. it ‘1 .‘ 81$ w <» .07 ,1, 731% ; ‘93 $89515 w ‘ .r at? I. & unwrap .; ==V_Y=;._,==M_ 2; .1 . i=5.55%.?‘ E: \U... v M_,_H._..~,_@._,_w., _1===‘._1_~ Illllllllllllllll 3-2- Maudnl'd ‘Indus—IQ -II I. \ w "m" yo Hfir . 55215 Dz ‘ Aw ' il/ 11/ “51* /~.- fl/jzbg W5 / iii/4 ionvention Ziecoro. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1.] FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 8. 1890. LNO. 1 Monday,] Ac'r CALLING CONVENTION. [September 8 . The Delegates elected to the Convention to reaadopt, amend or change the Constitu- tion of this State, assembled in the House of Representatives, at the city of Frank- fort, in the Capital of the State, this day, under and by virtue of the provisions of “An act to call a Convention,” approved 3d day ,of May,‘ 1890,_i:n the following words and figures‘ AN A01‘ to call a Convention to adopt, amend or change the Constitution of the State of Kentucky. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky/.- SEo. 1. That a Convention be, and the same is hereby, called for the purpose of re-adopting. amending or’ changing the Constitution of this State, to. be held in the City of Frankfort, the Capital of the State, commencing on the second Monday in September, one thousand eight hundred and ninety, and continuing from day to- day till ihe business thereof be completed, with power to adjourn and re-assemble at such times as it may deem proper. Said Convention shall consist of as many mem- bers as there are of the House of Repre- sentatives, and no more, who shall have the qualifications of an elector for Repre- sentative. Said members shall be appor- tioned among the several counties of the State in the same manner and proportion that Representatives now are by the law as it now exists. SEC. 2. That it shall be the duty of the Sheriff and other returning oflicers, at the election, to be held on the first Monday in August, one thousand eight hundred and ninety. to open a poll at their several places of voting for Delegate to said Convention, and all citizens entitled to vote for Repre- sentative shall have the right to vote for Delegate. Sec. 3. That the Sherifi‘s, Judges and Clerks of the County Courts of the several counties shall, upon comparison and count of the votes, within ten days after the election of Delegates to said Convention, deliver to each person, who shall have been elected a Delegate, a certificate of his election as such, and they shall, within twenty days after said election, transmit a copy thereof to the Secretary of State, which certificate shall be in the following 'form, namely: Be it known to all whom these presents shall come, that we, , Sherifi‘, and , Judge of the County Court, and , Clerk of the County Court of county, by an election held on the first Monday in August, one thousand eight hundred and ninety, by the electors of said county qualified ac- cording to law, caused to be chosen , for said county, to represent the same in the Convention to be held in the city of Frankfort on the second Monday in Sep- tember, one thousand eight hundred and ninety, for the purpose of readopting, amending or changing the Constitution of this State. Given under our hands. this day of , one thousand eight hundred and ninety. Provided, that in case of the resignation, inability to serve, or death of any member who may be elected a Delegate to said Convention, the Governor shall, upon information, issue a writ of election to the Sheriff of the county where said vacancy may Occur, directing and authorizing him to hold an election in ten days after the receipt of said writ, to fill any vacancy so occurring. ' SEO. 4. The Convention, when assembled, after taking the oath of office as prescribed by the Constitution, shall elect one of their members President, and may elect a Secre- tary, Assistant, Printer, Stenographer and Assistants, and such other Officers and em- ployee as they may deem necessary and proper. ‘The Delegates shallfreceive as compensation the same allowance per diem and mileage as is now allowed by'law to members of the House of Representatives, but shall not be paid for any recess longer than five days at one time. The Presi- . ‘to n . ‘OP ‘.0 Q. . ''.O Q ORGANIZATION. ooll'“ ,0.’ a. oro§_ ‘III 05 M onday,] Ac'r CALLING CONVENTION. September 8, dent, oflicers and employes shall receive a as compensation such as may be fixed by said Convention. ~ The compensation to the Delegates, President, officers, and so forth, shall be paid by the Auditor and Treasurer in the same manner as now provided by law concerning the pay of members, ofiicers and so forth of the House of Representa- tives. SEC. 5. That the Sheriff and other oflicers of the election shall be liable to all such fines and penalties. for failing to discharge the several duties imposed by this act as are now imposed upon them by law for-a failure to perform their duty in eonducting other general elections, and all persons who shall be found guilty of casting illegal votes for Delegates shall be liable, upon conviction, to all the fines and penalties now provided by law for illegal voting. SEC. 6. That when two or more counties vote together in the election of a Delegate, the Sheriffs of said counties, after the votes of each county shall have been compared and counted in the manner and by the officers herein before provided for, shall meet at the court-house of the county polling the largest number of votes, within ten days after said comparison and count- ing in each county,'and said Sherifl's shall then compare the returns from said coun- ties, and shall jointly give the certificate hereinbefore described to the Delegate elected. SEC. 7. The said Sherifi’s, County Judges and County Clerks shall be governed by the said laws now in force regarding the comparison of the polls for Representative. SEO. 8. The said Convention, when as- sembled, shall have authority to cause to be printed, at the cost of the State, all such of its debates and proceedings as it may deem proper; and it shall he the duty of the State Librarian to furnish a hall for the meeting of saidConventiontand all such Committee-rooms as the business of the Convention may require; and each member of said Convention shall be al- lowed the sum of twenty-five dollars for stationery, to be paid as herein provided for as to other allowances for them. SEC. 9. In case the right to a seat in said Convention by any Delegate who holds a certificate of election is contested, said Convention shall decide such contest, and testimony shall be taken in the same man- ner, and the same “proceedings had, as in case of a contest as to the seat of a Repre- sentative; and in case of a tie, the Gov- ernor shall issue a writ of election, as pro- vided for herein in case of a vacancy. SEC. 10. That before any Constitution agreed upon by said Convention shall take efi‘ect or become operative. the same shall be submitted to the qualified voters of this Commonwealth, after at least ninety days" notice, and ratified by a majority of those voting. \ SEO. _11. This act shall take effect from and after its passage. HARVEY MYERS, Speaker House of Representatives- JAMES W. BRYAN, Speaker of Senate. Approved May 3, 1890. S. B. BUCKNER. By the Governor: - GEO. M. ADAMS, Secretary of State. By WILLIS L. 'R'INeo, =~ ' Ass’zf See’y of Smite.- Promptly at 12 o’clock, Mr. SIMCN B. BUCKNER, Delegate from Hart county, and Governor of the State of Kentucky, took the Speaker’s stand and.called the Convention to order in the following words: ‘ Gentlemen of the Convention: The hour has arrived when, in accordance with the law passed by the people of Kentucky, we are to be called to order for the pur- pose of organizing ourselves into a Con- vention of the people. The law has not ‘fixed the method of organization, but as- sumes that we, the Delegates sent here by the people and representing the sover- eignty of the people of the Common- wealth, can organize in such a manner as we please; and I have been requested by a number of gentlemen to call the meeting‘ to order, and 'to propose as our temporary Chairman Mr. George Washington, of ' Campbell county, and as Secretary Mr. Thomas S. Pettit, the Delegate from Da- veiss county. It is understood, that, as a body of one hundred gentlemen assembled. here, we cannot; in the preliminary steps, go outside of our own body for our ofii- c'ials. Is it your will that those gentlemen» shall be appointed to the places for which they have been nominated? The Convention thereupon consented to the gentlemen nominated for the respect- ive positions, and, on motion of'Mr. EM- ERY WHITAKER, a committee of three C‘) ‘:a 3 <~ ,7) I.) ‘\ I“ . ;‘\\I S ‘ \ (“a h ‘a?’ f ORGANIZATION. - 3 it?“ "I C, H ,V ‘ti/:1} Monday,] BUCKNER—WHITAKER—SPALDING. [September 8 . was appointed to wait upon the gentlemen nominated, and inform them of their selec- tion to the places designated. Said Com- mittee was composed of Messrs. Whitaker, Spalding and McHenry. After a few minutes the Committee returned, and Mr. Whitaker, Chairman of the Committee, said: Mr. Chairman: I respectfully report that we have performed the duty assigned to us, and present now to you, for introduction to the Convention as its temporary Chairman, Mr. George Washington, of Campbell county. Mr. BUCKNER. Gentlemen of the Convention, I have the pleasure of pre- senting, as your temporary Chairman, the Hon.- George Washington, of Campbell county, whose name is sufficient to indi- cate the patriotic purpose which has led to his selection. Mr. WHITAKER. Mr. Chairman, we also present to you, as the temporary Secre- tary, and for introduction to the body, the Hon. Thos. S. Pettit, of Daveiss county. In taking the chair, Mr. Washington said: . Gentlemen of the Convention : For the honor which you have been pleased to ' confer upon me, I return you my cordial thanks; for it is an honor, of high degree, to be chosen to preside, even temporarily, over the deliberations of‘ such a body as this. And, I beg leave to assure you, that it is not the less appreciated because un- solicited, and, I fear, undeserved. For I am not unaware that upon this floor are gentlemen of the highest distinction, of abilities unexceled, of accomplishments the most desirable, of public service the most honorable, and who are, withal, mas- ters of all the mysteries of parliamentary law and practice. For myself, I can claim none of these. My little taper, as I once took occasion to say, under not dis- similar circumstances, "has burned upon a different altar, an altar whose priestess is proverbially jealous of her votaries, and who tolerates no divided attention. I am able, therefore, to make but one promise, and that is, so far as in me lies, during my brief occupancy of the Chair, to so ad- minister its duties that you shall have no just cause to complain of unfairness. For the rest, I bespeak both for my- self and successor, however great his ability, your kindly forbearance and co- operation. With these, I know of no rea- son why we may not move .along harmo- niously and efiiciently to the accomplish- ment of the great task committed to our hands; one of the greatest, in my judg- ment, which can enlist human endeavor; for it profoundly concerns not only our- selves and that great constituency which sent us here, but our posterity as well. And I cannot doubt that I but echo the earnest desire of each and every Delegate on this floor, when I express the hope that, at no stage of these proceedings, even for- a moment, we shall be unmindful of the‘ great fact that we are here in response to a. summons, or, rather, in obedience to a man-. date of more than imperial dignity; and, to- the patriotic ear, of greater authority than ever hedged about an hereditary throne, namely, the majestic voice of a great people, speaking in their sovereign capacit- ; a- voice, even though inaudible, yet mightier far than the roaring fury often thousand Niagaras, and hardly less impressive than a decree of fate. Moved by this spirit, and aided by the blessing of Him without whom we are as naught, I think we may well look forward with intelligent hopeful- ness to the result of our labers with your pardon for saying more than was perhaps needful, we will proceed to. the business before us. ‘ Mr. SPALDING. In order that we may- know W110 are Delegates, I offer a IffiisQllt-e tion in writing. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Union will please send up his resolution, and the Secretary will read the same to the Convention. The. resolution was thereupon read, as follows : Resolved, That the Secretary of State be requested to transmit to this Convention a list of the persons who appear, from the certificates received in his oflice, to have been elected Delegates to this Convention, and, where any papers have been received by him which disclose a controversv or contest as to the election of any Delegate, that hebe requested to transmit also a copv of such certificate of election and all other papers relative thereto, with a statement as to how and when such papers were I“€-_ ceived; and that a Committee of three be; I §~ And now, _ a o - r 4 ORGANIZATION. Monday,] MCHENRY—M ooRE—W HITAK ER. [September 8 . appointed by the Chair to inform the Sec— retary of State of the passage of this reso- lutign. The Chairman thereupon put the said "resolution to‘ the House, and declared the same adopted; and, thereupon, ap- pointed as said Committee Messrs. W. H. Mackoy, Thomas H. Hines and Laban T. Moore. . Mr. L. T. MOORE. I believe there is no ‘ time mentioned in that resolution as to when this Committee shall report, and I respectfully submit whether this Conven- tion can-do any thing more until after this report, and whether a motion would not . now be in order to adjourn. The CHAIRMAN. A motion to ad- ..journ is always in order. Mr. MCHENRY. I don’t presume an ‘adjournment is necessary. I suppose the Secretary of State has the roll made out already, and the Committee can call on him and return with it in a few minutes. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I understand there is in that resolution beyond what is neces- sary to get from the Secretary of State. There is a contest or question as to the election of some particular member, and we have to get all the papers in regard to that. Whether those can be returned as promptly as the list, I do not know. Mr. MCHENRY. All thoseipapers can be brought to us in five minutes. The roll, I presume, is already made out. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move now that this Convention adjourn, to meet at 3 o’clock. ' Mr. BUCKNER. I second that mo- tion. - The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen of the Convention, the question is upon the mo- tion of the Delegate from Boyd to adjourn until 3 o’clock this afternoon. All those in favor signify by saying aye, and the contrary no. A vote being taken, the Chairman declared said motion lost. Mr. WHITAKER. I move that the Sergeant-at-Arms of the last Senate of } Kentucky act as the Sergeant-at-Arms of this body during the organization of this Convention. The motion was seconded, and the Chair- man, after putting said motion to the House, declared the same to have been carried, and Mr. G. W. Castle, Sergeant-at- Arms of the last Senate, proceeded to act as Sergeant-at-Arms of the Convention. Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to offer the following resolution. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman. will please send his resolution to the Secretary, who will read the same. The Secretary thereupon read said reso- lution, as follows: Resolved, That the temporary Chairman of this Convention be directed to invite some clergyman to offer prayer and invoke the divine blessing upon this Convention. This was seconded, and upon being put by the President, was declared to have been carried, and the Chairman thereupon in- vited the Rev. J. M. Lewis, of Scott county, to ofliciate, who offered up the following prayer: Almighty God, our Heavenly Father, we adore Thee as the source of all wisdom and of all goodness, and as these representa- tives of the people are assembled here for the purpose of forming the organic law which shall govern this Commonwealth, we come to Thee and ask Thee that Thou wouldst endow them with a competency of divine wisdom that they may be able to de- vise such enactments as shall best redound to Thy name and the glory and good of the people and the honor of the Com- monwealth. We pray Thee that Thou wouldst divest their minds of all sectional and all personal views and desires, and that they may have in view the greatest good to the greatest number, and that in all they may do they may ever keep in view the grave fact that their acts are not only now to tell on the destiny and happiness of the people of this Common- wealth, but that their far-reaching in- fluence may be such as to determine the destiny and happinese of the people of this Commonwealth for generations to come. And grant, 0 Lord, that they may be rightly guided by Thy holy spirit and divine wisdom; and grant unto them ORGANlZATION. ‘ 5 M Onday,] MACKOY—MCH ENRY—BUCKNER. [September 8 . such clear and perfect views of that which is right and just and true, as between God and man and man and man, that all that they may do may be upon them to bless them, and redound to the great good of our general Commonwealth, as well as our own beloved State. For this blessing we ask Thee, not for any merit in us, but alone for the sake of Him who is the great Law- Giver of the universe, and grant that His spirit may be infused into all their enact- ments, that it may be a blessing to this en- tire people and the entire country, and unto Thy name shall be the praise and the glory, forever and ever. Amen. Mr. MACKOY, Chairman of the Com- mittee appointed to wait upon the Secretary of State to procure the list of the Dele— gates, &c , said: Mr. Chairman : The Committee appoint- ed to wait on the Secretary of State, and obtain from him the list of Delegates, re- port that they have discharged their duty, and herewith return to this body said list with some accompanying papers. The CHAIRMAN. What is now the will of the Convention ‘.7 Mr. MOHENRY. I move that the roll be called as returned to see if we have a quorum. ‘ Mr. BUCKNER. I second that mo- tion. ' The CHAIRMAN. please call the roll. The Secretary thereupon called the roll of Delegates, and the following named Delegates responded to their names: Adair—J. F. Montgomery. Allen—W. J. McElroy. Anderson—Thomas H. Hanks. ' Ballard and Carlisle—JV. J. 'Edrington. Barren—S. H. Boles. Bath and Rowan—L. P. V. Williams. Boone—L. W. Lassing. Bourbon—C. M Clay, Jr. Boyd and Lawrence—Laban T. Moore. Boyle—R. P. Jacobs. Bracken—W. W. Field. . Breathitt, Morgan and Magoffin—J. E. Quicksall. TheZSecretary will Breckinridge—Will. Miller.- Bullitt and Spencer—Frank P. Straus. ‘ Butler and Edmonson—J. M. Forgy. Caldwell—C. T. Allen. Galloway—W. W. Ayres. CampbelL—George Washington, George Trusdell. ‘ Carroll—H. COX. ' Carter and Elliott—Robert T. Parsons. Casey and Russell—John L. Phelps. Christian—J. D. Clardy. Clark—W. M. Beckner. Clay, Jackson and Owsley--S. P. Hogg. Clinton and Cumberland—J. A. Brents. Covington—William Goebel, W. 'H. Mackoy. Crittenden and Livingstonu-T. J. Nunn. Daveiss—Thomas S. Pettit, B. T. Birk- head. Estill and Lee—J. F. West. Fayette-P. P. Johnston, Bronston. Fleming—W. J. Hendrick. Floyd, Letcher and Knott—F. A. Hop- kins. Franklin—Thomas H. Hines. ' Fulton and Hickman—J. M. Brummal. Gallatin—J; S. Brown. Garrard—Wm. Berkele. Grant—R. H. O’Hara. Graves—T. J. Elmore. Grayson—Charles Durbin. Green and Taylor—J. M. Wood. Greenup—B. F. Bennett. Hancock—G. D. Chambers. Hardin—H. H. Smith. Harlan, Perry, Bell and Leslie—J. G. Forrester. , Harrison—W. H. Martin. Hart—S. B. Buckner. Henderson—H. H. Farmer. Henry—John D. Carroll. Hopkins—H. R. Bourland. J efi‘erson—Sam. E. English. J essamine—J. W. Holloway. Kenton—Dudley A. Glenn. Knox and Whitley—Nathan Buchanan. Larue—I. W. Twyman. Charles J. 6 ORGANIZATION. Monday,] WHITAKER—BECKHAM~—-BULLITT. Laurel and Rockcastle—W. R. Ramsey. Lewis—Sam’l J. Pugh. ‘Lincoln—W. H. Miller. Logan—J. Guthrie Coke. Louisville—First District, Zack Phelps. Second District—M. K. Allen. Third District, Morris A. Sachs. Fourth District, Bennett. H. Young. Fifth District, E. J. McDermott. Sixth District—E. E. Kirwan. Seventh District, J. T. Funk. Madison—Curtis F. Burnam. Marion—J. Proctor Knott. Marshall and Lyon—Samuel Graham. Mason—Emery Whitaker. McCracken —W. G. Bullitt. McLean—Jep. C. Jonson. Meade—J. F. Woolfolk. Mercer—J. H. Moore. Metcalfe and Monroe—W. Scott Smith. ' Montgomery, Powell, Wolfe and Mene- fee—G. B. Swango. Muhlenberg—A. D. James. Nelson—J. W. Muir. Nicholas and Robertson—Hanson Ken- nedy. - Ohio—Henry D. McHenry. Oldham and Trimble—S. E. DeHaven. Owen—Joseph Blackwell. Pendleton—Leslie T.‘ Applegate. Pike, Martin and J ohnson—A. J. Aux- ier. Pulaski—John S. May. Scott-—J. F. Askew. Shelby—J. C. Beckham. Simpson—Geo. C. Harris. Todd—H. G. Petrie. Trigg— W. W. Lewis. Union—I. A. Spalding. Warren—Robt. Rodes, D. C. Amos. Washington—J. W. Lewis. Wayne—J. S. Hines. Webster—W. F. Doris. Woodford—James Blackburn. Mr. WHITAKER. I now suggest that the oath be administered to the Delegates to support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Kentucky. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will please wait until the result of the roll- call is announced. Mr. PETTIT. There are present re- sponding to their names one hundred Dele- gates. ' The CHAIRMAN. We have a quorum. Mr. WHITAKER. I now renew my motion that the oath be administered to the Delegates of this body to support the Con- stitution of the United States and the Con- stitution of the State of Kentucky. Mr. COKE. 1 move to amend that by inserting in lieu of the words, ‘- the Consti- tution of Kentucky,” the words “ be faith- ful to the Commonwealth of Kentucky.” Mr. BECKHAH. I would suggest that the act of the General Assembly, by which we are assembled, provides that we take the oath prescribed by the present 'Consti- tution. That is the law of the land, in my judgment, until it is set aside by the work of this body. I would suggest, therefore, as an amendment to the motion of the gen- tleman from Mason, that the Chief J ustice- of the State administer the, oath prescribed by the present Constitution for members of the General Assembly. Mr. BULLITT. I can not understand how it would be proper for us, coming here to do away with the old Constitution, to swear that we will support it. 1 have drawn in conformity with the resolution that was adopted by the last Convention the exact language in a resolution pre senting the character of oath we shall take. I offer that as a substitute for the motion of the gentleman from Mason (Mr. Whit- aker). The CHAIRMAN. If I understand that correctly, it comes as a third amend- ment, and is not, therefore, in order. Mr. YOUNG. It seems to me that all those motions are out of order, and I rise to a point of order, for this reason, that the law under which this Convention is ‘assem- [September 8 . a I ORGANIZATION. 7 otherwise‘? 'stitution and then change it? Monday,] % bled provides a specific oath which the members shall take, and any motion to take any other oath is out of order. If the Chairman will read the call of the Convention by the Legislature, he will find it sets forth the oath we are to take, and we cannot take any other oath. I ' The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of the opinion, until otherwise advised, that the point of order is well taken. Mr. BULLITT. I would like to call the attention of the gentlemen of the (‘one vention to one fact. Suppose we take that oath; does not that compel every man who ‘is conscientious to adjourn this Convention without doing any thing‘? We are called here for the purpose of modifying or tak- ing some action in regard to that Consti- tution; if we swear we will support that Constitution, do not we necessarily swear that we will go home without disturbing that instrument 1?‘ Here we have the ex- :ample of the former Conventions, and the members of no former Convention ever swore that they would support the Consti- tution of the State that they were called on to ‘revise. How can we stand by the Constitution and obliterate or change it‘? How can we support that Constitution which we have been called here to modify, change or alter? I am not thoroughly acquainted with parliamentary law, and I do not know how to getlat it, but I believe that the conscience of a man is worth something to him; and when we undertake to swear that we will support the Con- stitution, and then come forward and undertake to change it, is it not a violation of that oath? How can it be How can we support that Con- We have the example, as I before remarked, of pre- vious Conventions that have met, and in no instance have they sworn that they would support the Constitution they were called upon to change, alter or amend. I hope we will not be required to take the oath to support the Constitution. BULLITT—WHITAKER. [September 8 . Mr. WHITAKER. If we are here as Delegates to this Constitutional Conven- tion, we are here by the authority of that law which called us here. If that law is nugatory and of no effect, there is not a man assembled here who is a Delegate to this Convention. The oath prescribed in that law that calls us here must certainly be as high and as binding as the will of its individual members, and we must conform to it; and I would answer the gentleman, when he says that we are destroying the old Constitution by making a new one, and assert that there is not an article of this Constitution to be made by this organ- ized body, when it is organized, which will take the place of a single article in the old Constitution until our work is finished and our names subscribed to it, and the people of Kentucky shall say that that is or is not to be the Constitution. Until that time, there is not a word or a sentence of the old Constitution obliterated or de- stroyed. Suppose this Convention, after it has done its work to the best of its ability, submits it to the people, and the people at the polls vote it down by a majority, and it becomes a nugatory matter, is not the old Constitution, that has served us for forty-one years, sz-ill the Constitution of Kentucky, and binding upon all the citi- zens and Courts of the Commonwealth? Therefore, I conclude and argue that the act of the General Assembly which calls us here, and authorizes us to be here, pre- scribes the manner of our election, and when and where we shall meet; and we are in our meeting here conforming to that law in form and in spirit, and that the oath prescribed in that act is the only legal oath that can be administered to the mem- bers of this Convention. The CHAIRMAN. it occurs to the Chair that it can not positively be in con- flict with the Constitution, for the reason that we are here in obedience to the Con- stitution. We are here for the purpose of framing an instument simply to be sub- 8 . ORGAN IZATION. ' Monday,] BECKHAM—DEHAVEN—BURNAM. [September 8. .9 mitted to the people for their inspection and their ratification, and it acquires no vitality until they have finally passed upon it. Therefore, it ‘occurs to me that it can not be improper to take an oath to do what the Constitution explicitly enjoins us to do. The oath introduced in the Convention of 1849-50 was prepared in that way because the act itself did not specify any particular kind of oath. Those are the reasons which the Chair takes the liberty of expressing to the Convention. Mr. BECKHAM. I have put in writ- ing the substitute which I offered to the motion of the gentleman from Mason. Will the Secretary please read it. The resolution was thereupon read, as follows: Resolved, That the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals be requested to adminis- ter to the members of the Convention, whose names have been called by the Secre- tary, the oath of ofiice prescribed by the Constitution. Mr. DEHAVEN. I do not think there is very great materiality in the oath that is administered to the members of this Con- vention, but certainly, as has been sug- gested, we are here as Delegates to this Convention by virtue of that act of the Legislature. The Constitution itself pro- vides the manner in which it shall be amended, and the Legislative Department of the Government has determined that these prerequisites have been gone through and we are here now ly virtue of the action of the Legislature; and I think, if there is any body of men upon the face of the earth that ought to adhere strictly to the provisions of the law, it is the members of this Convention; and that we ought to take the oath prescribed by that statute and none other. 5 . Mr. BECKHAM. I agree fully with the view expressed by the Honorable Delegate from Oldham. We are here to- day under the law as it now is. We are not here, certainly, above the law. We are here by virtue of the votes of the sov- ereign people of Kentucky in twice call- ing this Convention, and by virtue of their Representatives, in General Assembly con- vened, in passing this statute under which we are assembled, and that statute itself provides the oath that we shall take. Until that oath is taken, we have not the power of _a Legislature at all, as I conceive it, because we are not fully equipped mem- bers of this body. I suggest, therefore, the adoption of the resolution which I had the honor a moment ago to offer. Mr. STRAUS. I move that the oath be administered to all Delegates except where there is a contest. The CHAIRMAN. Do you move it as an amendment to the motion ‘? Mr. STRAUS. I do. Mr. BURNAM. We were advised by the Clerk of the House that there were a hundred names reported; and I suppose that every man who is now a member of the House stands here just by virtue of the re- port of the Secretary of State on the returns made to him by the County Courtsof the re- spective counties. Whatever may be the result hereafter of any contest, I suppose that the oath ought to be administered now to every man who has been so reported. I see no reason why there should be any dis- cussion at this time. I understand that there is a controversy over the seat from the county of Washington, and without at all intending to commit myself in any way to any action whatever. I think that, as he has come here with the indorsement of the county board of his county, as reported by the Secretary of State, this proposition should be voted down, and that the oath should be administered to him as to all others alike. Mr. STRAUS. I think it proper ‘that the Convention should ‘first determine, from the face of the papers returned by the Secretary of State, whether either of the gentlemen from Washington has a prima facie case. If, from the face of the papers, neither one of these gentlemen.- ORGAN IZ ATION. . 9 M onday,] AUXIER—HENDRICK—MILLER. “I [September 8 . have a prime facz'e case, of course the oath of ofiice ought not to be administered, and. for the purpose of settling that question, I ask that the two certificates returned by the Secretary of State be read, that the Convention may have information from the face of the papers whether either of these papers constitute a legal certificate. Mr. AUXIER. I take the position, Mr. Chairman, that in the organization of the House we go alone by the face of the returns, and afterwards, if the contest comes up, that question will be determined by a Committee and the vote of the House. There can be no contest until somebody is sworn in. If somebody is not sworn in, there can be no contest of election, and no question can come up. If neither of those parties is sworn in, there is no contest, and this House has no jurisdiction over it. I shall vote against the measure proposed by the gentleman—I do not know_ who he was—to let that question be determined now. That motion, I think ought to be voted down. The CHAIRMAN. Is there a second to the motion of the gentleman from Bullitt? Mr.YJOHN L. PHELPS. Before that motion is acted upon, I will ask that the Secretary read that part of the Act in ref- erence to the oath we should take, and with reference to contested elections. The CHAIRMAN. That is ruled out of Order for the time being. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. I ask that as a matter of information, and if the House desires the information, I think that the House is entitled to hear it before the vote on the motion. The CHAIRMAN. The passed on the question, Mr. HENDRICK. I think the gen- tleman on my right misunderstood the Object of the motion of the gentleman from Bullitt. I understand the gentleman from Bullitt to say, and I understand that to be the rule, that in case these papers Chair has *__‘ presented from the Secretary of ‘ State~ make a prima facie case, if there is really a certificate, that there would be no ques- tion as to the duty of the Convention; and I understand the gentleman from Bullitt to call for the reading of those papers in order that the members of this Conven- tion may determine for themselves whether there is a certificate returned here by the Secretary of State. That certainly ought to be done. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make this point of order on the motion of the gen- tleman from Bullitt. It seems to me that, from the report of the Secretary of State, there is aprz'ma facie case here made in . favor of the gentleman reported by him as a member from Washington; and, there- fore, sir. it appears to me that the gentle- man named in the report of the Secretary of State has a right to be sworn as a sitting member of this Convention. Mr. HENDRICK. Will the gentleman permit a question ? Mr. ‘W. H. MILLER. Yes, sir. Mr. HENDRICK. Don’t you deter- mine that from the certificate itself? Can you determine it from any other thing than the certificate; and are not the mem- bers of this Convention the judges of that question? Mr. W. H. MILLER. In all parlia- mentary bodies, the organization of which is provided for, there is an ofiicer named to judge of these matters; and the gentle- man from Fleming, I suppose, will admit. that in this instance the Secretary of State is that oflicer; and he has recognized that certificate and reported upon it; and, ac- cording to all parliamentary precedents, I say that the gentleman named from Wash- ington is a member, recogniied by the Secretary of State, and ‘is entitled to take the oath. Mr. WHITAKER. I think we are all out of order. There is not a member of this- Convention who has produced a certificate of his election from the proper ofiicers- 10 ORGANIZATION. of this Convention until after taken the oath, and when we have taken papers is called for Monday,]_ WHITAKER—CoKE—STRAUs. [September 8 . of his county; and we only know that we are members of this Convention from the fact that that report has been made to the Secretary of State, and he has transmitted it to this body and we have acted upon it. There is no higher evidence than that, that any of us are elected; and if the gentleman from Washington has been reported as a member by the Secretary of State, he has the same right to take the oath and be- comea member of this Convention, until ‘the question has been inquired-into, as any other member has. ~ 'th‘er, that none of us are qualified as yet to Therefore, I say fur- We are not members we have hear any question. the oath we are qualified as members; and until that time we can act upon no propo- sition except the organization of this Con- vention. The CHAIRMAN. The reading of the The Chair under- stands, although it has permitted some debate, that that question is not debat- able. Mr. COKE. I desire, for information, to hear read the section of the act that calls us together in reference ‘to that very question before the report is read. Mr. STRAUS. I insist upon the read- in g of the papers returned by the Secretary of State. The Secretary thereupon read the follow- in g papers : } Sci. STATE oE'KEN'rUcKY, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, Be it known to all whom these presents shall come, that we, Sidney Green, Sheriff, and Andrew Thompson, Judge of the County Court, and W. F. Booker, Clerk of the County Court of Washington county, I by an election held on the first Monday 'in August, one thousand eight hundred and ninety, by the electors of said county, ‘qualified according to law, caused to be chosen John W. Lewis for said county, to represent the same in the Convention to be held in the city of Frankfort on the second Monday in September, one thousand eight hundred and ninety, for the purpose of re-adopting, amending or changing the Constitution of this State. Given under our hands this, the seventh day of August, one thousand eight hundred and ninety. SIDNEY GREEN, Sheriff W. C., A. THOMPSON, County Judge, W. F. BOOKER, County Clerk, LoUIs D. WALKER, J. P. W. C- i W. H. McELRoY, J. I’. W. C. I, Geo. M. Adams, Secretary of State of the Commonwealth of Kentucky; hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true copy of a paper received by mail at this ofiice on the 11th day of August, 1890. Given under my hand and seal of oflice this 8th day of September, 1890. (Signed) GEO. M. ADAMS, Secretary of State. [Seal.] The undersigned, Andrew Thompson, Presiding J ucge of the \Nashington Coun- ty Court, certifies that he was one of the board which counted and compared the poll-books, for the election of a Delegate to the Constitutional Convention from Wash- ington county, which election was held on the 4th day of August, 1890, and at which election he was also a candidate for re- election to office of County Judge of Washington county, and that said board consisted of himself, as said Presiding Judge, togetherwith Sidney Green, Sheriff, and W. F. Booker, Clerk of said county, together with L. D. Walker and W. H. McElroy, the two Justices of the Peace residing nearest the court-house; that John W. Lewis and W. C. McChord were the only candidates for Delegates to said Convention; that said canvassing board met in the Clerk’s office of said county, _ and begun the .count of votes cast for said McChord and Lewis first; that when they adjourned for dinner they had finished the addition of votes cast in said race, which, according to their said count, showed ORGANIZATION. 11 O Monday,] WASHINGTON COUNTY Con'rns'r. [September 8 , 1,508 votes for Lewis, and 1,507 for Me- Chord; that said McChord demanded of said board that they again go over their count before the result was certified; that said Lewis demanded that his certificate be issued to him at once in accordance with their said count; that if he was elected to said position, he wanted his certificate; if he was not elected, he did not want it. I was out in the hall of said office, and did'not hear every thing that was said by the par- ties. The board finally concluded to issue the certificate to Lewis, and did so the next ‘day. My attention was called to the fact that we had counted one vote twice, to wit, one John Anderson for said Lewis, which, in my opinion, was true; but as said board had adjourned, we'took no further action‘ in the matter. This August 13, 1890. A. THOMPSON, Presiding Judge Washington Co. Court. I, Geo. M. Adams, Secretary of State of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true copy of a paper received at this oflice on the 15th day of August, 1890, by mail, from W. C. McChord. Given under my hand and seal of oflice this 8th day of September, 1890. (Signed) Geo. M. AnAMs, [ Seal.] Secretary of State. We, the undersigned, two Justices of Qthe Peace of Washington county, and residing nearest to the court-house, with Andrew Thompson, Judge of the Washington County Court, Wm. F. Booker, the Clerk thereof, and Sidney Green, Sheriff of Washington county, constituted the exam- ining board to examine the poll-books of the election in Washington held August 4, 1890, for the purpose of electing a Delegate to the Constitutional Convention from Washington county. We hereby certify that the said board constituted as aforesaid did,'on the 7th day of August, 1890, make, ‘for at said election for said as we then thought, a careful examination of said poll-books and count of the vote as shown thereon, as cast between John W. Lewis and W. C. McChord for the office of member of the said Constitutional Con- vention, they being the only persons voted office, and according to our said count we were of the opinion that said poll-books showed (1,508) fifteen hundred and eight votes as cast and recorded for said Lewis, and (1,507) fifteen hundred and seven as cast and recorded for said McChord. After said board, constituted as aforesaid, had made said count, we announced our conclusions publicly. Lewis demanded a certificate of election immed_iately,'when said McChord demanded a recount of the vote before any certificate was issued or delivered, to which Lewis objected, when we immediately gave said Lewis a certifi- cate of his election, which he now has, and we forwarded a copy to the Secretary of State. _()n the 8th day of August, 1890, after the said poll-books had been examined by the undersigned Justices of the Peace, alone, as the examining board, as to the vote of the other ofiicers voted for at said election, and certificates given according to the results as shown, we again counted the vote on said poll-books, as cast between said Lewis and McChord, more carefully than at first, and found that instead of Lewis receiving (1,508) fifteen hundred and eight votes, he had only received (1,507) fifteen hundred and seven votes, and that McChord had received (1,507) fif- teen hundred and seven votes. We immediately notified said Lewis of said mistake, but he declined to surrender the said certificate of election, which had been~given him as aforesaid, although he had promised to do so if it should ap- pear that he was not entitled to it. Be- lieving that we had no further authority or power in premises, we did not, nor will we, take any further action, but leave the 12 ORGANIZATION. Monday,] LEWIS—STRAUS. [September 8 , matter in the hands of the properly consti- tuted authorities for final action, to de- termine who is entitled to the seat in said Convention. I11 testimony whereof, we have hereto subscribed our names this 9th day of August, 1890. LEWIS D. WALKER, Justice of the Peace ofWashington County. W. H. MCELROY, Justice of the Peace, Washington County. The undersigned, Sidney Green, Sheriff of Washington county, does hereby certify that the statements as contained in the foregoing certificate of L. D. Walker and W. H. ‘McElroy are true, except that he does not know of his personal knowledge that Lewis has refused to surrender his certificate of election. August 9th, 1890. SIDNEY GREEN, Sheriff of Washington County. I, Wm. F. Booker, Clerk of the Wash- ington County Court, do certify that the - statements contained in the foregoing cer- tificate of L. D. Walker and W. H. Mc- Elroy are true. That Lewis, at the time he demanded his certificate of election as stated, said, if, upon a'recount of said vote, it was ascertained that he was not entitled to said certificate, he would surrender it. I further certify that the above-named L. D. Walker and W. H. McElroy are duly elected, qualified and acting Justices of the Peace of Washington county, Ken- tucky, and they reside nearer the court- house of Washington county than any other Justices of the Peace of Washington county. This August 9th, 1890. W. F. BOOKER, Clerk Washington County Court. I, George M. Adams, Secretary of State of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, here— by certify that the above and foregoing is a true copy of a paper received at this ofiice, by mail, from W. C. McChord, on the 13th day of August, 1890. Given under my hand and seal of office this 8th day of September, 1890. (Signed) GEORGE M. ADAMS, [Seal] Secretary of State. Mr. J. W. LE WIS. If the Convention will indulge me, I desire to say afew words in reference to this matter. I shall not an- ticipate the evidence, nor discuss it at this time. These papers that have been read in the hearing of the Convention are ear part6 statements, written and sent here by the contestant himself, and not sworn to. The depositions of ,each one of these per- sons, under their oaths, have been taken in the case, and are now, I presume, in the city of Frankfort, in the post-office, ad- dressed to the Secretary of this Convention, in obedience to the provision of the Act call- ing the Convention. The question that I now submit is, will the Corfvention accept that sworn testimony as to these matters, when here was a full examination of the witnesses and cross-examination, or will it proceed to dispose of this seat in the Convention- upon an pa'rie statements, unknown to my- self, written and sent here by the contestant. Now, that the Convention may understand how it happened that the two J nstices of the Peace nearest the court-house signed the certificate of election awarded to my- self, if the Convention will allow it, I will read the affidavit of the County Judge and the Sheriff of the county explaining that matter. Mr. STRAUS. I want to call the gen- tlema-n’s attention to one fact, that he may address himself to it while he is on the floor, and that is,whether or not his own certifi- cate is such a one as the law requires upon the face of the paper. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I propose to. ad- dress myself to that point, and also to read some authorities upon it But I desire, in justice to myself, as well as the Convention, that it shall be explained how the two Justices of the Peace happened to partici- ORGANIZATION. ' 13 ' Monday,] LEWIS. [September 8. pate in that matter, along with the Judge of the County Court, the Sheriff and the Clerk of the County Court. Mr. J. W. LEWISthereupon read the following paper: STATE OF KENTUCKY. 88 WASHINGTON COUNTY. " This affiant, Andrew Thompson, says on his oath that he was on Thursday, August the 7th, 1890, the Judge of the Washington County Court, State of Kentucky; that upon the morning of said day he appear- ed at the ofiiee of the County Court Clerk, in Springfield, for the purpose of perform- ing his duty as one of the board directed by law to canvass the election returns and compare the poll-books of said county for the election held for State and county ofii- cers at the August election in 1890, and for Delegate to the Constitutional Conven- tion of Kentucky. Louis D. Walker and W. H. MeElroy, Esquires, the two Justices of the Peace of said county residing near- est the eourt-house, were also present in said Clerk’s oflice, also Sidney Green, Sher- ifi“ of said county, and W. E. Booker, Clerk of the County Court of said county. Mr. W. C. McChord was present and John W. Lewis also. Said McChord said that said two Justices of the Peace were the legal board of canvassers for said election, while said Lewis said the said Sherifl', County Judge and Clerk of the County Court were . the legal board to canvass said election returns, and to issue the certificate of elec- tion in the matter of the Delegate to said Convention. Said McChord insisted that said Justices were the proper board. Said Lewis then said he was willing that both boards should compare the poll-books and count said vote ; that it would not weaken said McChord’s claims to the said position or his own, whoever was elected, to have the result ascertained by both boards, that is, the said Sheriff, Judge of the County Court and Clerk of the County Court and said two Justices of the Peace, and certified by both. _Mr. McChord said that was satisfac- tory to him, and that he agreed to it. Whereupon said two boards, said two J us- tices and said Sherifi', affiant, as Judge of the County Court, and said Clerk of the County Court, repaired to the vault of said Clerk’s ofiice, where the poll-books of said election were, made the comparison canvass and counted the vote of said county as to Delegate to said Convention, and certified the election ‘of John W. Lewis. It was in this way, and for the reason of the facts above set out, that the certificate of election awarded said Lewis was signed by said Sheriff, Sidney Green; afiiant, as County Judge, and said Clerk of the County Court, and said two Justices of the Peace. Said Sidney Green, Sheriff, afiiant, Judge of the. County Court, and said W. F. Booker, Clerk of the County Court, were all candidates at said election for the ofiiees held by each of them respectively; but said Sherifi', Green, and Booker, County Court Clerk, were elected without opposition. There being no one voted for for Sherifl‘ or County Court Clerk at said election except said Green ~ and Booker, respectively; and said Green was re-elected Sheriff and‘ said Booker Clerk of the County Court without any opposition whatever. ANDREW THOMPSON. Subscribed and sworn to by Andrew Thompson before me, this 3d day of September, 1890. J. L. WHARTON, Clerk. The undersigned, Sidney Green. says he was Sheriff of Washington county on the 7th day of August, 1890, and is still Sher- iii‘ of said county, and is the Sheriff referred to in the foregoing affidavit of Andrew Thompson. He has heard read and read said aflidavit, and the statements thereof are true and correct, and he concurs therein and makes them his aflidavit. SIDNEY GREEN. Subscribed and sworn to by Sidney 14 ORGANIZATION. Monday,] BLACKBURN—DEHAVEN—STRAUS—LEWIS. [September 8 . Green before me, this 4th day of Septem- ber, 1890. J. L. WHARTON, Clerk Washington Circuit Court. Mr. JAMES BLACKBURN. a point of order. There is no jury here to try this case. It seems to me, sir, we are proceeding with undue haste. I know as well that he is a Delegate as he does that I am a Delegate. We are not Delegates to hear this case until we have taken the oath. and I, therefore, move that we suspend this matter, and that every Delegate who comes here with a certificate from the Secretary of State shall be so con- sidered a Delegate and sworn in. Mr. DEHAVEN. The point of order, in my judgment, is well taken. If the gentleman from Washington has a certifi- cate of election that is certified by the offi- cers required by law to sign that sort of certificate, he is certainly, prima facie, en- titled to a seat upon this floor, and there ought to be no question raised about it. Whether he is, or is not entitled to it, must be determined hereafter in a much more deliberate way than we are proceeding. and the only question that occurs to me to be determined is, whether his certificate is such a certificate as the law requires, and ifit is, that settles it in my humblejudg- ment. Y Mr. STRAUS. I desire to state that the certificate produced by the gentleman, and returned by the Secretary of State here, is not such a one as is required by law, and that is shown upon the face of the certificate. It is signed by the County Judge, the Sheriff, the County Clerk, and, in addition thereto, by two Magistrates. No such board as that is known to the law. There is not another certificate filed with the Secretary of State signed by any such I rise to board of officers as that. Either the County ‘Judge and Sheriff and Clerk constitute a board to give a certificate, or, if they are disqualified, then the twb nearest Magis- tratesconstitute the board, but you cannot include them. The Court of Appeals has decided in two cases, that when the parties undertake to make a board out of two boards, and that board gives a certificate, that it is void upon its face. You cannot gather two or three Magistrates in a county and let them act in conjunction with the County Clerk, the County Judge and Sher- ifi'. His certificate is signed on its face by two Magistrates, the County Judge, County Clerk and Sherifi“. N 0 such certificate as that is known to the law, and the Court of Appeals has decided that it is void upon its face. The CHAIRMAN. That is a matter for argument. The gentleman from Wash- ington has the floor. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I was trying to address myself directly to the point made by the gentleman, and to show that the two Justices of the Peace participated in pursuance of his request and upon his de- mand. Now, sir, the names of ‘the two Justices of the Peace are not embraced in the body of the certificate at all, but their names are signed to it at the foot. If I understand the rule in such matters as this, it is not that the certificate must be in ex- act form, but that it must be true in sub- stance; and an oificer charged with the duty of canvassing an election, and certifying the result after doing it, has no power to make any further certificate of statement about it, and if he does, his act is void. I read from the work on American Law of Elections by Mr. George W. McCreary. He says: “ No particular form of creden- tials is required, it is sufiicient if the claim- ~ant for office presents a certificate of election signed by the ofiicers authorized to sign it, and stating generally the fact that the election was duly held, and that the claimant is duly elected to the office in question. If several oificers or persons are required by law to join in a certificate, it is generally sufficient if a majority has signed it. It is enough for a prima facie case if the certificate comes from the proper ORGANIZATION . i 15 Monday,] ALLEN—LEWIS—BLACKBURN. -_ [September 8 , ofiicers of the State, and clearly shows that the person claiming under it is duly elected Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I rise to a point of order. . The CHAIRMAN. State the point. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. The pointis this: that this whole proceeding with reference to‘ this contest is out of order. The proper - proceeding is for those whose certificates are undenied and undeniable to be sworn in, and then we have a'tribunal ‘competent to try the correctness of the certificate of the gentleman from Washington county. You have nobody now authorized by the law to, try this question of contest, and it is a waste of time and a waste of argument to listen further, as it appears to me. In making this point I mean, of course, no disrespect whatever to the worthy gentle- man from the county of Washington. M r. STRAUS. My motion was to amend the original motion, so that all members could be sworn in where there was no con- test. ‘ to be the motion. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. If the Convention does not desire to hear me, I do not care to insist on it. The rule is, that a person having a certificate of election, whether it is in form or not, when signed by a major- ity of the officers charged by law to give the certificate, is prima facie entitled to be sworn in.- I desire to know how this Con- vention can make an order that I shall not be sworn as a member, thereby vacating the seat from Washington county upon ex parte statements read in their hearing, and without considering the sworn evidence relating to the very point upon which they are voting and passing. I desire to know whether it is just to Washington county or to myself, or to the oflicers who awarded the certificate of election to me, for this Convention to pass upon these ea: part0 statements without first hearing all the proof in the case read before any- The CHAIRMAN. I understood that body is sworn; and if anybody is sworn, then I desire to know the reason why I shall not be sworn at the same time, when my certificate is certified by the Secretary of State the same as theirs. I make the further point, if this seat is vacated, and if I am not permitted to qualify upon a primafacie showing, how can any legal right attach to any human being upon the face of this earth‘? How can a notice be served upon vacancy? If I am not here as a Delegate, this contestant can serve notice on no one. Mr. JAMES BLACKBURN. I rise to a point of order. No matter what our opinion about this may be, we are in no condition to vote on it until we have taken the oath. If we take the vote on that mat- ter of credentials, either of, the gentlemen might well challenge our right to vote, be- cause we are not members of the Conven- tion yet. Therefore, I think the motion is right, that the balance be sworn, and then et the question come up whether that cer- tificate of election is good. - Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I rise to a point of order as to the motion of the gentleman that all members be sworn except in the case of Washington county, where there is a contest. The Act calling this Convention says it shall consist of one hundred mem- bers. If ninety-nine Delegates are only sworn in, it fails to come up to the‘require- ment of the act. I make the further point of order, that the gentleman’s motion is out of order, for the reason that I am returned as a member from Washington county, and my election is certified hereby the Secre- tary of State, and the Convention now in its disorganized form, without the oath of office being administered to a single Dele- gate, has no right to make an order exclud-‘ ing me from the privileges exercised by the other Delegates. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of the opinion that the point of order of the gentleman from Washington is well taken. Mr. BREN TS. The law provides that 16 ORGANIZATION. Mon day,] BRENTS—MILLER—SPALDING. [September 8 . the county board shall meet on a certain day and count the vote. They shall then and there count the vote and grant the certificate. When they do that their work is finished. When they do that their work is final. They cannot reconvene and re- consider that matter. We have a prece- dent: In 1855-6 W. C. Anderson, of Boyle, and James S. Chrisman, of Wayne coun- ty, were candidates for Congress in the old Fourth District. The board of Cum- berland county met on the day prescribed by law. They certified the vote of Cum- berland county to the Secretary of State. They met on another day and discovered a mistake of ten votes against James S. Chrisman, which, ifthey had been counted, would have given him the certificate. Gov. Charles S. Morehead and the State board considered the matter, and decided that when the board adjourned on the day fixed by law their action was final, and they could not reconvene and recount the vote, and they rejected the amended cer- tificate and granted a certificate to W. C. Anderson. The law prescribes the duty of the county board in regard to the election of Delegates to the Constitutional Conven- tion. A certificate has been granted by that kind of board, and the county board has certified that a certain gentleman has been elected as the Delegate from Wash- ington ‘county. That was certified to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State has certified to us the name of Mr. J. W. Lewis, with the names of the other Dele- gates from the other representative dis- tricts. Now, he is the oflicer to whom these certificates must be' mailed or sent. He is the officer who has certified these certificates to us, and Mr.Lewis has as much right to be sworn as a member of this Con- vention as any other member. He has as much right to deny-to any of the rest of us the right to be sworn in as we have a right to deny him the right to be sworn as a member of this Convention. We can not now resolve ourselves into an election Committee to decide that matter. We must accept the certificate as sent to us by the Secretary of State, and this is all out of order. This is all I desire to say. . The CHAIRMAN. The question is upon the amendment of the gentleman from Bullitt- The amendment is to the effect that the oath be administered by the Chief Justice to all Delegates whose seats are undisputed. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to have the Chair pass upon the point of order made by myself, and renewed by the gen- tleman from Oldham, to the effect that the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Bullitt is out of order, and nothing is in order except to permit those members who have been rep rted by the Secretary of State to be sworn as ‘members of this Convention. That is the point of order made by me, and renewed by the gentle- man from Oldham; and, so far as I under- stand the ruling of the Chair, it has not been passed upon by the Chair, and I insist upon its being passed upon. Mr. SPALDIN G. It occurs to me that the matter was clearly stated by the hon- orable gentleman from Oldham. The only question before the House is, whether this gentleman had his certificate in proper form. The next question is, who is to de- cide that question ? Can this Convention do it by a vote, when the Convention is not organized, and when the Delegates are not sworn in‘? Somebody has to do it. We have no parliamentary law governing it, and hence‘ it seems to me that the Speaker ought to determine that question. I understand that in the House of Repre— sentatives the Clerk decides that question. We have no Clerk here, but we have a tem-_ porary President; and it seems to me that he is the proper person to pass upon the question whether the certificate is in due form; and if it is in due form, I believe there is no question that the gentleman is ORGANIZATION. 17 M on day,] i STRAUS—JONSON—DEHAVEN. entitled, prima facie, to his seat. I think the Chair should decide that question. Mr. STRAUS. It does seem to me that my amendment is in order, unless the tem- porary Prrsident of this Convention wants to assume the responsibility of deciding that question upon the face of the certifi- cate. But it does seem to me that this body can pass a resolution authorizing all the Delegates to be sworn in whose seats are not contested. Mr. JEP. C. JONSON. I think there is nothing for this body to do about this certificate. The law calling this Conven- tion, and providing for the election of Dele- gates, prescribes the board that shall count the votes and eertifv to the Secretary of State. That board Was distinct from any board provided for in our general election laws. Now, the only thing to be deter- mined by this body is, whether those oificers have discharged their duty. It seems to me that the certificate is in full compliance with the law The Sheriff, the Judge and the Clerk of the Washington County Court have granted that certificate to Mr. Lewis. They sent that certificate to the Secretary of State, the proper custo- dian, at the Capital of the State. as re- quired under the provisions of that law. Heis the only officer who can pass upon that certificate. He has done it, and if every Justice of the Peace in Washington county, and in the State of Kentucky, had voluntarily come forward and added their names to the foot of that certificate, it would not have added or detracted one iota from it. Therefore, I say that certificate is in perfect order. There can be no quibble about it. The universal rule is, that when a Delegate has been certified by the proper officer of the State. that then he is qualified. We had a precedent in our Constitutional Convention in 1849 in the person of Mr. Nuttall. He was sworn, and after all that the contest came. Now, why should we strike down this representative from Washington county? Had we not just as [September 8. well strike down Governor Buckner? Would the offense be any less? I know nothing of the merits of ‘the case. There is no gentleman here who knows or can have any information of the merits of the case, but in common honesty and fairness let us swear the man, and then give him ahearing. [Applause] The CHAIRMAN. The Chair, upon reflection, is inclined to believe that the. certificates in ‘the papers received from the office of the Secretary of State ought to be accepted at present as prima facie evi- denee. The Convention can do hereafter as it pleases in the matter 1, therefore, hold that the amendment of the gentleman from Bullitt is out of order. The Score- tary will please read the resolution The resolution was read by' the Secre- tary. Mr. DEHAVEN. Ido not really sup- pose that it is the object of that resolution that we shall, each one individually, be called up and sworn. I would say that eight Or ten of us be called up at a time and sworn. I move, then, that the Clerk call the roll, and ten members be sworn at a time by the Chief Justice. A MEMBER. Why not call a bun- dred? The CHAIRMAN. The remark is a little out of order. The Clerk thereupon called the roll, and the oath was admistered by the Chief Justice, W. H. Holt, in accordance with the resolution, to ten members of the Con- vention at a time. The said oath was as follows: You, and each of you, do solemnly swear that you will support the Constitu- tion of the United States and the Constitu- tion of the State, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, so long as you continue citizens thereof, and that you will faithfully execute, to the best of your ability, the oflice of member of the Constitutional Convention according to law. And you do further solemnly 18 ORGANIZATION. Monday] MILLER—SWANGO—SPALDING. I [September 8 . swear that since the adoption of the pres- ent Constitution, being a citizen of the State, you have ‘not fought a duel with deadly weapons, within the State nor out of it, with a citizen of this State, nor have you sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with a citizen of this State; nor have you acted as second in carrying a challenge, or aided or assisted any person thus offend- ing, so help you God. The CHAIRMAN. That concludes the roll. What is your further pleasure? Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a reso- lution to offer, which is as follows: Resolved, That Clarence E. Walker, John P. Cassilly and Phil. Myers, stenog— raphers, be, and they are hereby, requested to report the proceedings of this Conven- tion until a stenographer and his assistants shall be elected or employed. Mr. SWANGO. I desire to offer an amendment by inserting the name of J. H. Sublett. Mr. MILLER. I accept the amend- ment. The resolution, as amended, was adopted. Mr.DEHAVEN. I move the Conven- tion now adjourn, to meet again at half- past 4 o’clock. Mr. SPALDING. I would state to the gentleman from Oldham that the Librarian informs me that she intends to have some changes made in the seats, and she is going to have them moved forward. These rear seats are so arranged that it is hard for gentlemen back here to hear what is go- ing on. ~ Mr. WHITAKER. I amend the mo- tion, and move that the Convention do now adjourn until t~~-morrow morning at 10 o’clock. The motion was put upon the question to adjourn till 10 o'clock, and was declared carried by the Chairman. And the Con- vention thereupon adjourned. . ionvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1.] FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 9, 1890. [No. 2 Tuesday,] BUCKNER—STRAUS~ Cox. [September 9 . The Convention was called to order by the Chairman at 10:20 A. M. He said: It is customary to open proceedings with prayer. Is there a minister present? No one answering, the Journal was ordered to be read, which was done. The PRESIDENT. You have heard the Journal read; are there any corrections? If not, it will stand approved as read. Mr. BUCKNER. We are here, I be- lieve, without any special rules to guide our conduct, and I think it entirely proper and necessary that we shall arm our pre- siding officer with such powers as will ena- ble him to conduct the proceedings of the Convention. I, therefore, offer this resolu- tion : Resolved, That a Committee of five, in- cluding the President, be appointed by the Chair to prepare and report a Code of Rules for the government of the proceed- ings of the Convention, and that until the adoption of their report the rules adopted by the Constitutional Convention of Ken- tucky in 1849 shall be the rules of this body. Mr. STRAUS. It seems to me that that motion should come after we have per- fected the regular organization of this body. The Committee on Rules ought to be ap- pointed by the regular Chairman of the Convention. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks that the point of order is not well taken. Mr. COX. I desire to offer a substitute. Resolution read as follows: Resolved, That the President appoint a Committee on Rules, to be composed of ten members, one from each Constitutional District, and the President of the Conven- tionshall be the Chairman of said Com- mittee. Resolved, That said Committee shall re- port rules for the government of this Con- vention, together with the names of the several Committees necessary to facilitate the work of forming a Constitution. Mr. GOEBEL. I have a substitute to offer. The substitute was read, as follows: Resolved, That the ofiicers of this Con- vention be a President, Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Sergeant-at-Arms, Door-keeper and Reporter; and that we proceed imme- diately to the election of said officers. The President ruled the substitute out of order. ' Mr. BULLITT. I move to amend the motion made by Gov. Buckner, that for the purpose of organization We adopt the rules that were adopted at the preceding Convention, so as to let the appointment of the Committees for the purpose of framing rules lay over until a permanent organiza- tion of the Convention. Mr. BUCKNER. I accept the amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. The amendment to the original resolution having been ac- cepted, it becomes a part of the resolution. The question is upon the substitute of the gentleman from Carroll. The Secretary will please read it. Mr. Cox’s substitute read. Mr. KNOTT. I would like to have the original proposition, as amended, read. The Secretary read the resolution. Mr. BUCKNER. I withdraw my reso- lution. Mr. MACKOY. I understand that the resolution offered by Gov. Buckner has been withdrawn. 2 ' ORGANIZATION . Tuesday,] BUeKNER—GOEBEL—SPALDING. Mr. BUCKNER. I misunderstood the character of the amendment, and, with the permission of the gentleman, I withdraw the resolution. The PRESIDENT. The resolution be- ing withdrawn, the substitute falls with it. Mr. GOEBEL. I now re-ofi'er the res~ olution I offered a moment ago. The resolution was read by the Secre- tary, as follows: Resolved, That the officers of this Con- vention be a President, Secretary, Assist- ant Secretary, Sergeant-at-Arms, Door- keeper and Reporter; and that we proceed immediately to thev election of said ofii- cers. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I move to amend by inserting “ and a Janitor.” A vote being taken on the amendment, it was lost. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I propose the fol- lowing substitute: Reoolved, That a Committee of six mem- bers be appointed by the Chair to report what officers are necessary to the organiza- tion of this Convention. Mr. STRAUS. I think that amend- ment is out of order. The act provides what ofiicers we must elect. r The PRESIDENT. The Chair difi‘ers from the gentleman from Bullitt, because the act provides, that while certain oflicers shall be elected, additional oificers may also be elected. Mr. SPALDIN G. It seems to me that the first thing to be done is to adopt rules for the government of this body. Mr. Bullitt offered a resolution to adopt the rules governing the last Convention, and I think that resolution should be disposed of. The PRESIDENT. The original reso- lution of the gentleman from Hart was withdrawn. That carried the substitute with it, and it is not before the House. The substitute offered by the Delegate from Hardin (Mr. Harvey H. Smith) was put to the Convention, and, on a vote, was declared lost. ‘ Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to offer a substitute. The Secretary read the substitute, as fol- lows: Resolved, That the following-named ofli- cers of this Convention shall be elected, whose several compensations shall be as herein recited: . 1. A President, whose compensation shall be $5 per day, in addition to his pay as a Delegate. 2. A Secretary, whose compensation shall. be 810 per day. 3. An Assistant Secretary, whose com- pensation shall be $8 per day. 4. A Sergeant-at-Arms, whose compen- sation shall be $5 per day. 5. A Door-keeper, whose compensation‘ shall be $5per day. ' 6. A Stenographer, whose compensation shall be $8 per day. 7. Two Assistant Stenographers, whose- gompensation shall be for each 87 per ay. 8. A Printer, whose compensation shall be such as shall hereafter be fixed by this- Convention. Second. The President of this Conven- tion, when elected, shall appoint a Com- mittee of three Delegates, whose duty it shall be to investigate and report what other ofiicers, if any, and employes are needed for the proper conduct of the busi- ness of this Convention, and in what man- ner they shall be appointed or employed, and what will be a just and sufiicient com- pensation for each‘. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I would like to ask the consent of the gentleman who in- troduced the substitute to‘ allow me to- ofi‘er this, and see whether he will not ac- cept it. Mr. W. H. MILLER. If the gentle- men desire the substitute read for informa- tion, I have no objection. The resolution was read by the Secretary, as follows: Resolved, That a Committee composed of twelve (12) Delegates be ‘appointed by the ( hair to prepare and report suitable rules to govern the actions of this Convention. ‘Mr. PETTIT. I move you that the whole subject he referred to a Committee of seven members, to be appointed by the- Chair. [September 9‘. ORGANIZATION. 3 Tuesday,] HENDRICK—MACKOY—PETTIT. [Septe nber 9 , Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a point of order; that motion is out of order, be- cause the Chair has ruled that comes as amendment No. 3. The President decided that the point of order was not well taken. The substitute of the gentleman from Lincoln (Mr. W. H. Miller) was put to a ,vote, and declared lost. The PRESIDENT. The motion before the House is, that the whole subject he re- ferred to a Committee of seven members, to be appointed by the Chair, to report at some future time. Mr. MACKOY. It seems to me that the proceedings of the House are being delayed by the various motions and amendments that are being offered. If the motion of the gentleman from Kenton to proceed at once to the election 01 offi- cers is adopted, there will be no delay whatever in the organization. If the Committee is appointed, we may lose an- other day. I think it is highly important that we should at once organize this Con- vention. The question of compensation, the order of business, the number of Com- mittees to be appointed, all that will then come properly before. the permanent or- ganization; but now the important thing is to organize this House, and to do it as quickly as we can. There is no need for any resolution in reference to rules, be- cause, in the absence of rules, we are pro- ceeding under rules governing assemblies of this kind. It is important to organize as quickly as possible, and I hope that the resolution ofl'ered by the gentleman from Kenton will prevail. If there are other officers necessary for this Convention to elect, we can elect them at a later period. Mr. PETTlT. I ofi‘ered my motion for the simple purpose of facilitating the busi- ness of the House. I would say to the gentleman, that, in my opinion, my motion does not preclude this Convention from proceeding at once with the election. of its officers. It was in that spirit that I ofl'ered my resolution. Mr. BLACKBURN. A vote was taken upon the same question just now, upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Bullitt. The motion of the gentleman from Daveiss is, that a Committee of seven be appointed to report on this matter. The Convention just refused to do that, there- fore, it can not now come before the Con- vention. The PRESIDENT. The question re- curs upon the substitute. Are you ready for the question‘? Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I seems to me\ that all of this is anticipating business which will properly come before the Con- vention when organized. Nothing is in order now except to enter upon the organ- ization of this Convention. A MEMBER. Has not that substitute been voted upon '? The PRESIDENT. The motion was put, but the vote was not taken. The substitute, upon a vote, was lost. The PRESIDENT. The question re-- curs upon the amendment to the originah resolution. Mr. PETTIT. I now move you, sir, to‘ strike out the word “ Reporter.” The motion, upon a vote. was lost. The resolution then, upon vote, was adopted. Mr. HARRIS. I desire to offer the fol‘ lowing resolution: Resolved, That in the election of perma- nent President of this Convention, after the second vote or ballot, the candidate receiving the lowest number of votes be dropped, and on each succeeding vote or ballot. the one receiving the lowest number of votes be dropped, until one shall receive a majority of all the votes of this Convention, and that this rule shall apply in the election of all the other ofiicers after the first vote or ballot. The resolution, upon a vote, was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Nominations‘ for President are in order. Mr. FARMER. I nominate for Presi- 4. ORGANIZATION. ' Tuesday,] 4 BRoNs'roN—BEcKHAM—BUcRNER. [September 9 . dent of this Convention Mr. Henry D. -McHenry, of Ohio county. Mr. BRONSTON. I nominate Hon. Bennett H. Young, of Louisville. Mr. BOLES. I nominate the Hon. Cas- -_sius M. Clay, J r., of Bourbon. Mr. BECK H/AM. I desire to present to this Conventioii for the office of President ‘the name of a gentleman who is known ‘from ocean to ocean, and from the lakes to ‘the gulf. Kentucky, sir, will, perhaps, but twice in this generation, have such an op- portunity to honor one of her most distin- guished sons as she has to-day. Willa life of public service that has lasted for a quarter of a century before a people like this count for nothing? There is here among us a man who served his State and his country in atime that tried men’s souls; in a time when there was corruption in high places in the seat of government of this country; and yet, sir, after serving there for the length of time that he did, ranking as a lawyer with the highest, as a statesman among the foremost, he holds up in the face of the people of Kentucky to- day, and of this Convention, the hands of a stainless gentleman. Well-born, well- bred, by training a scholar, by experience a statesman, by impulse a patriot, by in- stinct a gentleman, Gov. J. Proctor Knott, if seated to preside over this Convention, will do honor to Kentucky and Kentucky will do honor to herself. I “place his name, sir, before the Convention. Mr. BUCKNER. I rise, sirmto second the nomination made by the gentleman from Snelby of the distinguished Delegate from Marion county. His private charac- ' ter and his public services are alike known to us all, and we will honor the State of Kentucky by electing him ‘to this place; and the very fact that we should name him will be an evidence to the people of the United States that we select from amongst ourselves the best qualified and best equipped gentleman to preside over our delibera- tions. ' Mr. COKE. I rise to second the nomi- nation of Henry D. McHenry, of Ohio county. He is a gentleman known, not only in this State, but out of it. He has served in the halls of the Legislature of Kentucky with distinguished honor to him- self and credit to his State. He has, in addition to that, held a high and important position as member of the Democratic Na- tional Committee, and he is familiar with all the rules of parliamentary law. If this body should elect him to the position to which he aspires, he will fill it with honor and distinction. Mr. JOHNDTON. I desire to second the nomination of Mr. Clay, of Bourbon. The PRESIDENT. Are there any fur- ther nominations? If not, nominations are closed. Mr. W. S. SMITH. I move that the evote be taken by ballot. The motion failed for want of a second. The first ballot resulted as follows: For Mr. Clay: ' Amos, D. C. Kennedy, Hanson Applegate, Leslie T. Lassing, L. W. Askew, J. F. Lewis, W. W. Ayres, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. Bennett, B. F. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James a Blackwell, Joseph Boles, S. H. Brents, J. A. Burnam, Curtis F. Edrington, W. J. Field, W. W. Glenn, Dudley A. McElroy, W. J. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. O’Hara, R. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Goebel, William Ramsey, W. R. Graham, Samuel Smith, W. Scott Hanks, Thos. H. Swango, G. B. Hendrick, W. J. Trusdell, George Hines, J. S. West, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Whitaker, Emery Hopkins, F. A. Williams, L. P.V.-41. Johnston, P. P. For Mr. McHenry: Allen, C. T. Farmer, H. H. Birkhead, B. T. Forgy, J. M. Bourland, H. R. Harris, Geo. C. Buchanan, Nathan James, A. D. Bullitt, W. G. Jonson, J ep. C. Chambers, G. D. May, John S. Clardy, John D. Miller, Will. ORGAN IZATION. . English, Sam. E. Tuesday,] Coke, J. Guthrie Petrie, H. G. Doris, W. F. . Pettit, Thos. S. Durbin, Charles Rodes,"Robert—-21. Elmore, T. J. For Mr. Knott: Auxier, A. J. Muir, J. W. Beckham, J. C. Nunn, T. J. Beckner, W. M. Sachs, Morris A. Berkele, Wm. Smith, H. H. Brummal, J. M. Spalding, I. A. Buckner, S. B. Straus, F. P. DeHave-n, S. E. Twyman, I. W. Jacobs, R. P. Wood, J. M. Miller, W. H. Woolfolk, J. F.~—19. Moore, J. H. ~ For Mr. Young: Allen, M. K. Funk, J. T. Bronston, C. J. Hines, Thomas H. Brown, J. S. Hollowav. J. W. Carroll, John D. Kirwan, E. E. Cox, H. McDermott, E. J. Phelps, Zack Forrester, J. G. Washington, Geo-14. Mr. BRONSTON. I. desire to with- draw the name of the Hon. Bennett H. _ Young, of the city of Louisville, and in doing this I desire, in his behalf, to thank the gentlemen for the compliment they have extonded him by their votes. , The CHAIRMAN. No candidate hav- ing received a majority of the votes cast, we will proceed with a second ballot. . The~ second ballot resulted as follows: For Mr. Clay: Allen, M. K. Hogg, S. P. Amos, D. C. - Holloway, J. W. Applegate, Leslie T. Hopkins, F. A Askew, J. F. Johnston, P. P. Ayres, W. W. Kennedy, Hanson Bennett, B. F. Kirwan, E. E. Blackburn, James Lassing, L. W. Blackwell, Joseph Lewis, W. WV. Boles, S. H. Mackoy, W. H. Brents, J. A. Martin, W. H. Bronston, C. J. McElroy, W. J. Brown, J. S Montgomery, J. F Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Cox, H. ' Edrington, -W. J. English, Sam. E. Field, W. W. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Moore, Laban T. O’Hara, R. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. F BRoNs'roN—MAcKoY—BUCKNER. [September 9 . j Goebel, William Smith, W. Scott Graham, Samuel Swango, G. B. Hanks, Thos. H. Washington, George Hendrick, W. J. West, J. F. Hines, J. S. Hines, Thomas H. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L.P.V.—52. For Mr. McHenry : Allen, C. T. Farmer, H. H. Birkhead, B. T. Forgy, J. M. Bourland, H. R. Harris, Geo. C. Buchanan, Nathan James, 'A. D. Bullitt, W. G. J onso'n, J ep. C. Chambers, G. D. May, John S. Clardy, John D. Miller, Will. Coke, J. Guthrie Petrie, H. G. Doris, W. F. Pettit,»Thos. S. Dnrbin, Charles Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Trusdell, George—‘22. For Mr. Knott: Auxier, A. J. Moore, J. H. Beckham, J. C. Muir, J. W. Beckner, M. Nunn, T. J. Berkele, 'W m. Sachs, Morris A. Brummal, J. M. Smith, H. H. Buckner, S. B. Spalding, 1. A. DeHaven, S. E. Straus, F. P. Forrester, J. G. Twyman, I. W. Jacobs, R P. Wood, J. M. McDermott, E. J. Woolfolk, J. F.-21. Miller, W. H. The PRESIDENT. The total number of votes cast is 9-5; necessary for an elec- tion, 48; of these, Mr. McHenry received 22, Mr. Clay 53 and Mr. Knott 21. Mr. Clay having received a majority of all votes cast, is declared duly elected to the oflice of President. (Applause). Mr. MACKOY. Imove that a Com- mittee of five be appointed to escort the President to the Chair. The temporary President appointed Hon. W. H. Mackoy, Gov. S. B. Buckner, Hon. J. Proctor Knott, Hon. H. D. McHenry and Hon. Bennett H. Young as said .Com- mittee. Mr. BUCKN ER. Mr. Chairman, in obedience to the resolution of theConven- tion, I have the honor of presenting to you for introduction‘ to the Convention our President, Hon Cassius M. Clay, Jr. Mr. WASHINGTON. Gentlemen, I present your permanent President, Mr. Clay. Before withdrawing, I wish to 6 ORGANIZATION. Tuesday,] CLAY. [September 9 . tender my heartfelt thanks for the forbear- ance with which you have treated an in- experiended parliamentarian. Mr. CLAY. Gentlemen of the Con- vention: I regret exceedingly for your sakes that my voice is in its present condi- tion. I am profoundly affected by my election, and most cordially and grate- fully appreciate it Especially is my ap- preciation of it enhanced by the fact that you preferred me over such worthy and distinguished competitors. But, to be can- did, I think you‘ preferred me not on ac- count of my own personal merit, but because you felt that in me you found, along with the other candidates, one who was in thorough sympathy with the Wants and needs of the great mass of the peo- ple, an exponent and representative of them in their just and reasonable de- mand for proper protection against any consolidation of power which might un- duly threaten their welfare and happiness. (Applause) And this feeling, which neither tolerates} communism, agrarianism or the least impairment of the rights of property on the one hand, nor the unlimit- ed and despotic control of great public agencies on the other, simply demands, in the spirit of American liberty, equal rights and protection to all. To your wisdom is confided the duty of drawing the line of prudence and safety, and in drawing that line, let us remember that the adequate protection of the individual in his rights of life, liberty and property, not only conduces in the highest degree to the prosperity and welfare of society, but is the best and most permanent foundation for material prosperity and progress. We have met to perform a most important duty—a more important duty I cannot well imagine—and let us give to that task the very best efl’orts of ‘our intellects and hearts. ‘ Our present Constitution was adopted forty years ago. Since that time wonder- ful changes have taken place. In looking over those forty years, we find them crowd- ed with great events, which shook the na- tion to its center, and an era of physical and material development that has eclipsed all flthe preceding centuries. Then the rail- road and telegraph systems were pigmies; now they are giants, bringing into asso- ciation all the people in the closest sort of contact. Since then every conceivable implement of machinery to aid produc- tion, transportation and manufacture has been invented. The beneficent system of life insurance, and many other contrivances to ameliorate the condition of society, and make more prosperous and happy the lot of mankind, have been originated and de- veloped. In fine, the brain of our people, stimulated by training and education, has, in every department, achieved the grand- .est triumphs. Now, the question for us to determine is this: What new adjustments in the or- ganic law are required by these changed conditions that we see around us? While the principles of liberty in their essence do not change, still it is necessary, as society develops, as new conditions‘ arise, that there should be adaptation to these conditions. Now, I imagine that among the changes demanded are, first, those to adequately- and fully protect the individual in his rights of life, liberty and property; ,then those changes which are required in the processes of government in order to save expense that your government may be more convenient to you, that your pros- perity may be promoted, and that the exe- cution of the law may be more evenly and speedily procured. But I will not go into details to tell you what your wisdom and experience at the proper time will more wisely determine. I imagine that various prohibitions will be imposed upon the power of the‘ Legisla- ture; that better and simpler arrange- ments of the Courts will be made; that the purity of elections will be better secured. Our mode of revision by Constitutional ORGANIZATION. Tuesday,] CLAY—ALLEN—SMITH. [September 9 . Convention, making a revolution in the Constitution possible, is certainly not as wise and philosophical as a change in the mode of revision by which, while we give stability to the organic law, will allow the Constitution to grow according to the wants :and necessities of the people. But in all these things, no doubt, your wisdom and experience will much better ‘decide than I could indicate. Let us always remember, though, in chang- ing this Constitution, that it represents the centuries of the best efforts of no- I Ne and patriotic minds to secure society ‘and liberty from communism on the one hand, and from despotism on the other; and let us not discard needlessly any of those time-honored guarantees and provisions, and let us remember all the time that we are the representatives and the servants of the people; that to them we owe an undivided allegiance; that to them we owe the very best efforts of our minds and hearts. And may the blessing of God attend our work. Again, gentlemen, thanking you for this distinction, I appeal to you for your aid and forbearence while conducting the pro- ceedings of this Convention. 1 will now allow the Convention to proceed to busi- ness. (Applause) The first thing in order is the election of a Secretary. Nominations are in order. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. For the position of Secretary of this Convention, I beg leave to nominate Mr. Thomas G. Poore. M r. H.H. SMITH. ' I wish to nominate :a gentleman for the position of Secretary who has previous to this ‘time filled the po- sition of Assistant Secretary in the House of Representatives, and is in every way qualified for the position. I nominate Mr James E. Stone, of the county of Breckin- ridge, a gentleman fitted in every way for the position, who will always do whatever is desired by the Convention, and, I am sure, have the confidence of all the Dele- gates. Mr. BOLES. I desire to place in nomi- nation the name of James B. Martin as Secretary of this Convention. The PRESIDENT, If there are no further nominations, the same will be closed. The vote was then taken, and resulted as follows: For Mr. Poorer Allen, C. T. Holloway, J. Applegate, Leslie T. Hopkins, F. w'. o. P. Auxier, A. J. Jacobs, R. P. Ayres, W. W. Jonson, J ep. Beckner, W. M. Johnston, P. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, J. W. Blackwell, Joseph Lewis, W. W. Brummal, J. M. Mackoy, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. McHenry, H. D. Burnam, Curtis F. Miller, W. H. Carroll, John D. Moore, Laban T. (.llardy, John D. Nunn, T. J. Cox, H. O’Hara, R. H. DeHaven, S. E. Pugh, Sam’l J. Edrington, W. J. Quicksall, J. E. Elmore, T. J. Ramsey, W. R. Farmer, H. H. ' Sachs, Morris A. Field, W. W. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Hines, Thomas H. For Mr. Stone: Beckham, J. C. Berkele Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Bourland, H. R. Bronston. C. J. Trusdell, George Washington, George Whitaker, Emery vWilliams, L. P. V.—45. Kennedy, Hanson Knott, J Proctor ‘Miller, Will. Parsons, Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Buchanan, Nathan Smith, H. H. Chambers, G. D. Straus, F. P. Doris, W. F. Twyman, I. W. Durbin, Charles West, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Wood, J. M. Hogg, S. P. Woolfolk, J. F.-—24. For Mr. Martin: Allen, M. K. Kirwan, E. E. Amos, D. C. Lassing, L. W. Askew, J. F. Martin, W. H. Boles, S. H. May, John S. Brents, J. A. McDermott, E. J. Brown, J. S. McElroy, W. J. Buckner, S. B.. Coke, J. Guthrie Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. ORGANIZATION. / Tuesday,] HINES—HOPKINS—KENNEDY. [September 9 .. English, Sam. E. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Harris, Geo. C. Hines. J. S. James, A. D. The PRES IDENT. The name of Mr. Stone, who has received the lowest number of votes, is, according to the rule, dropped. Muir, J. W. Petrie, H. G. Phelps, John L. Rodes, Robert Smith, W. Scott Spalding, I. A Clay, C. M., J r.—-30. The second ballot was then taken, and resulted as follows: For Mr. Poore: Allen, C. T. Applegate, Leslie T. Auxier, A. J. Ayres, W. W. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M Bennett, B F. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Blackwell, Joseph Brummal, J. M. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Chambers,~G. D. Clardy, John D Cox. H. DeHaven, S. E, Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. For Mr. Martin : Allen, M. K. Amos, D. C. Askew, J. F. Blackburn, James Boles, S. H. Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Buchanan, Nathan Buckner, S. B. Coke, J. Guthrie Doris,- W. F. Holloway, J. W. Hopkins, F A. Jacobs, R. P. Jonson, Jep. C. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Lewis, J. W. Lewis, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. McHenry, H. D. Miller, W. H. Mopre, Laban T. Nunn, T. J . O’Hara, R. H. Pettit, Thos. S. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey. W. R. Sachs, Morris A. Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. Washington, George West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. “700d, J. M. Young, R H.~—56. Kirwan, E. E. Knott, J. Proctor Lassing, L. W. Martin, W. H. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. McElroy. . W. J. Miller, Will. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Muir, J. W. Parsons. Rob’t T. Petrie, H. G. Durbin, Charles English, Sam. E. Forrester, J. G. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Rodes, Robert Forgy, J. M. Smith, H. H Funk, J. '1. Smith, W. Scott Harris, Geo. C. Spalding, I. A. Hines, J .'S. Straus, F. P. Hogg, S. P. \Voolfolk, J. F. James, A. D. Clay, C. M.. Jr.-—44. The PRESIDENT. The whole num- ber of votes cast is one hundred, of which fifty-one are necessary to a choice. Of these, Mr. Poole has received fifty-six, which is a majority. Mr. Poore is, there- fore, duly elected as Secretary of this Con- vention. Mr. Thomas G. Poore came forward, and was duly sworn by the President. The PRESIDENT. The next thing' in order is the election of Assistant-Secretary. Mr. THOMAS H. HINES. I nominate- Mr. James B. Martin for the position of Asistant Secretary. Mr. HOPKINS I have the pleasure of placing the name of Mr. Spencer Cooper, of the county of Wolfe, before this honorable body for the ofiice of Assis- tant Secretary. It would, perhaps, be just to myself and to this Convention to say that he was not a personal acquaint- ance of mine until yesterday; but the in- dorsement he brings from his people, and from those among whom he lives, is a suf- ficient guaranty to authorize me to pre- ‘sent him to you for this position, and to ask that this Convention give his claims a careful consideration. Mr. KENNEDY. I place in nomina- tion the name of Hon. G. R. Keller. I did not propose to say any thing other than place the nameof Mr. Keller before the Convention, but since the name of Mr. Martin has been presented for the same office, it seems to me that it is but fair that those candidates who have not heretofore been voted for should now receive the support of the Convention. It hardly seems fair for a gentleman, however wore thy he may he, to make one race, and ORGANIZATION. 9 Tuesday,] ELECTION OF OFFICERS. [Septembei' 9 . then, after suffering defeat, to make a succeeding race for another place. It seems to me to be rather unfair, and I ap- peal to the fairness of this Convention that we have a fair division in the appoint- ment of officers in this Convention. The PRESIDENT. There being no other nominations, they are closed. The result of the first ballot was as fol- lows: For Mr. Martin : Allen, C. T. Hines, J. S. Allen, M. K. Hines, Thomas H. Amos, D. C. James, A. D. Ayres, W. W. Jonson, J ep. C. Bennett, B. F. Kirwan, E. E. Blackwell, Joseph Knott, J. Proctor Boles, S. H. Lewis, W. W. Brents, J. A. May, John S. Brummal, J. M. McElroy, W. J. Buchanan, Nathan McHenry, H. D. Buckner, S. B. Miller, W. H. ' Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Burnam. Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Clardy, John D. O’Hara, R. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Petrie, H. G. _ Cox, H. Phelps, John L. English, Sam. E. Rodes, Robert Farmer, H. H. Smith, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Smith, W. Scott Forgy, J. M. Spalding, I. A. Funk, J. T. Twyman, I. W. Graham, Samuel Woolfolk, J. F. Harris, Geo. C. Young, B. H.-—46. For Mr. Keller: Applegate, Leslie T. Holloway, J. W. Askew, J. F. Johnston, P. P. Beckham, J. C. Kennedy, Hanson Beckner, W. M. Lassing, L. W. Berkele, Wm. Mackoy, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James McDermott, E. J. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. Brown, J. S. Moore, Laban T. Carroll, John D. Nunn, T. J. Chambers, G. D. Phelps, Zack » Clay; C. M., Jr. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Ramsey, W. R. Doris, W. F. Sachs, Morris A. Durbin, Charles Straus, F. P. Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Field, W. W. Glenn, Dudley A. Trusdell, George Washington, George West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery , Brown, J. S. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. For Mr. Cooper: Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M.—-45. Auxier, A. J. Parsons, Rob’t T. Hogg, S. P. Pettit, Thos. S. Hopkins, F. A. Quicksall, J. E Jacobs, R. P. Swango, G. B.——8. The PRESIDENT. 'Mr. Cooper hav- ing received the lowest number of votes, will be dropped, according to the rule estab- lished, and the Clerk will proceed to call the roll for the second ballot. The second ballot was as follows: For Mr. Martin : Allen, M. K. Jacobs, R. P. Amos, D. C. James, A. D. Auxier, A. J. “Jonson, J ep. C. ,Ayres, W. W. Kirwan, E E. Blackwell, Joseph Knott, J. Proctor Boles, S. H. _Lewis, J. W. Brents, J. A. Lewis, W; W. Brummal, J. M. May, John S. Buchanan, Nathan McElroy, W. J. Buckner, S. B. McHenry, H. D. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, W. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Montgomery, J. F. Clardy, John D. Moore, J. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Muir, J. W. Cox, H. O’Hara, R. H. English, Sam. E. Petrie, H. G. Farmer, H. H. Pettit, Thos. S. Forrester, J. G. Phelps, John L. Forgy, J. M. Rodes, Robert _ Funk, J. T. Sachs, Morris A. Graham, Samuel Smith, H. H. . Harris, Geo. C. Smith, 'W. Scott Hines, J. S. Spalding, I. A. Hines, Thomas H. Twyman, I. W Hogg, S. P. Woolfolk, J. F. Hopkins, F. A. Young, B. H.—-52.. For Mr. Keller: Allen, C. T. Hendrick, W. J. , Applegate, Leslie T. Holloway, J. W. Askew, J. F Johnston, P. P. Beckham, J. C. Kennedy, Hanson Beckner, W. M. Lassing, L. W. Bennett, B. F. Mackoy, W. H. Berkele, Wm. Martin, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. McDermott, E. J .. Blackburn, James Miller, Will. Bourland, H. R. Moore, Laban T. Bronston, C. J. Nunn, T.‘J. Parsons, Rob’t T. 10 ORGANIZATION. Tues'day,] STRAUS—WHITAKER—WOOD. ' [September 9 , Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Clay, C. M., Jr. DeHaven, S. E. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Field, W. W. Glenn, Dudley A. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Straus, F. P Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Washington, George West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery _ Hopkins, F. A. Hendrick, W. J. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, B. H.—5-1. For Mr. Jenkins: 'Goebel, William Williams, L. P. V. Hanks, Thos. H. Wood, J. M.-—48. The PRESIDENT. Mr. Martin hav- ing received fifty-two votes—a majority of those cast—is duly elected Assistent Secre- tary of this Convention. M r. James B. Martin came forward, and was duly sworn by the President. The PRESIDENT. The next thing in order is the election of a Sergeant-at-Arms. Mr. STRAUS. I 'desire to place in nomination Capt. Robert Tyler, of Bullitt county. Mr. WHITAKER. I desire to put in nomination Capt. Bart. Jenkins. The PRESIDENT. If there are no more nominations, the Secretary will pro- ceed to call the roll. Allen, M. K. Hogg, S. P. Askew, J. F. Holloway, J. W. Ayres, W. W. Jacobs, R. P. Blackwell, Joseph Kirwan, E. E. Boles, S. H. Lassing, L. W. Brent's, J. A. Martin, W. H. Brown, J. S. McHenry, H. D. Buchanan, Nathan Montgomery, J. F. The vote resulted as follows: For Mr. Tyler: Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Amos, D. C. Jonson, Jep l‘. A ppl-egate, Leslie T. Auxier, A. J. Beckham, J. C. Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Knott, J. Proctor Beckner, W. M. ' Lewis, J. W. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Berkele, Wm. Mackoy, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. McDermott, E. J. Blackburn, James, McElroy, W. J. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Bronston, C. J. Miller, W. H. Brummal, J. M. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Nunn, T. J. Carroll, John D. Petrie, H. G. Chambers, G. D. Phelps, John L. Clardy, John D. Phelps, Zack Coke, J. Guthrie Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Ramsey, W. R. Durbin, Charles Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Smith, H. El.' Farmer, H. H. Spaldiug, I. A. Glenn, Dudley A. Straus, F. P. Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. I Buckner, S. B. Moore, J. H. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, Laban T. Clay, C. M., Jr. O’Hara, R. H. Cox. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Doris, W. F. Pettit, Thos. S. Quicksall, J. E. Sachs, Morris A. Edrington, W.IJ. English, Sam. E. Field, W. W. Smith, W. Scott Forrester, J. G. Swango, G. B. Forgy, J. M. _ Trusdell, George Funk, J. T. Twyman, I. W. Hanks, Thos. H. Washington, George Hines, J. S. West, J. F. Hines, Thomas H. For Mr. Walker: Goebel, VVilliam—l. The PRESIDENT Mr. Tyler having received 54'out of 98 votes cast, is duly Whitaker, Emery—44. elected Sergeant-at-Arms of this Conven- tion. Mr. Tyler came forward and was sworn by the President. ' The PRESIDENT. The next thing in order is the election of a Door-keeper. Mr. WOOD. I desire to place in nomi- nation one whom I conceive to be one of the best men we have in the country, and all I shall say for him is, that he is compe- tent. I place in nomination Mr. W. J. Bale. Mr. CARROLL. I placein nomination - Mr. Smith Cook. - Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to place in nomination Mr. H. O. Sullivan, of 'the county of Lawrence. Mr. BOURLAND. I desire to place in nomination Mr. A. W. Bolloman. Mr. SPALDING. With the permis- sion of this Convention, I place in nomina- ORGANIZATION. . 11 Tuesday,] Yonive—Hmns. [September 9 , tion Mr. H. C. Elliott, of the county of Nelson. Mr. YOUNG. I desire to place in nomination Mr. R. T. Haley, of Louisville. Mr. J". S. HINES. I desire to place in nomination Mr. Nathan L. Moore. a The PRESIDENT. There being no further nominations, they are closed. The result of the first ballot was as fol- lows: For Mr. Haley : Allen, M. K. Miller, Will. Applegate, Leslie T. Miller, W. H. Chambers, G. D. Moore, J. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Petrie, H. G. Elmore, T. J. Rodes, Robert English, Sam. E. Sachs, Morris A. Funk, J. T. Trusdell, George Glenn, Dudley A. Washington, George Harris, Geo. C. West, J. F. Johnston, P. P. Woolfolk, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. Young, B. H.-2o. McDermott, E. J. For Mr. H. C. Elliott: Amos. D. C. ' Forgy, J. M. Beckner, W. M. Graham, Samuel Berkele, Wm. McElroy, W. J. Birkhead, B. T. Muir, J._ W. Brown, J. S. , Pettit, Thomas S. Buchanan, Nathan Phelps, Zack Bullitt, W. G. , Smith, H. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Spalding, I. A. \Durbin, Charles Straus, F. P. Edrington, W. J. Twyman, I. W.——20. For Mr. H. C. Sullivan: Auxier, A. J. Kennedy, Hanson Bennett, B. F. Lewis, J. W. Clay, C. M., Jr. Martin, W. H. Field, W, W. Moore, Laban T. Forrester; J. G. O’Hara, R. H. Hendrick, W. J. Parsons, Robert T. Hogg, S. P. Pugh, Sam’l J. Hopkins, F. A. Quicksall, J. E.—16. For Mr. Holloman: ' Allen, C. T. Lewis, W. W. Ayres, W. W. May, John S. Brents, J. A, M cHenry,'- H. D. Clardy, John D. Nunn, T. J. Doris, W. F. Phelps, John L. Farmer, H‘. H. Whitaker, Emery James, A. D. Williams,L.P.V.--15. Jonson, J ep. C. For Mr. Smith Cook: Askew, J. F. DeHaven, S. E. Beckham, J. C. Goebel, William Blackwell, Joseph Holloway, J. W. Bronston, C. J. Jacobs, R. P. Carroll, John D. Lassing, L. W. Cox, H. Mackoy, W. H.-—12. For Mr. W. J. Bale: Boles, S. H. Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Smith, W. Scott Knott, J. Proctor Wood, J. M .—6. For Mr. Nathan L. Moore: Blackburn, James Hines, J. S. Hanks, Thomas H. Hines, Thomas H.—4._ For Mr. Baker: Ramsey, W. R.—~1. The PRESIDENT. The name of Mr. Nathan. L. Moore, who has received the smallest number of votes on the last ballot is, according to the rule, dropped, and the Clerk will proceed to call the roll for the second ballot. The second ballot resulted as follows: For Mr. Bale: Boles, S. H, Ramsey, W. R. Buckner, S. B. Smith, W. Scott Knott, J. Proctor Twyman, I. W. Montgomery, J. F. Wood, J. M.—-8. For Mr.- Cook: Askew, J. F. Goebel, William Beckham, J. C. Blackburn, James Hanks, Thos. H. Hines, Thomas, H. Blackwell, Joseph Holloway, J. W. Bronston, C. J. Jacobs, R. P. Carroll, John D." Lassing, L. W. Cox, H. Mackoy, W. H.—l5. DeHaven, S. E. For Mr. Sullivan: Auxier, A. J. Martin, W. H. Field, W. W. Moore, Laban T. Forrester, J. G. O’Hara, R. H. Hendrick, W. J. Parsons, Rob’t T. Hogg, S. P. Pugh, Sam’l J. Hopkins, F. A. Quicksall, J. E. Kennedy, Hanson Whitaker, Emery. Lewis, J. W. Williams, L. P.V.-16 For Mr. Holloman: Allen, C. T. Farmer, H. H. 12 ORGANIZATION. Tuesday,] ELECTION OF OFFICERS. [September 9. Ayres, W. W. James, A. D. Beckner, W. M. Muir, J. W. Bennett, B. F. Jonson, Jep. C. Berkele, Wm. Pettit, Thomas S. Bourland, H. R. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Phelps, Zack Brents, J. A. McHenry, H. D. Bullitt, W. G. Smith, H. H. Clardy, John D. ‘Nunn, T. J. Burnam, Curtis F. Spalding, I. A. Clay, C. M. Jr. Phelps, John L.—15. Durbin, Charles Straus, F. P. Doris, W. F. Edrington, W. J. Twyman, I. W. For Mr_ Elliott: Forgy, J. M. Wood, J. M. , Graham, Samuel Woolfolk, J. F.—21. Amos, D. C. Edrington, W. J. Knott J Proctor , Beckner, W. M. Forgy, J. M. ’ ' Berkele, Wm. Graham, Samuel For Mr. Holloman: Birkhead, B. T. McElroy, W. J. Brummal, J. M. Muir, J. W. Allen, 0- T- Doris, W' F- Buchanan, Nathan Pettit, Thos. S. Ayres, W- W- Fal'mel', H- H‘ Bullitt, W_ G. Phelps, Zack Bourland, H R. Jonson, J ep. C. Burnam, Curtis F. Smith, H. H. Brents, J- A- Lewis, W- W- Durbin, Charles For Mr. Haley: Allen, M. K. Applegate, Leslie T. Brown, J. S. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Harris. Geo. C. Hines, J. S. Johnston, P. P. ‘‘ Kirwan, E. E. Spalding, 1. A.—18. May, John S. McDermott,. E. J. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Moore, J. H. ' Petrie, H. G. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Trusdell, George Washington, George West, J. F. Woolfolk, J. F.—25. The PRESIDENT. The name of Mr. 7W. J. Bale, who has received the lowest number of votes on the last ballot, is, ac- cording to the rule, dropped, and the Clerk will proceed to call ballot. the roll for the third The third ballot resulted as follows: For Mr. Haley: Allen, M. K Applegate, Leslie T. Brown, J. Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S. B. Coke, J. Guthrie Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, J. S. James, A. D. Johnston, P. P. For‘Mr. Elliott: Amos, D. C. Kirwan, E. E. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Moore, J. H. Petrie, H. G. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Trusdell, George Washington. George West, J. F. Young, B. H.—27. McElroy, W. J. Buchanan, Nathan Montgomery, J. F. Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J.-—13. Clay, C. M. Jr. For Mr. Sullivan : Auxier, A. J, McHenry, H. D. Bennett, B. F. Moore, Laban T. Field, W. W. O’Hara, R. H Forrester, J. G. Hendrick, W. J Parsons, Rob’t T.~ Phelps, J ohn' L. Hogg, S. P. Pugh, Sam’l J. Hopkins, F. A Quicksall, J. E. Kennedy, Hanson Smith, W. Scott Lewis, W. W. ‘Whitaker, Emery Martin, W. H. Williams L. P. V .-20‘. For Mr. Cook: Askew, J. F. Goebel, William Beckham, J. C. Hanks, Thos. H. Blackburn, James Hines,'Thomas H. Blackwell, Joseph Holloway, J. W. Boles, S. H. Jacobs, R. P. Bronston, C.J. Lassing, L. W. Carroll, John D. Mackoy, W. H. Cox, H. Ramsey, W. R.—-17. DeHaven, S. E. . The PRESIDENT. The name of Mr. A. W. Holloman, who has received the lowest number of votes on the last ballot, is, according to the rule, dropped, and the Clerk will proceed to call the roll for the fourth ballot. The fourth ballot resulted as follows: For Mr. Haley: Allen, M. K. Kirwan, E. E. Applegate, Leslie T. May, John S. Bourland, H. R. McDermott, E. J. Brown, J. S. Miller, 'Will. Buckner, S. B. Miller, W. H. ORGANIZATION. 13 Tuesday,] Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, J. S. James, A. D. Johnston, P. P. For Mr. Elliott: Allen, C. T. Amos, D. C. Beckner, W. M. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Brummal, J. M. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Farmer, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Graham, Samuel For Mr. Sullivan : Auxier, A. J, Bennett. B. F. Brents, J. A. Buchanan, Nathan Clay, C. M., Jr. Doris, W. F. _ Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Hendrick, W. J. Hogg, S. P. Hopkins, F. A. Kennedy, Hanson For Mr. Cook : Askew, J. F. Ayres, W. W. Beckham, J. C. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Boles, S. H. Bronston, C. J. Carroll, John D. Clardy, John D. Cox, H. The PRESIDENT. The name of Mr. Smith Cook, who has received the lowest Mnumber of votes on the last ballott, is, ac- cording to the rule, dropped; and the Clerk will proceed to call the roll for the next ballot. ELECTION OF OFFICERS. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Petrie, H. G Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Trusdell, George Washington, George West, J. F. Woolfolk, J. F. 29. Jonson, Jep. C. Knott, J. Proctor Lewis, W. W. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. Moore, Laban T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Smith, H. H. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Twyman, I. W. Wood, J. M.-—26. Martin, W. H. Muir, J. W. O’Hara, R H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Phelps. John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Smith, W. Scott Whitaker, Emery Williams,L.P.V.-—23. DeHaven, S. E. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W. Jacobs, R. P Lassing, L. W. Mackoy, W. H. Nunn, T. J.—19. [September 9. The result of the fifth ballot was as fol- lows: For Mr. Haley: Allen, M. K. Applegate, Leslie T. Askew, J. F. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Brown, J. S. Buckner, S. B. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. James, A. D. For Mr. Elliott: Allen, C. T. Amos, D. C. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B..T. Bronston, C. J. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Clardy, John D. DeHaven, S. E. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Farmer, H. H. Forgy, J. M. For Mr. Sullivan: Auxier, A. J. Ayres, W. W. Bennett, B. F. Brents, J. A. Clav, C. M., Jr. Doris, W. F. Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Goebel, William Hanks, Thomas H. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, J. S. Hogg, S. P. Hopkins, F.'A. Jonson, Jep. C. Johnston, P. P. Kirwan, E. E. Lassing, L. W. Mackoy, W. H. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Petrie, H. G. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Trusdell, George Washington, George West, J. F. Young, B. H.—-36. Graham, Samuel Holloway, J. W. Jacobs, R. P. Knott, J. Proctor Lewis, W. W. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Smith, H. H. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Twyman, l. W. Wood, J. M. 'Woolfolk, J. Kennedy, Hanson Lewis, J. W. Martin, W. H. Moore, Laban T. O’Hara, R. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J E. Ramsey, W. R. Smith, W. Scott _ Swango, G. B. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L.P.Y.-28 14 ORGANIZATION. Tuesday,] M cDEnMoTT—ENGLIsH— MOHENRY. September 9 . The PRESIDENT. The name of Mr. H. C. Sullivan, who has received the low- est number of votes on the last ballot, is, according to the rule, dropped, and the Clerk will proceed to call the roll for the next ballot. The result of the sixth ballot was as fol- ows: For Mr. Haley : Allen, M. K. Holloway, J. W. Applegate, Leslie T. James, A. D. Askew, J F Jonson, Jep. C. Auxier, A. J. Johnston. P. P. Ayres, W. W. Kennedy. Hanson Bennett. B. F. Kirwan, E. E. Blackburn, James Lassing, L. W. Blackwell, Joseph Mackoy, W. H. Boles, S. H. May, John S. Bourland, H. R. McDermott, E. J , Brents, J. A. Miller, Will. Brown, J. S. Miller, W. H. Buckner, S. B. Montgomery, J. F. Chambers, G. D Moore, J. H. Clay, C. M., Jr. Moore, Laban T. Coke, J. Guthrie Petrie, H. G. Cox, H. Pugh, Sam’l J. Doris. W. F. Ramsey, W. R. Elmore, T. J. . Rodes, Robert English, Sam. E. Sachs, Morris A. Field, W. W. Smith, W. Scott Funk, J. T. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Trusdell, George Washington, George West, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Whitaker, Emery Hines, J. S. Young, B. H.—55. Hines, Thomas H. . For Mr. Elliott: Allen, C. T. Hogg, S. P. _ Amos, D. C. Jacobs, R. P. Beckham, J. C. Knott, J. Proctor Beckner, W. M. Lewis, J. W. Berkele, Wm. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Bronston, C. J. _McElroy, W. J. Brummal, J. M. McHenry, H. D. Buchanan, Nathan Muir, J. W. Bullitt, W. G. Nunn, T. J. Burnam, Curtis F. O’Hara, R. H. Carroll, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Clardy, John D. . Pettit, Thos. S. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, Zack Durbin, Charles Smith, H. H. Edrington, W. J. Spalding, I. A. Farmer, H. H. ‘ Straus, F. P. Forrester, J. C. Twyman,"I.~ W. Forgy, J. M. Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Quicksall, J. E. The PRESIDENT. Mr. R. T. Haley having received the largest number of votes on the last ballot, is duly elected Door-keeper of this Convention. Mr. R. T. Haley came forward, and was duly sworn in by the President. Mr. MODERMOT'I‘- I move that we adjourn until to-morrow at 10 o’clock. Mr. ENGLISH. I move that a Com- mittee, composed of twelve Delegates, be appointed by the Chair. to draft suitable rules to govern the proceedings ‘of this Convention. Mr. MOHENRY. I move to amend that by adding, “and that this be made a Special Order for to-morrow morning after the reading of the Journal” Mr. L. T. MOORE. ment to that. Mr. Moore’s resolution read as follows: Resolved, That a Committee, composed of twelve (12) Delegates, be appointed by Williams, L. P. V. Wood. J. M. Woolfolk, J. F.-—43. 1 offer an amend- the Chair to prepare and report suitable . rules to govern the actions of this Conven- tion. The PRESIDENT. The original prop- osition was offered by the Delegate from Jefferson county. One amendment to that is allowable; and one amendment to that amendment; so that the proposition offered by the gentleman from Jefferson county is in order, and also the substitute to the ‘ proposition offered by the Delegate from Ohio. The other motion is not in order unless it be made as an amendment to the substitute. Mr. MOHENRY. I move that the res- olution be made a Special Order after the election of Reporter to-morrow morning. Mr. HEN DRICK. Under that resolu- tion, for which I propose to vote, I desire to have read two motions forythe informa- tion of the Convention.‘ ORGANIZATION. I 15 Tuesday,] MCDERMOTT—HENDRICK—MACKOY—KNOTT. [September 9 . The PRESIDENT. The motion to ad- journ has not been withdrawn. The SECRETARY. The gentleman from Carroll sends to the desk a resolution: Resolved, That the President appoint a Committee on Rules, to be composed of ten members, one from each Constitutional District, and the President of the Conven- tien shall be the Chairman of said Com- mittee Resolved, That said Committee shall re— port rules for the government of this Convention, together with the names of the several Committees necessary to facil- itate the work of forming a Constitution. Mr. MODERMCTT. I now insist upon the motion to adjourn until 10 o’clock to- morrow morning. The motion to adjourn until 10 o’clock to-morrow morning was thereupon put to the House, and lost. Mr. MCHENRY. now‘? Mr. DEHAVEN. ' I think we have done a good work thus far this morning, and I move that we adjourn, to meet again at 8 o’clock to-night. The motion of the Delegate from Old- ham to adjourn, to meet again at 8 o’clock ‘to-night, was, upon a vote, declared to have been lost. Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to offer the following resolutions: The said resolutions are as follows: What is in order Resolved, That a board of five members of this Convention be now chosen, as pro- vided by law, to determine the contest be- tween J. W. Lewis and W. C. McChord, of the county of Washington, for a seat in this body. Resolved, That the Auditor of Public Accounts be directed to draw his warrant upon the Treasurer, in favor of G. W. Castle, for ten dollars, for two days’ serv- ices as Sergeant-at-Arms during the organ- ization of this Convention. The PRESIDENT. These resolutions are merely read for information. The next thing in order is the election for Be- porter. Mr. MACKO Y. I nominate for the office of Reporter for this Convention Mr_ Philip N. Myers, of the city of Covington ; and I desire to say in his behalf that he is a young man, entirely capable in his special department, attentive to his duties, and the incarnation of hard' labor; and if he is elected Reporter ’of this Convention, the members will ting him polite, obliging, and always attentive to his duties. Mr. KNOTT. I am satisfied, sir, from the limited experience I have had in parlia- mentary assemblages, that there can be no more important subordinate official to this body than the Reporter of its proceedings. Without uttering a syllable in disparage- ment of the claims and merits of any other gentleman, I desire to nominate for this position Mr. Clarence E. Walker, of Louis- ville, knowing him to be an accomplished and reliable Stenographer, who will make- for this Convention as accurate and honest a report as perhaps any other of his pro- - fession could possibly do. Making these, remarks, I say confidently that they will be verified, if necessary, by the gentlemen of' the bar of Louisville, who have long known Mr. Walker as Official Reporter of the Courts of that city. Mr. SACHS. In seconding Gov. Knott’s nomination of Mr. Walker, and as he has specially called upon the mem- bers of the bar of Louisville to verify his statement as to Mr. Walker’s ability I will simply state that, as an active mem- ber of that bar, I know the fact that Mr. Walker has reported the Court proceedings of the city for many years, to the entire satisfaction, so far as 1 know,v and so far as I have ‘heard, of the members of the bar and the Courts of the city of Louisville. I can cheerfully join Gov. Knott in all he says as to honesty, industry and capacity for work, and the manner in which that work has always been done, to the entire satisfaction of all those with whom Mr. Walker has been brought in contact. I also join Gov. Knott in saying that it is O 16 ORGANIZATION. Tuesday,] SMITH—HENDRICK—BRONSTON. Snptember 9 . a matter of a great deal of importance to have, besides industry and honesty, accur- acy; and I will say I believe that Mr. Walker has not his superior in America as a Stenographer. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Born and raised, as he was, in the county of Hardin, the county that I represent, I wish to second the nomination of Mr.” Walker for the position of Ofiicial Reporter of this Con- vention. At one time myself a‘Reporter, and having known Mr. Walker in that capacity, I have a knowledge sufficient to enable me to say I believe that Mr. Walk- er has no superior as a Reporter in the State of Kentucky or anywhere. He has been an ()fiicial Reporter of the Courts of Louisville for several years. He has re- ported many of the most important cases in the State, and he has always been found able, painstaking and efficient in his labors. I, therefore, second his nomination ‘with pleasure. Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to second the nomination of Mr. Myers, of‘ (loving- ton. I have known him a long time. He is the ()fiicial Stenographer of the Courts in that city; is a gentleman of stainless character; and, without disparagement to any gentleman who has been named, he is the equal of any Stenographer in the country. I know him thoroughly, and I do not hesitate to say to this Convention, and to every member of it, that they could not elect a better Stenographer than Mr. Myers. Mr. BRONSTON. In justice to merit, and for that purpose alone, I desire to supplement the remarks of the Delegate from Fleming in behalf of Mr. Myers, of Covington. It is my misfortune in Court practice to speak with great rapidity, and I desire to say to this Convention that Mr. Myers, of Covington, with the assistance, as I am informed, of a mechanical instru- ment of his own invention, which I have seen practically used, is the most expert short-hand writer and reporter that it has been my pleasure in a long vpractice to know. I have no personal acquaintance . with the distinguished young gentleman from Louisville, and, therefore what I say cannot be construed as disparaging the complimentary remarks that have been made of him ; but I do say, however com- petent he may be, that no one could be found more competent, more reliable, and more expert than Mr. Myers, of Coving- ton. The PRESIDENT. Are there any fur- ther nominations‘? If not, nominations are closed. The vote was thereupon taken upon the election of a Reporter, and resulted as fol- lows: For Mr. Walker : Allen, C. T. Kirwan, E. E. Allen, M. K. Knott, J. Proctor Amos, D. C. Lewis. J. W. Auxier, A. J. May, John S. Beckham, J. C. McDermott, E. J. Bennett, B. F. McElroy, W. J. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Boles, S. H. McHenry, H. D. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Brents, J. A. Muir, J. W. Buchanan, Nathan Nunn, T. J. Buckner, S. B. Parsons, Rob’t T. Bullitt, W. G. Petrie, H. G. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Twyman, I. W. Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, B. H.-51. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie DeHaven, S. E. Durbin. Charles Edrington, W. J. English, Sam. E. Forrester, J. G. Funk, J. T. Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Jacobs, R. P. James, A. D. Jonson, Jep. C. For Mr. Myers: Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, Thomas H. Askew, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Ayres, W. W. Holloway, J. W. Beckner, W. M. Hopkins, F. A. Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Lassing, L. W. Lewis, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. ORGANIZATION. 17 M CHENRY—BRONSTON—MCDERMOTT. 7 [September 9 . Tuesday,] Burnam, Curtis F. Martin, W. H. Carroll, John D. Miller, Will. Clardy, John D. Moore, J. H. Clay, C. M., Jr. Moore, Laban T. Cox, H. O’Hara, R. H. Doris, W. F. Pugh, Sam’l J. Elmore, T. J. Quicksall, J. E. Farmer, H. H. Spalding, I. A. Field, W. W. Straus, F. P. Forgy, J. M. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hendrick, W. J. Hines. J. S. The PRESIDENT. Mr. Walker hav- ing received a majority of the votes cast, is elected the Reporter of the Convention. Mr. Walker thereupon came forward and was duly sworn. Mr. M CHENRY I move that the reso- lutions, as heretofore ofl'ered, be made a Trusdell, George Washington, George West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery—47. special order for to-morrow morning at 10 ' o’clock. Mr. BUCKNER. I move that we pro- ceed with the election of a Public Printer. Mr. MCHENRY. We have no right to elect a Public Printer, but we have a right to elect a Printer to this Convention, and I have no objection if the gentleman will so modify his motion that we go at once to the election. Mr. BUCKNER. Iaccept the amend- ment. ' The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state the motion. It is moved that this Convention now proceed with the election of a Printer for the Reports and Debates of this Convention. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Have we not a Public Printer? Mr. MCHENRY. The law prescribes there should be a Printer [to the Conven- tion, and the motion is that we proceed to the election of a Printer to this Conven- tion. , The motion was put to the House and carried. Mr. BUCKNER. I nominate Mr. E. Polk Johnson for the position of Printer to this Convention. ‘ There were no other nominations, and, upon motion, the rules were suspended, and the nomination of Mr. E. Polk J ohn- son as Printer was made unanimous. Mr. BRONSTON. It was evident from a vote veryrecently taken that this Con- vention would have been very glad to have elected both of the young gentlemen to the ofi'ice of Reporter, and as it is equally apparentl'zthath'one cannot perform all the duties of that office, I now move that Mr. Myers, of Covington, be made Assistant Reporter of this Convention. Mr. SWANGO. I move to amend by inserting the name of J. H. Sublett. Mr. MCHENRY. I make the point-of order that we have no right to elect any; otficcrs except those provided for by law. ‘ Mr. CLARDY. The law provides that we may elect any oflicers that we choose. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is of the opinion that the motions are in order. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I desire to Say a word on the subject of the appointment of an assistant Stenographer. I think the system of having one Reporter, and hav- ing him manage the department exclu- sively, and thus introducing something like decorum and system into the otlice, will be much better than to elect any num- ber of assistants, who will be men of dif- ferent degrees of capacity in their profes- sion. If the Convention insists upon hav- ing the gentlemen whose names have been mentioned "placed before the House, I de- sire to nominate Mr. John P. Cassilly, of Louisville, for the ofiice of Assistant Re- porter to the Convention; but I think it would be better to leave the matter as it is, and leave to the Reporter elected by the House the right of selecting his own assistants. I have no objection to either of the gentlemen proposed, but it is a matter of great importance that this department of the Convention should be conducted on systematic principles. You want one man to supervise the work, and he to employ his own assistants, whose 18 ORGANIZATION . Tuesday,] BEOKHAM. [September 9. abilities he knows, and whom he can assign to different speakers at differ- ent times, and who may report for a limited length of time. I think, however, that it is a matter of suflicient importance to jus- tify us in postponing further its considera- tion until some future time. Mr. BECKHAM. It seems to me that the first thing for us to decide is as to the power of the Convention in reference to the appointment of an Assistant Stenog- rapher, and the matter may, perhaps, be better determined at some future day. I, therefore, move that we adjourn until to-morrow morning at 10 o’clock. The Convention thereupon, upon a vote, adjourned. _- @rmvmiiun guard. ~——- K E N T U C K Y —— CCDNS'I'ITUTIONAL CONVENTICN. Vol. 1.] FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 10, 1890. [No. 3 Wednesday,] Moons—M CHENRY—HANKS—LEWIS. [September 10 . The Convention met pursuant to adjourn- ment at 10 o’clock A. M. Rev. Mr. Penick opened the proceedings with the following prayer: Most Gracious God; we humbly beseech Thee, as for the people of the Common- wealth of Kentucky, so especially for their Representatives in Convention here as- sembled, that Thou wouldst be pleased to direct and prosper all their doings to the advancement of Thy Glory, the good of Thy Church, the safety, honor and welfare of Thy people, that all things may be so ordered and settled by their endeavors upon the best and surest foundation that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and righteousness may be estab- lished amongst us for all generations, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order will be the consideration of pending resolutions. _ Mr. L. T. MOORE. I would like to have the resolution providing for the appointment of a Committee of ten mem- bers read. The PRESIDENT. I would suggest to the Delegates, that when they ofl'er resolu- tions or amendments, they put their names on the back, so that the Clerk can after- wards distinguish them. Mr. MCHENRY. I do not understand from the reading of the Journal how these resolutions stand. Do they have prece- dence in the order in which they are offered. The PRESIDENT. Yes. Mr. HANKS. I desire to offer this paper, that it may be read for the informa- tion of the House. It is in the form of a res- olution. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, it can be read for information. The resolution was read as follows: To facilitate the work of this Conven- tion, Resolved, That the President thereof shall appoint a committee of one member from each Congressional District, whose duty it shall be, in conjunction with him- self as Chairman thereof, to formulate and report to the Convention a‘ code of rules for its government. And be it further Resolved, That, until the Committee re- port as aforesaid, the rules adopted by the Constitutional Convention of 1849 shall govern this body. - Resolved, further, That said Committee ascertain the number of standing Commit- tees necessary for the deliberation and bus- iness of the Convention; the style and du- ties of each, and that they report the result of their deliberations to the Convention at as early a day as practicable. The PRESIDENT. Such resolution is not now in order. The Clerk will read the first resolution. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I ask unanimous consent to offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT. The resolution can not be considered except by unanimous consent. There is no objection, and the resolution may be read for information. The resolution offered by Mr. Lewis was read, as follows: Resolved, That the thanks of this Con- vention are due, and are hereby tendered, to the Hon. George Washington, the tempo- rary President, and the Hon. Thos. VS. Pettit, the temporary Secretary, and the ' 2 ORGANIZATION. Wednesday,] STRAUS—HENDRICK—SPALDING. [September 10. other temporary officers, for their able, im- partial and efficient discharge of the diifi-' cult duties imposed npon them. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such resolution will be considered before the Convention. The resolution was thereupon put to a vote of the House, and adopted. Mr. STRAUS. I desire to offer a reso- lution. ThePRESIDEN T. All resolutions are out of order unless by unanimous consent. Mr. STRAUS. I desire it read for in- formation. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the Secretary will read the resolution. The resolution was read, as follows: Resolved, That James E. Stone be em- ployed to act as Reading Clerk for this Convention. An objection being ofl'ered to the con- sideration of this resolution, the President declared the same out of order. A DELEGATE. Is it in order to offer a substitute for the resolution offered by the gentleman from Bullitt ?_' The PRESIDENT. That resolution it- self is not in order. Mr. HEN DRICK. I understand the ruling of the Chair to be, that resolutions offered on yesterday are now in order. The PRESIDENT. There can be but one resolution before the House at a time, and one amendment to that resolution and one amendmentto that amendment. These other resolutions are read for information, and considered without objection as being in order. . I Mr. HEN DRICK. I understood the ruling of the Chair, and so, also. did the gentleman from Ohio, I think, that all resolutions offered on yesterday should be considered in the order in which they were presented. The PRESIDENT. Yes; but still there can be but‘ one resolution before the Con- vention legitimately at one time. Mr. SPALDIN G. I ask the unanimous consent of the House that I may offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution may be read. The resolution was as follows: Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms be, and he is hereby, directed to invite the Ministers of the several religious denomi- nations of this city to open the sessions of ' the Convention with prayer, to rotate in such manner as they may agree upon. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob~~ jection to the present consideration of said resolution ‘2 The Chair hears no objection, and will put the question. The resolution was put to the House and‘ adopted. . Mr. MACKOY. I desire to ofler a res-i olution, and ask that it be read for infor- mation. The PRESIDENT. There being no- objection, it may be read. The resolution was read, as follows: Resolved, That the Secretary of this Con- vention be, and he is hereby, authorized to procure, forthwith, twelve copies of the compilation of the Constitutions of the several States published by the authority of Congress, and embracing the Constitution of each State to and including the year 1876; and that he be also authorized to procure twelve copies of the Constitution- of each State that has been adopted since 1876 for the use of this Convention and its Committees; the said books, after the adjournment of this Convention, to be- placed in the State Library. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the consideration of the resolution just read? The Chair hears no objection, and will put the question. Mr. BECKHAM. I have no objection to the consideration of the resolution, but 14 think that there has been a compilation, under order of the United States Senate, up to 1878. Mr. MACKOY. ‘The compilation em- braces the Constitutions to and including- 1876. That is the compilation to which I referred. ORGANIZATION. Wednesday,] BOLES—MCHENRY—BLACKBURN—BRONSTON. [September 10. Mr. ROLES. I object to its considera- tion at the present time, if I am not too late. . The PRESIDENT. The gentleman 1s too late. The Chair asked for objection, and none was made. Mr. BOLES. I call for a division. On the division, the resolution was de- clared adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will now report the first resolution offered yes- terday afternoon. It is the first resolution in order. The resolution of Mr. English, ofl’ered on yesterday, was read: ~ Resolved, That the President of this Con- vention appoint a Committee, consistingbf a member from each Congressional District of this State, who shall report to this Con- vention the number and style of the Committees necessary to bring before this Convention the work it is called to per- form. Mr. MCHEN RY. I move the resolu- tion ofi'ered on yesterday by me, and at the Clerk’s desk, as a substitute for that resolu- tion. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resolution offered as a substitute by the Delegate from Ohio. Mr. BLACKBURN. There was a res- olution ofiered yesterday for the election of an Assistant Reporter that has not been read. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will re- port the resolution first ofiered. The SECRETARY. That was the res- olution which I have just read. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk informs the Chair that the matter of Assistant Re- porter was disposed of yesterday afternoon. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to call the attention to the fact that the Clerk is in error. There was a motion pending to elect an Assistant Reporter at the time that the motion to adjourn was made, and that was cut of!‘ by the motion to adjourn. The PRESIDENT. The Chair can only go by the record. M-r. BRONSTON. I am not disposed to press it at this time. The SECRETARY. If there was any thing in a shape of a motion or resolution, I failed to catch it; I know it was spoken of, but nothing came here in a shape of a motion. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest to the Delegates that they put their motions in writing, and send them up to the Clerk with their names on the back. The Secretary will now report the reso- lution offered as a substitute for the pend- ing resolution by the gentleman from Ohio. The resolution was read, as follows: Resolved. That a commmittee consisting of (7) seven members be appointed by the President, whose duty shall he to prepare ' and report rules for the government of this. Convention, and that this body he gov- erned by the rules of the Constitutional Convention of 1849 until said Committee report and new rules are adopted. Mr. MCHENRY. I think that resolu- tion, sir, covers every thing that this Con- vention will want. The resolution ofiered by the Delegate from J efl‘erson does not go- far enough, and the resolution which I have the honor to offer whole ground covered by the resolution of the gentleman. This Committee is com- posed, as I have it there, of seven members. I am of the opinion that that is sufiicient. It may be that the Convention may see proper to add additional members to it, or make it a smaller Committee. I took the number‘ from the resolution adopted by the Convention of 1849, and this resolution is in the exact language of that resolution, with the exception that I provided here for the government of this body until that Committee shall report new rules,’ and that we should be governed by the rules of the Convention of 1849; there are a few copies of those rules here. I have one and I have read those rules, and I think they are pretty much all we shall want for ., the government of this Convention, and I. ~. assume that the Committee will take nearly does cover the-- .-4 ORGANIZATION ( L Wedn esday,] MOORE—HANKS. [September 10 . ,___ every rule that was adopted by theConven- tion of 1849, with the exception that that Committee reported, and it is part of the rules of the other Convention, that there‘ should be nine Committees, consisting of ten members each, and one composed of nine members, in order. that these ten Standing Committees should embrace every Delegate in the Convention, ninety-nine, excepting the President, of course. Now, we want to change that rule. This Com- mittee on Rules, 1 take it, will make a very material change in the Standing Committees. I am inclined to think that we will need more than ten Standing Com- mittees. I am firmly of the opinion that we will need some Committees not pro- vided for in that Convention. It will be a matter for very careful consideration for the Committee on Rules to get up a proper list of Standing Committees, and that will be the serious work of the Committee on Rules; because, as I said, I think the gen- eral government of the Convention is well provided for by the Old rules of that body. I think that this Committee can do its work by tO-morrow morning, certainly by the next day,'and make their report setting forth the Committees. Then we can have them printed, and have the report before the Convention for consideration, when there can be any amendment to the rules, and any additional Standing Committees suggested that may not be provided for by this Special Committee; and it strikes me that the resolution which I ofl‘er covers, substantially, all the resolutions which have been offered by the other Delegates, and which are now upon the Clerk's desk. As I understand it, however, the question comes up on the resolution offered by the Delegate from Jefferson, for which mine is .-a substitute. A DELEGATE. I move that the sub- stitute be amended so as to read one Dele- gate from each Congressional District. instead of “seven members.” The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will l l I l please inform the Chair whether there is not some amendment pending to the sub- stitute; my impression is that there is. The SECRETARY.‘ There are a series of resolutions—three of them. The PRESIDENT. Read No. 3. The Secretary then read the third reso- lution, as follows: Resolved, That a. Committee composed of twelve Delegates be appointed by the Chair to prepare and adopt suitable rules to govern the actions of this Convention. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will be disposed to consider that resolution as an amendment to the substitute, so that your amendment is not now in order. Mr. Hanks’ resolution was next read, as follows: To facilitate the work of this Conven- tion, Resolved, That the President thereof shall appoint a Committee of one member from each Congressional District, whose duty it shall be, in conjunction with him- self as Chairman thereof, to formulate and report to the Convention a code of rules for its government. And be it further Resolved, That, until the Committee re- port as aforesaid, the rules adopted by the Constitutional Convention of 1849 shall govern this body. Resolved, further, That said ‘Committee ascertain the number of Standing Commit- tees necessary for the deliberation and bus- iness of the Convention; the style and duties of each, and that they report the re- sult of their deliberations to the Conven- tion at as early a day as practicable. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I think it will be necessary to appoint a Committee for the purpose of ascertaining what oficers are necessary for the Convention. I think that Committee will have as much as it possibly can do, and that there should be a Committee on Rules, separate and distinct from that. ' Mr. HANKS. I insist upon my resolu- tion without amendment. The PRESIDENT. I don't understand what resolution you insist upon. - Mr. HAN KS. The one which is at the resolution ' ORGANIZATION. 5 Wednesday] MCORE—KNOTT—MILLER—CLARDY. 4 [September 10 Clerk’s desk, and which has just been re- ported. The PRESIDENT. The resolution is not now in order. It was read for information. Mr. L. T. MOORE. The Clerk has those resolutions mixed. I introduced the third resolution, and he has me as offering the first. The PRESIDENT. The question will be upon the resolution which was intro- duced by the gentleman from Jefferson, which the Clerk will please read. Mr. English’s resolution was then read. The PRESIDENT. That is the origi- nal resoulution to which the gentleman from Ohio ofliered an amendment, to which amendment there was a substitute offered by the gentleman from Boyd. ' Mr. KNOTT. If I heard correctly, the word “adopt” is used in the amendment or substitute of the gentleman t‘rom Boyd. I presume the Committee can not adopt rules. I move to strike out that word, and insert the words, “ prepare and report.” The PRESIDENT. Strictly speaking, your amendment is not in order. Mr. KNOTT. I understand there is an ~ amendment to the substitute. The PRESIDENT. No; an Qamend- ment to an amendment to a substitute. Mr. KNOTT. An amendment to an amendment to a substitute is in order as I understand. The PRESIDENT: The Chair rules that an amendment to an amendment to a substitute is not in order. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I accept the‘ amend- ment of the gentleman from Marion. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please change the resolution No. 3, offered by the gentleman from Boyd county, in accordance with the amendment of the gentleman from Marion, and make it read as suggested by him.. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I‘ desire to have the resolution, as amended, reported. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk. will please report the resolution as amended. A The Clerk thereupon read said resolu- tion, as follows: Resolved, That a Committee, composed of twelve Delegates, be appointed by the Chair to prepare and report suitable rules to govern the actions of this Convention. Mr. W. H. MILLER. As I under- stand, that does not include the President of the Convention. ' The PRESIDENT. That is for the Convention to decide. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment of the gentleman from Boyd. The question being put, it was declared to have been lost. A DELEGATE. Don’t this simply change seven into twelve? Is not that the only change? The PRESIDENT. The Chair would not like to interpret the resolution. Mr. CLARDY. This says twelve, and the amendment to the first resolution says seven. It simply puts twelve in the place of seven. Mr. MCHENRY. This makes no pro- vision for the government of the House until that Committee reports. I think the same thing can be gotten at much better by moving to strike out seven and insert twelve. ' Mr. CLARDY. That is it, exactly. The PRESIDENT. That is for the Convention to decide. The question now recurs upon the resolution offered by the Delegate from Ohio as an amendment to the resolution of the gentleman from Jef- ferson. ' _ Mr. STRAUS. If amendments are in order now, I move to amend by adding that the Chairman of this Convention shall constitute a member of the Commit- tee. Mr. FARMER. Will the Delegate from Ohio accept an amendment that there shall be one member of this Commit- tee from each Congressional _District and the Chairman? __ _‘ p _ Mr. McHEN RY. We can take ‘the opinion of the Convention ‘ on that. I 6 ORGANIZATION. Wednesday,] CLARDY—STRAUs-McHENRY—PETTIT. [September 10. am rather against it. I think that the President ought to select the Committee, and select good parliamentarians. I would like, however, to have the opinion of the Convention on the subject; but I cannot accept the amendment. I hope some gen- tleman will move a larger number, so that we can take the sense of the Convention as to_ what number the Committee should be composed of. Mr. CLARDY. I move that we strike out the word “seven” and insert “twelve.” The PRESIDENT. That is out of or- der, as the gentleman from Bullitt has moved a substitute. Mr. STRAUS. My motion was to amend by adding that the President shall be one of that Committee. Mr. MoHEN RY. I am perfectly will- ing to accept that amendment. Mr. CLARDY. I now renew my mo- tion to strike out 7 and insert 12. Mr. WHITAKER. Then the question is first on striking out seven, I believe. The PRESIDENT. That is correct. The question on the motion to strike out “seven,” being put to the House, was de- clared to have been carried. A DELEGATE. I now move that that blank be filled by inserting “12.” Mr. CLARDY. I say one from each Congressional District, which is to include the President. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion to insert “12." Mr. PETTIT. Does that include the President ‘? The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks so. Mr. COX. We ought to have one from each Congressional District, which would 'make ten. The PRESIDENT. That is for the Convention to decide. The question is now on the motion to insert “twelve” in the blank which was left by striking out “seven.” The motion being put, was declared to have been carried. > Mr. FARMER. I move that the Pres- ident be one of those twelve. The PRESIDENT. That has already been carried. Mr. MACKOY. I move to strike out that part of the resolution which provides that the rules of the last Convention shall govern this Convention, and insert instead of that the “rules of the last House of Rep- resentatives.” I make that motion for the reason that the “ rules of the last House of Representatives” are readily accessible. The question’ being put on the motion of the gentleman from Covington, was de- clared to have been lost. Mr. WASHINGTON. I rise to a ques- tion of privilege. My attention has ‘just been directed to an editorial published in the Louisville Commercial, a newspaper published in the city of Louisville, in which it is alleged that, in the course of the brief remarks which I had the honor to submit to the Convention yesterday, on taking the Chair as temporary President, I made use of the word “infamous,” and it is made,the basis of a very unkind person- al attack upon me, and in it, very un- worthy motives are imputed to me. I would like to inquire of all the Reporters of the Convention, if any of their reports show any such word as “ infamous.” I will say, in addition to that, if there is any gen- tleman on this floor who heard me make use of the word “infamous,” or any other word that can be tortured into an expres- sion of a political opinion, I would be pleased if he would call my attention to it. I call upon the Reporter for a statement on the subject. Mr. WALKER, Reporter. At the re- quest of the Delegate from Campbell, I carefully examined and read over my notes of the speech he refers to. There is no word in the speech that can, to use his ex- pression, be “tortured” into the word “ in- famous.” I would call the attention of the Convention to the fact that the word “ in- famous” does not occur in the report of t-A‘ ORGANIZATION. 7 'WVednesdayJ WASHINGToN—m‘RAUs—MoDnnMo'r'r. [September 10 , speech published in the Commercial, but only appears in an editorial. Mr. CASSIL LY, of the Reporters corps. I will say that I carefully read over my notes,_and failed to find the word “in famous.” Mr. WASHINGTON. I am sincere in my desire that if any person on this floor heard me use such a word, he should :so state it. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs on the adoption of the resolution No. 2, which has been substituted for N o. 1. The question being put, was decided to have been carried. Mr. STRAUS. I would like to call for the reading of the resolution which I ~ofl’ered in regard to a Reading Clerk. Said resolution was read. ' A DELEGATE. I would like to in- ~quire if a Reading Clerk is necessary. I think that the question should be referred ‘to the Committee on Rules, when ap- pointed. Mr. STRAUS. I suppose this resolu- ‘ ‘tion is debatable. The PRESIDENT. Yes. Mr. STRAUS. I would like to say to the Convention that I don’t know of a 'more important ofiicer to the Convention than a Reading Clerk. It is very apparent to all the members that we must have some one to do the reading to this Convention. I don’t mean to say that the Clerks who have been elected could not possibly do the reading, but they will have as much work .as they can do to do the clerical work of the Convention; and it is very important .that we should have some one who can read distinctly, so that the Convention can hear all the reading. It will facilitate 'business and save time, and it is economy 'in the right direction; and I hope the Con- vention will give the matter proper con- -=sideration . ' Mr. MCDERMOTT. Just a word in that connection. Mr. Stone has been the "Reading Clerk of the House of Represent- atives, and everybody who knows him knows that he is a good Reading Clerk. You have seen that you have more work than two men can do at the desk; and it seems to me you ought not to expect those gentlemen to do the reading. You will find that the election of a Reading Clerk will save money and expedite busi- ness, and let us all know better what is going on. Mr. J ON SON. I think that ought to be adopted. The saving of five minutes of the Convention’s time W111 save ten times the cost of a Clerk. There is no doubt ' that much time will be saved by the ap- pointment of a Reading Clerk. The SECRETARY. If the Conven- tion will permit me, I will say that I am very willing for a Reading Clerk to be appointed, as keeping up the minutes is going to keep both of us busy. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I can not see any particular necessity for hastening the elec- tion of a Reading Clerk. It strikes me that it ought to go to a Committee. I don’t think that the last two days’ work of the Convention is illustrative of the work in the future. I do not think the work will move with the same rapidity that we had in the last two days; and I think it is proper to refer this matter to a Committee, and see if we need any more assistants. Mr. H. E. SMITH. I do not mean any reflection upon the gentlemen who are Secretary and Assistant Secretary. but it seems to me evident, from the workthis morning, that a Reading Clerk is abso- lutely necessary. It seems to me that the election of Mr. Stone would be in accordance with the mode in which we have been conducting things of electing our oflicers, and not referring the matter to a Committee. Mr. W. H. MILLER. It seems to me that this is unprecedented in'the history of legislative and parliamentary proceedings in the State of Kentucky, to create an oflice, and state beforehand that a particu- is ORGANIZATION. »- Wednesday] GLARDY—BOLES—PETTIT——-MILLER—-MCHENRY. [September .10 * lar man should fill that ofiice. create the oflice, why not ileave it to the Convention to take time and make the selection of a gentleman to fill that ofiice. ‘I have no objection to Mr. Stone if this ' oflice is created; but there may be several citizens in the State of Kentucky quite as competent; and if this ofiice is created by the Convention, I think every gentleman who would have any desire to fill that oifice should have an opportunity to do so. Mr. CLARDY. I would ask if it is not entirely competent for any other gentle- man to present another name. The PRESIDENT. Certainly. The question is first on referring it to the Com- mittee on Rules when appointed. Mr. MA Y. I rise to ask for informa- tion. Does the Committee on Rules select the Reading Clerk, or is it left to the Con- vention ? The PRESIDENT. There was nothing said on that point except whatv is said in the resolution, which the Clerk will now read. The re=olution of Mr. Straus was then read. The PRESIDENT. The question is now on the motion to refer it to the Com- mittee on Rules. » Mr. BOLES. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. PETTIT. I second the call. The PRESIDENT. The yeas and nays are demanded by the gentleman from Bar- ren, seconded by the gentleman from Da-'- veiss. The Clerk will call the roll. The result was announced, as follows: Yeas, 46; 'nays, 49'. ' I ' i‘ YEAs Allen, C. T. Hopkins. F. A. Amos, I). C. Jacobs, R. P. Askew, J. F. James, A. D. . Ayres, W. W. Kennedy, Hanson Beckham, J. C. Lewis, J. W. ' Bennett, B. F. Martin, W. H. Bir'khead B. T. McElroy, W. J. ' BlackburmJames >Miller,-.W. H. Blackwell, Joseph Montgomery, J. F. If we Boles, S. H. Brents, J. A. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Bullitt, W. G. Burnam. Curtis F. Clay, C. M.. Jr. Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Hanks, Thomas H. , Harris, Geo. C. Allen, M. K. Applegate, Leslie T. Auxier, A. J. Berkele, Wm. Bourland, H. R. Bronston. C. J Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Clardy, J. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles English, Sam. E. Farmer, H H. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hendrick. W. J. Hines, J. S. ' Hines, Thomas H. Hogg, S. P. Holloway, J. W. Jonson,'Jep. C. Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T Nunn, T. J. Parsons, Robert T- Pettit, Thomas S. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey. W. B. Rodes, Robert Swango, G. B. Twyman, I. W. West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Williams,L.P.V.—-46 NAYS. Johnston. P. P. Kirwan. E. E. . Knott, J. Proctor Lewis, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. May. John S. McDermott. E. J. McHenry, Henry D.. Miller, Will Muir, J. W. O’Hara, R. H. Petrie, H. G. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Sachs. Morris A. Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Trusdell, George Washington, George Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. Y oung, B. H.——49. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Is not there an amendment to the resolution? The PRESIDENT. I believe there is an amendment. The Clerk will report the amendment. " The, Clerk thereupon read the amend- ment, as follows: Amended by inserting instead of “ Read- ing Clerk,” “ Second Assistant Clerk.” ‘ Mr. MCHENRY. Is it proposed to make him Second Assistant Clerk? I am voting on the idea that we are voting for an independent oflicer to do the reading. Mr. STRAUS. I decline to accept the- amendment. ORGANIZATION. 9 Wednesday ] ‘ YOUNG~LEWIS~BRON STON—KNOTT. The amendment was then withdrawn. The PRESIDENT. The question re- curs on the adoption of the resolution. Mr. PETTIT. On that I demand the yeas and nays. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I second it. The PRESIDENT. On the adoption of the resolution the yeas and nays are demanded by the Delegate from Owens- boro and seconded by the Delegate from Daveiss. The Secretary will call the roll. The result was announced, as follows: Yeas, 64; nays, 33. YEAs Allen, C. T. Allen, M. K. Amos, D. C. Applegate, Leslie T. Beckham, J. C. Berkele, Wm. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. ‘ Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Doris, W. F English, Sam. E. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Harris, Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, J. S. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W. Jacobs, R. P. ' Askew, J. F‘. ' Auxier, A. J. Ayres, W. W. Bennett, B. F. ' Birkhead, B. T. Boles, S. H. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, N athan, ' ' Pettit, Thos. S. Buckner, S. B. Jonson, Jep. C. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Kirwan, E. E. Knott, J. Proctor Lewis, J. W. Lewis, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. Martin, W. H. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. McHenry. H. D. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Moore, J. H. Muir, J. W. O’Hara, R. H. Petrie, H. G. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Quicksall, J. E. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Smith, H. H. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Twyman, I. W. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, B. H.—6-.l. NAYS. Hogg, S. P. James, A. D. Lassing, L. W. McElroy, W. J. , Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. N unn, 'T. J. Parsons, Rob’t T. , .- [September 10. Pugh, Sam’l J. Ramsey, W. R. Smith, W. Scott Clay, C. M., Jr. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Swango, G. B. Forrester, J. G. Trusdell, George Forgy, J. M. West, J. F. Graham, Samuel Williams, L. P.V.-33. Hanks, Thos. H. So the resolution was adopted. Mr. Stone was then duly sworn by the President. Mr. YOUNG. It seems to me that it is proper and just that some action should be taken by this body in regard to the edito- rial of the Louisville Commercial concern- ing the speech of Mr. Washington, and with the consent of the body, I desire to offer the following: ' Resolved, That this body has heard with. regret of the editorial comment of the Louisville Commercial upon the speech of Hon. George Washington upon his being made temporary Chairman or this body, in which it is stated that Mr. Washington used the word “infamous;” and this body now declares that no such term. or any thing similar, was used by Mr. Washing- ton in his address, and now, in proper vindication of the temporary President, places upon record this statement of fact. MI‘.'YOUNG. The reporter of the Com- mercial asked me to make this statement in his behalf. The editorial criticising Mr. Washington for using the word “ infa- mous” was based upon a report published in an afternoon paper. He is very sorry that unintentional injustice has been done. An editorial correction» will probably be made ;. but in justice to himself, the correspondent refers to his report of the speech in the paper which was prepared by the oflicial Stenographer, and, therefore, presumably correct. > Mr. J. W. LEWIS. Being near the- President’s chair, I could easily hear his speech, and I state emphatically that that. language was not used, nor was any thing said ‘of an invidious nature whatever. I. 'am cordially in favor of the resolution, and desire it to go to record‘ in justice to as fair and impartial an ofi‘icer as I‘ ever saw preside in a deliberative'body. .10 I ORGANIZATION. 'WednesdayJ BRONSTON—KN OTT——-PHE LPS—PETTIT. [September 10. The resolution, on the vote, was declared ‘to have been adopted. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to ofler a resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary in- forms the Chair that there are several reso- lutions pending, that have been sent up, which were carried over from yesterday afternoon, which are strictly in order before :any of these resolutions. If there is no objection, the Chair will instruct the See- ~retary to read the next resolution. The resolution offered on yesterday’ vproviding for the appointment of a Com- mittee, was then read. Mr. KN OTT. I move to refer it to the Committee on Rules. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I second _ the motion. The motion being put by the President’ it was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the next resolution. Resolution providing for paying Mr. G. V W. Castle ten dollars for acting as Ser- =geant-at-Arms during the preliminary or- ganization of the Convention, read. Mr. PETTIT. I move, as an amend- ment, that the name of Mr. Cromwell, who acted as Assistant Secretary, be also .added.. The amendment was accepted, and the resolution as amended, was, upon a vote, :adopted. The resolution offered on yesterday, pro- viding for the appointment of a Commit- .-tee on Rules, was then read. The PRESIDENT. That has already "been disposed of. Mr. STRAUS. The number, I believe, ‘was fixed at twelve. The PRESIDENT. Yes. next resolution. The resolution of Mr. Hendrick, pro- viding for the appointmont of a Commit- tee of five to try the contested election Read the ¢~case, was then read. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to offer, as an amendment to that, the following resolu- tion: Resolved, That a Committee of five to decide the contested election case of McChord vs. Lewis, pending before this Convention, be selected in the following manner, viz.: The name of each member present shall be written on a separate piece of paper, every such piece being as nearly similar to the other as may be, and each piece shall be rolled up so that the name thereon can not be seen, nor any particu- lar piece ascertained or selected by feeling, and the list of names so prepared shall be placed by the Secretary in a box on his table; and after it has been well shaken and the papers therein well intermixed,’ the Secretary shall draw out one paper, which shall be opened and read aloud by the President, and so on until the required number is obtained. If any member so selected is excused, his place shall be supplied by another name drawn from the box. The persons whose names are so drawn shall be mem- bers of the board, and, before acting, shall each ‘be sworn by the President to try the contested election case of McChord v. Lewis, and give true judgment thereon, according to the evidence, unless dissolved before rendering judgment. Mr. MCHENRY. I make the point of order that we have no petition or memo- rial from Mr. McChord claiming the seat. We do not know really that there is a con- test. I ask the Clerk and President if there is any such papers presented. Mr. HENDRICK. I simply wish to say that the oflicial notice of contest is with your Secretary, and was read as one of the papers from the ofiice of Secretary of State; and I wish to say, in addi- tion to that, that I am perfectly willing to accept the amendment ofi'ered by the gentleman from Henry‘ county, for the reason that it simply expresses the law as given in our General Statutes. The gen- tleman from Henry county has simply copied ~into his resolution the provisions of the law, and, therefore, I accept the amend- ment. Mr. RAMSEY. I move to amend by inserting-M nine" instead of “five.” ORGANIZATION. 11 . ’Wednesday,] MCHENRY—HENDRICK—WHIT AKEB—CARROLL. [September 10. Mr. MCHENRY. I would like to ask #the gentleman from Fleming if the law provides for nine. Mr. HENDRICK. The law says not less than five nor more than nine. I put in five because I thought five would be ample, but I have no objection to nine. Mr. WHITAKER. That question can be best settled by a division of the ques- tion. Mr. HENDRICK. I don’t know that it is nesessary to do that. I accepted the gentleman’s amendment, which puts it at - nine. - The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs on the adoption of the original reso- lution as amended by the resolution of the gentleman from Henry. The question being put, the resolution was declared to have been adopted. Mr. HENDRICK. Will it be in order now to proceed immediately to the selec- tion of a Committee? Mr. CARROLL. Was the vote taken on my amendment, or on the resolution ? The PRESIDENT. Your amendment was accepted by the gentleman from Flem- ing. The Secretary will now proceed to carry out the order of the Convention. Mr. JONSON. I move that we have a call of the roll,to know whose names shall go into the box. - Upon the motion being put to the House, it was declared to have been adopted. ' Mr. HEN DRICK. I don’t wish to be captions about it, but it occurs to me that ‘the law doos not contemplate any such action as indicated by the motion of the Delegate from McLean. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks, ' upon a reading of the statute, that it is necessary to ascertain the number of mem- bers present. The Clerk will. therefore, > call the roll to see whose names shall be ' placed in the box. The Clerk thereupon called the roll. Mr. MoHEN RY. Do I understand that h the names of the gentlemen who have not responded do not go in the box. The PRESIDENT. That is my ruling. Mr. MCHENRY. I think we ought to get all of themhere. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk may re- capitulate the vote, and take the names of all the Delegates present. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to say that in drafting that resolution I complied strictly with the letter of the statute, and the statute provides that the names of those present only shall be put in the box. Mr. McDERMOTT. Is it not pre- sumed they are all present unless roll is called? Mr. J ON SON. It seems to me that the roll-call just taken positively shows that some were not here. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please recapitulate the absentees. This was done. The Clerk thereupon placed in the box only the names of the Delegates who had answered the roll-call. While the Clerk was preparing the box, Mr. Hendrick asked leave of absence for the Delegate from Clark, which was granted. The Clerk thereupon drew from the box the following names: C. F. Burnam, Emery Whitaker, Sam’l J. Pugh. F. A. Hopkins, Wm. H. Miller, J. T. Funk, H. G. Petrie, E. J. McDermott, J. Proctor Knott. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to have a resolution which I sent up reported. The Clerk thereupon read said resolu- tion, as follows: Resolved, That Phil. Myers and J. H. Sublett be, and they are hereby, elected Assistant Reporters of this Convention; their compensation to- be fixed thereafter. 12 ORGANIZATION. \Vednesd ay,] WILLIAMS—MCDERMOTT—BRONSTON. [September 10. Mr. WILLIAMS. I offer a substitute. The substitute was read, as follows: Resolved, That Mr. Walker, Chief Sten- ographer, be permitted to select his own assistants. Mr. McDERMOTT. I offer as an amendment to the substitute of the gentle- man from Rowan, the following: “And that he be held responsible for the work ‘of such assistants as the Committee on Rules may think are necessary for the proper reporting of the proceedings of this Convention.” Mr. WILLIAMS. I accept the amend- ment of the gentleman from Louisville. Mr. BRONSTON. The'act of the Leg- islature calling us together, provides that the Convention shall a=semble, and after taking the oath prescribed by the Consti- tution, shall elect one of their number President, and may elect a Secretary, As- sistant Secretary, Sergeant-at-arms, Door- keeper, Reporter and such other assistants as may be necessary and proper. I don’t wish in any way to reflect upon the capac- ity of the Stenographer selected by this Convention to perform the duties of the ofiice to which he has been elected, but I deny that the gentleman who has been selected has the right to indicate to this Convention who shall be the officers that they desire to record their proceedings. Every Delegate upon this floor is inter- ested in knowing who shall record what he says on the floor of the Convention; and the two men indicated in my resolu- tion are men of unexceptional, you might say, of marked worth, in this respect. One of them was voted for by, I believe, forty- seven Delegates, as Chief Stenographer. Mr. Myers, of Covington, is a young man of irreproachable moral character, of the ., strictest habits, of the most marked impar- tiality in reporting; a young man who has, in his capacity as Stenographer, gained for himself the reputation, in the city of Covington, and among the bar of Central Kentucky, as the most accurate Stenogra- pher that they have ever had in their ser- vice. As I stated on yesterday, he has a machine of his own invention, which does not undertake. as has been misconeeived by some of the gentlemen, to mark the words down in the hieroglyphicsiof short- hand, but in the most accurate way so that he can catch every word. I might say, if there were two or three men speaking at one time, he could catch it all. What ob- jection can there be to the Convention selecting the Assistant ‘Stenographer, espe- cially when we offer you first, a man like- Mr. Myers, of Covington. The other gen- tleman, whose name is mentioned, is from Eastern Kentucky. He has, I am in- formed by those who know him, filled the’ position of Private ‘Secretary to the Hon. Daniel Manning, and has had marked ex- perience in the courts of the city of Wash- ington; has given his life to that particu- lar calling, and is indorsed by every man from that section of the country, who has the pleasure of knowing him, as a young, gentleman of decided ability. Why can not this Convention select two men as As- sistants, as contemplated by this act, and not be considered as in any way reflecting on the Stenographer, who may want to select for that position some personal friend. As to the suggestion in the amendment of the gentleman of the Sixth District of Louisville, that the Stenogra- pher be held responsible to this Conven- tion for his action, certainly this Conven- tion will hold the Stenographer responsible, but I will say I want the Convention to hold the Assistant Stenographers respon- sible as well as the Chief, so that if either is derelict in the performance of his duty, the Convention can hold him answerable. The only question is, whether the Conven- tion shall select, or whether the Chief Stenographer. The act contemplates that. the Convention shall do it, and I don’t see myself that the friends of the Stenograph- er ought to construe it as reflecting on him or abridging'his rights under "the election. ORGANIZATION. 1 3 is settled among the reporters.” Wednesday,] M CDERMOTT—STRAUS. [September 10. Mr. MCDERMOTT. "I shall not say a word derogatory to the capacity and worthiness of the gentleman sought to be elected as Assistant. I hear him spoken of in the very highest of terms; but I think one of the greatest mistakes that is made in our governmental affairs is division of responsibility, until at last the people are unable to tell who is to blame when any thing goes wrong. We must, some time, center responsibility. We should hold the stenographer responsible for all the work that comes to the Convention. If any thing is wrong we must go to him, and we don’t want him to tell us that it is this assistant or that assistant. We should say to him: do the work, and the moment it is not done right we shall discharge you. You all know that there is a difference in taking down speeches. One man will speak slowly ,and deliberately, like the gentleman who has just preceded me. An- other man will speak quite rapidly, like myself. One stenographer will say, “you take the hard man and I will take the easy one.” If you have two men independent of each other, there will be constant bicker- ing, constant shirking. and the result will be, when your speeches are reported, you will never know who is to blame for the inaccuracies that appear in them. I there- fore think it is much better, as a matter of principle, that you should have as many assistants as your Committee on Rules find necessary, and that you should make the one man responsible, and he shall say who his subordinates are, and regulate his work, Otherwise, during the course of our labors, we may find it necessary to pass a resolu- tion something like this: “Resolved, That in case of a dispute between the Reporter ang Assistant Reporters as to which one shall take such a speech, the Convention shall cease its proceedings until that matter I say, therefore, fixv upon how many assistants as you think necessary, but let the Reporter choose them and be responsible. _You‘ might as well select a type-writer copyist, I or the printers who shall be employed by the Printer to the Convention. I say, in both those matters you should elect one man, and hold him strictly accountable; and if the Reporter you have elected, at any time shows his inefficiency, I shall be the first to make the motion to discharge him. Mr. STRAUS. I see no reason why‘ this House should not elect an Assistant Reporter any more than why they should refuse to elect an Assistant Secre- tary. There is just this much reason to give the Chief Secretary of this Conven- tion the power to elect his assistant as there is for giving the Chief Reporter the right to select his assistants. Under the not, we have the right to elect an Assistant Re- porter, or as many Assistant Reporters as we please. Now, what reason is there in the world why the Chief Reporter should claim the right to select his assistants any more than why the Chief Secretary should claim the same right. It is not to be sup- posed‘ that the Chief Secretary of this Convention and his assistants are going to get into any trouble as to who shallsdo the work, or how it shall be done, any more than it should anticipate the same trouble if you elect an Assistant Reporter. It does seem to me that the right of this Convention to elect an Assistant Reporter ought to be exercised, and there is as much reason for exercising it as in electing an Assistant Secretary of this Convention. I would say to the gentleman from Louis, ville that we may have some trouble about the Reporters of this Convention, but this Convention itself will appoint a Commit- tee at the proper time to revise the work of the Chief Reporter, and unless a Com- mittee of that kind should be appointed to revise their work and to correct it and keep them in order, the members of this Convention will find much to complain of ; and we will find it necessary before we proceed many days, to have a Committee 14 ' ORGANIZATION. \Vednesdayj HENDRICK—FUNK—OOKE—BRONSTON—SMITH' appointed. to revise their work. Why should not the Convention proceed at once to elect as many Assistant Reporters as they may see proper, and then we, individually and collectively, take the responsibility at least in part for their work and take that much from the Chief Stenographer, and we hold them all responsible at the proper time. Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a point of order. I am sure that every Delegate upon this floor, whatever may be his opin- ions about this matter, will not hesitate as to his duty when that duty is shown. Each one of these amendments contem- plate the appointment of an assistant by the Stenographer already elected. Your act, by the authority of which we meet, declares that the Convention, when assem- bled, after taking the oath of office pre- scribed, shall elect—and the word elect is mandatory—one of their number Presi- dent, and may elect a Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Printer, Stenographer and as- sistants. I appeal to the intelligence of every Delegate present whether it is not the clear meaning of this act that the as- sistant Stenographer, like every other ofi‘i- oer of this Convention, shall be the choice of this Convention, and not the choice of the Stenographer. I ask, Mr. Chair- man, a ruling upon that point of order. The PRESIDENT. The Chair decides that that is a point for the Convention to decide for itself. Mr. HENDRICK. I have only this in addition to say, that the gentleman from the City of Lexington, in presenting this young gentleman, has given to every gen- tleman upon this floor a guarantee of his efliciency. I trust that this body will keep in its own hands this power, and exercise it wisely and well. Mr. FUNK. I have an amendment to offer. The amendment reads as follows: “Amend by adding the name of John P. Cassilly as an Assistant Reporter.” Mr. COKE. The gentleman from Flem- ing, in reading the act, dwelt upon the word “ shall,” and passed over very lightly the word “ may.” “ The Convention, when assembled, after taking the oath of oflice- prescribed by the Constitution, shall elect one of their number President, and may- elect a Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Printer, Stenographer and Assistants.” The gentleman’s point was that the word “shall” applies to the election of these- assistants. It is in the discretion of this- Convention whether they shall elect or not- The word “ may” implies that they can permit the Stenographer to appoint his own assistants, and, therefore, it becomes only a question with us which is the best mode to proceed under; whether we, as a. body, shall elect these persons, each Stenog- rapher holding under the Convention and being independent of each other, or wheth- er, having elected one Stenographer, we shall hold him responsible, and let him ap- point his assistants, and, if they do not. discharge their duties as they should, he- can dismiss them at once and employ oth- ers inwtheir stead. If you elect his assist- ants, and any thing goes wrong, and he‘ desires to do any thing, he can’t do it, be~ cause his hands are tied by the action of the Convention in electing those assistants. Mr. BRONSTON. From the fact that. this Convention has elected all of its offi- cers up to the present time, I insist that the Convention conform to the rule. I think the law clearly indicates that this Convention elect its officers. It is just as much the right of this Convention to allow the Secretary of this Convention to select- - his assistants as it is the right of this Con- vention to allow the Reporter to select his. assistants. carry out the rules laid down, and elect the Assistant Reporters of this Conven- tion. Mr. H. H.SM~ITH. I do not wish to advertise myself to the country as a speech--. maker, but I want to make some remarks; September 10.. I insist that this Convention , ORGANIZATION. 15 Wednesday] BECKHAM. [September 10. upon this resolution, because 0 theifact that the office of Reporter is the most important position that this body has to deal with. The law authorizing the elec- tion of a stenographer seems to have been fulfilled. That law does not seem to require the election of assistant stenog- raphers. It has long been the custom to elect a principal, a chief stenographer, who shall see to the duties of his assistants. Suppose that this Convention elects an assistant stenographer to your chief sten- ographer (and I do not make any dispar- agement of any gentleman nominated) who is not efficient, and who does not conform to his ideas of reporting this Convention. He is- responsible to the Convention as Chief Reporter, and he is the stenographer who ought to be respon- slble for the selection of his assistants. I understand that the gentleman from C'ovington, Mr. Myers, is a capable man. I have nothing to say of him. I hear also that he has a machine by which he reports. I would say that, having been a reporter myself, if the machine had been an excel- lent instrument to take down such things as speeches, going at a two—forty rate, Congress, and other legislative bodies, long before this, would have adopted such a machine. Therefore, I say that in reporting court proceedings at Covington, he must not have had to take more than one hundred or a hundred and fifty words a minute, while there are members of this Convention who may speak at least two hundred or two hundred and fifty, and it will require the brain of a man and not a mechanical instrument to report those words and send them to the country exactly as they are I spoken. And upon this resolution I desire further to say that since Mr. Walker has been made our Chief Reporter, he ought to have the right to. select whom he pleases as assistants. ‘ It isnot going from a precedent established by this ‘Convention, but it has elected a Reporter; and the law does not direct that we shall have two Reporters, but one Reporter; and I take it that it means but one Chief Reporter, and he shall select his own assistants. So far as the gentleman nominated from Louisville is concerned, Mr. Cassilly, I have to say, that I gradu-» ated from the Louisville Law School with him, and have known him for several years. He is a gentleman of pure charac~ ter, scholarly ability and of some literary attainments. He is not- only a stenog- rapher, but a gentleman of excellent. worth. He has everywhere had friends, and he comes to this Convention besides, as being one of the most rapid Reporters. in the city of Louisville. Mr. BECKHAM. The law by which‘ we are called together provides that the Convention when assembled shall, after taking the oath of office, as prescribed by the Constitution, elect one of their num- ber President, and may elect a Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Printer, Stenograph- er and Assistants. It seems, sir, that under this act we have some discretion as- to the number of assistants the Stenog- ragher is to have. As to the other ofiicers that discretion is taken from us, for they are provided for in the act itself. Stenog- raphy itself is comparatively of recent origin. I must say that I do not know‘ to-day, and I doubt if this Convention knows, what number of assistants are re» quired to discharge and attend to the busi-> ness of this Convention. I must say that. I am in the dark, and I think it very prob- able that the Convention itself is in the dark. The Convention, as I take it, and as all gentlemen, I think, will agree, ought to select such ofi‘icers and such number of ofiicers as the business of the Convention may require. mean no reflection upon the power of the gentleman that we have selected, nor do I mean to part with any power that prop- erly belongs to this body, but, in ‘order that we may ascertain just precisely what we do want, and what the business of this ' Being in the dark myself, I. a 16 ORGANIZATION. Wednesday,] BOLES—BRONSTON—MCDERMOTT—MACKOY. [September body requires, I move that this resolution be referred to the Committee on Rules. Mr. BOLES. Before that motionu'l de- sire to offer an amendment to original res- olution. . .The amendment was read. as follows; “Amend by adding to the original reso- lution the name of Miss Matilda Quick- sall, as one of the Assistant Stenographers.” Mr. BOLES. open for debate? The PRESIDENT. consent. Mr. BOLES. I am like the gentleman from Shelby. I want light put upon this subject. I know but very little about this art of stenography. I do not know how many Stenographers we will need. If the whole matter is referred to the Committee on Rules, they can investigate the matter and report back to us the number that we will need, Now, if it is the purpose to have enough Stenographers to report all the speeches that is made in this Conven- tion, we will be here when the roses bloom again, if what has occurred in the past two days is to be taken as an evidence of what is coming in the future, and I, therefore, second the motion of the gentleman from Shelby to'refer the matter to the Commit- tee on Rules. Mr. BRONSTON. I should not have any objection to refer this matter to the Committee on Rules, if we knew how long it was going to be before that Committee would report; but as I understand that, until that Committee shall report, we will proceed under the rules of the last Consti- tutional Convention, it is possible that the Committee'on Rules may not make a re- port for ten days or two weeks; and in the meantime what are we to do? Mr. vMCDERMO'I‘T. We have a Stenog- rapher already appointed, who can look after that. Mr. BRONSTON. It would seem ,from the response of the gentleman from Louis- Is the motion to refer By unanimous ville, that he should select his own assist- ants until the Committee on Rules shall report. I do not see why this Convention should not now determine the question as to whether or not it should have two or three Assistant Stenographers. If we find hereafter that they are not enough to per- form the duties of the Convention, you can select others, I regard the matter as extremely important that ‘the Convention shall determine the question now as to whether it shall select its officers, or wheth- er it will delegate that to a subordinate officer; and when he selects, whether or not you will pay such a number as he may see proper to select until the Committee on Rules shall report; and then whether or not you will continue to so pay these subordinates alter that Committee shall report. . Mr. MACKOY. If I were not thor- oughly familiar with the gentlemen whose names have been suggested as Assistant Stenographers, I might deem it proper to vote for the motion to re'er; but knowing one of them, Mr. Myers, personally so well, and knowing the other by reputation as I do, I think that this Convention will not err in selecting those gentlemen at the present time, without delay. So far as Mr. Myers is concerned, I have known him from his boyhood to the present time. He is a young man who was deprived of his father very early in life. His father was a gentleman who was known throughout the entire State, and who, in a time of political excitement, distinguished himself by re- fusing to accept oflice, because he knew that military force had been improperly used in his behalf to procure his election. I allude to the late lamented Harvey My- ers, the father of Mr. Philip N. Myers. Unlike his son in political faith, he was a Republican; but he was so just, so true to his convictions of duty, that, although he had been elected to the Legislature of Ken- tucky as a Republican, yet because soldiers had been used at the polls, because he be- ORGANIZATION. 17 Wednesday,] WASHINGTON—PETTIT—STRAUS—APPLEGATE. [September 10. lieved that their use had influenced his election, as an honorable gentleman he de- clined to accept an ofiice which he sup- posed had been obtained in that manner. Ea: pede Herculem. I can say for the young man that he has the same sterling qualities that characterized his father, and knowing him him as I do, I should prefer seeing him elected as one of the assistants rather than entrust the selection to a gentleman, in whom I have the highest confidence, but of whose assistants I know nothing what- ever. I think, therefore, that it would be wise on the part of the Convention to terminate this controversy inasmuch as Mr. Sublett is known and indorsed and recommended, and as those gentlemen who have a personal acquaintance with Mr. Myers, know he is in every way fitted to discharge the duties of this position. Mr. WASHINGTON. I move to lay the motion to commit on the table. The PRESIDENT. The Chair decides the motion out of order because it accom- plishes nothing, and the idea of parlia- mentary law is to economize time. Mr. PETTIT. It strikes me, sir, that in this matter it is important that we should make haste slowly. To-day’s proceedings, it seems to me, is simply for the purpose of making places upon this floor for defeated candidates. All that has been said in favor of Mr. Myers and the other candidates I freely acknowl- edge. I am impressed with Mr. Myers’ ability, impressed with his high character as well as others who have been suggested, but I want to say to this Convention that I have seen proceedings in the House of Representatives in Washington, where 325 members were reported, and their business taken down by only four stenog- raphers. Here we propose to supply ourselves with five. Now, let me inquire if four can do the work for the Lower House of Congress of the United States, does it require five to perform the duties that we require at their hands? Another point is this: A stenographer is a high- priced servant. There is not a stenog- rapher, I take it, who will perform the duties here for a less salary than at the rate of from four to six thousand dollars a year. Now, you can compute it, and if you employ all upon the same footing and make them officials here, you simply impose upon the people of Kentucky an expense that ought not to fall upon them. I believe, sir, that one stenographer is sufi‘icient. Pay him what is needed to conduct his office. Hold him to a strict responsibility and let him employ his own assistants; and let this resolution go to the Committee to which it is proposed to refer it. Let us find out the duties that may pertain to that official and give him what assistants he may need for the economical administration of his ofiice. Mr. STRAUS. In response to a remark made by the gentleman from Daveiss, that this Convention has been doing nothing to-day except attempting to make places for defeated candidates, I want to say that the election of the gentleman for Reading Clerk this morning was a necessity, and became an apparent necessity to this body, notwithstanding his strenuous efforts to defeat it. I am not willing for him or any other Delegate to select the Reporters of this Convention, any more than I am will- ing for him to select all the Secretaries of this Convention. I say that this Conven- can see itself this morning that we need, at least, one more Reporter, and we can proceed now to elect that man with as much intelligence as if we waited two weeks. We may find out to-morrow that it is just as necessary to have an Assistant Stenographer as it was this morning to have a Reading Clerk. Mr. APPLEGATE. I wish to notice some of the objections made by some of the Delegates against the selection of these gentlemen as Assistant Stenographers. One gentleman starts out by assuming that 18 ORGANIZATION. \VednesdayJ MILLER—ALLEN—MCDERMOTT. [September 10. the Convention is incapable of choosing an Assistant Stenographer. That argument is self-consuming. If we are incapable of selecting the Assistant Stenographer, we are incapable of selecting the Chief Sten- ographer, and we certainly ought not to con- cede that the Stenographer elected is better prepared to choose the officers of this Con- vention than the Convention- itself. An- other gentleman insisted that because it requires only four Stenographers to report the proceedings in Congress, with 825 members, that we should get on with a I take it that these 100 men,’lin the same length of time, will do as much talking as the 325 in the N a- tional House. What has to be done by the Stenographer is to report every thing that is said and done. There is not to be one iota left out, no matter who says it, and I do not believe that there is any Stenog- rapher who can stand the strain, and hold out for four or five hours. I do not believe that this Convention ought to acknowledge that we are incapable of selecting our ofi‘icers. We certainly cast a reflection on the intelligence of this Convention when we pass such a resolution. The young gentleman from Covington, I insist, has no superior in the State of Kentucky as a Stenographer, he has no superior as a gen- tlemen, and I think no conflict can arise if the gentleman who has been selected as Chief Stenographer bears the same order of manhood. As well as sume that the two Secretaries chosen here are going to engage in an unseemly row. If we have the ca- pacity to select an Assistant Secretary, why not an Assistant Stenographer. The man who does the work ought to be paid, and the Convention ought to decide on his pay, and not leave it to some one else to decide how much he shall be paid for his labor. I say we should name the Assistants, and to name the salary, and if the gentlemen are not willing to accept the place we will take some one else. proportionate number. A motion to adjourn until half-past 3 o’clock was voted down. - Mr. W. H. MILLER. I rise to a ques- tion of order. A resolution was introduced on yesterday providing for the election of a Reporter. By way of a substitute, it was moved to provide for the election of a Stenographer and assistants, which substi- tute was rejected; and it seems to me, until that is reconsidered, we can not pro- ceed to the election of an Assistant Stenog- rapher. The PRESIDENT. I don’t think that was the way or it, and I hold the point not well taken. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Ithink we have had discussion enough, and I move the previous question. The resolution to refer the whole matter to the Committee on Rules was, upon a vote, declared to have been carried. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I move that we adjourn, to meet to-morrow morning at 10 o’clock. Mr. ALLEN. I desire to ask for infor- mation. What became of the resolution yesterday, calling for the appointment of a Committee to name the number and- style of the standing Committees? The PRESIDENT. Those are all the resolutions oflered yesterday, as the Secre- tary informs me. Mr. ALLEN. ‘I heard nothing done about that, and the Secretary will please look after it. The PRESIDENT. Feeling that the Convention cannot proceed with its business without the appointment of a Committee on Rules, the President has considered it his duty to make up that Committee, and will announce it just .be- fore the adjournment. Mr. YOUNG. I desire to move that, when we adjourn, we adjourn until Tues- day. We can do no work until the Committee on Rules report, and there is ORGANIZATION. 19 Wedneday,] SPALDING—MCDEBMOTT—STRAUS. [September 10. no use of keeping us here awaiting the deliberations of that Committee, and by Tuesday they can report. I, therefore, move that, when we adjourn, we adjourn to meet Tuesday morning at 11 o’clock. Mr. SPALDING. I want to suggest this: that the Committee on Rules can report in a short time, but there will be time needed for the President to select his Committees. If we go home until Tues- day, when the Committee on Rules make their report we will have to adjourn to give the President time to appoint his Com- mittees. I think you had better withdraw your motion and have the Committee on Rules report, and then renew it. The Committee on Rules ought to be able to report to-morrow, or the day after. Mr. McDERMOTT. When the Com- mittee on Rules present their report, is it presumed that the report will be adopted without debate? The PRESIDENT. That is in the pleasure of the Convention. Mr. SPALDIN G. We had better have that discussion and then adjourn. Mr. STRAUS. Will the gentleman who made the motion to adjourn withdraw his motion until you can announce the Committee‘? The PRESIDENT. I will not declare the Convention adjourned even after taking the vote, until after I make the announcement. The question was then put on the mo- tion to adjourn. The PRESIDENT. The ayes have it, but before the Convention adjourns, I will announce the Committee on Rules: Messrs. MeHenry, Young. L. T. Moore, Burnam, Rodes, McElroy, Thomas H. Hines, Goebel, Spalding, Montgomery Miller, and Auxier. The Convention then adjourned. _ Qnnveniinn guard. daring judgment. ——.K E N T U C K Y "— CONSLLLLLL' U ‘.L‘lCDNAL OCDN'V'ENTION- Vol. 1 .1 FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 11, 1890. [NO. 4 Thursday, ] COMMITTEE on RULES. Met pursuant to adjournment, at 10 o’clock A. M. Rev. Mr. Penick offered up the follow- ing prayer: ' Almighty and Everlasting God, who alone canst order all things, direct and .guide this body, in all then doings, with Thy most gracious favor, that in all their works, begun, continued and ended in Thee, they may legislate for the best inter- ests of the Commonwealth at large, may glorify Thy name, and finally, by Thy mercy, obtain everlasting life, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. The Journal of the preceding day was read. ' The PRESIDENT. The Committee on the contested case of McChord versus Lewis was not sworn yesterday. They ‘ will now appear at the bar and be sworn. The said Committee thereupon came for- ward, and the oath was administered to them in the following words: - You do solemnly swear that you will try this election case, and give true judg- ment thereon, unless dissolved before ren- So help you God. Mr. RAMSEY. In the reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings, I fail- ed to hear the Clerk read the amend- ment offered by me to the resolution of the gentleman from Henry, on the con- tested election case. The resolution offered by the gentleman from Henry provided for a board of five members, to which I introduced an amendment providing to increase the number to nine, which he accepted. That does not appear upon ‘the records. The PRESIDEN T. The gentleman may make a motion to correct the minutes. The SECRETARY. I will say that when the amendment was offered the gen- tleman accepted it, and it was inserted in the resolution. ' The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Journal will be considered as approved as read. The Chair will state, that upon yesterday the Convention adopted the ' rules of the Convention of ’49, and the first thing in order are petitions. - Resolu- tions only can now be considered except by suspension of the rules. Mr. SPALDING. The Committee on Rules may possibly be ready for a partial report. The PRESIDENT. The Chair, accord- ing to the rules adopted on yesterday, will call for petitions. If there are no peti- tions, then reports from standing Commit- tees. If there are no reports from Standing Committees, then reports from any Special Committee are in order. Mr. MeHEN RY. The Committee on Rules, to whom was assigned the duty of framing rules for the government of this Convention, have had that matter under consideration, and have directed me to make the following report. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will. read the report. The Secretary thereupon read the report, which was in words and figures as follows ': The undersigned Committee, appointed to prepare and report a Code of Rules for the government of the proceedings of this Convention, would respectfully submit the , following : [September 11. . ORGANIZATION. Thursday,] COMMITTEE on RULES. [September ll. Touching the Duties of the President. He shall take the Chair every day precisely at the hour to which the Conven- tion shall have adjourned the preceding day, and, on the appearance of a quorum, shall cause the Journal of the preceding day to be read. 2. He shall preserve decorum and order; may speak to points of order in preference to other Delegates, rising from his chair for that purpose. He shall decide questions of order, subject to an appeal to the Conven- tion on request of any two Delegates. 3. He may state a question sitting, but shall rise to put a question to the vote of the Convention. 4. Questions shall be distinctly put in this form, viz: “All you who are of the opinion that (as the question may he) say ‘Aye.’ You of the contrary opinion say ‘No.”’ If the President doubt, or a division be called for, the Convention shall divide; those in the afiirmative shall first rise from their seats, and afterwards those in the negative. If the President still doubts, or a count be required, the President shall name two Delegates, one from each side, to tell the Delegates in the aflirmative and negative; and the result being reported, he shall rise and state the decision to the Convention. 5. The President may examine and cor- rect the Journal before it is read. 6. The President shall have the right to name any Delegate to perform the duties of the Chair, but such President pro tem. shall not be empowered to act beyond a period of five legislative days; but if the person so appointed fails to act, or if the President fails to return at the ter- mination of the five days, the Secretary shall hold an election for President pro tem. 7. All Committees shall be appointed by the President, unless otherwise specially directed by the Convention, in which case they shall be appointed by a vote. A plurality of the votes shall be sufficient to determine the choice. 8. All writs, warrants and subpoenas, issued by order of the Convention or its Committees, shall be signed by the Presi- dent under his hand, and attested by the Secretary, 9. In case of any disturbance or dis- orderly conduct in the galleries or lobby, the President or Chairman of the Commit- tee of the Whole House shall have power to order the same to be cleared. Organization of the Convention. 10. A quorum shall consist of at least two-thirds of the Delegates elected, but ten Delegates of the Convention may adjourn from day to day when a sufficient number has not met to proceed to business, and fifteen Delegates, together with the President, may call the House, send for absent Delegates, and make an or- der for their censure. 11. The following Standing Committees shall be appointed by the President: 1. A Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, to which shall be referred and which shall report upon all propositions relating to Preamble and Bill of Rights. This Committee shall consist of seven members. 2. A Committee on Elections, to which shall be referred and which shall report upon all propositions relating to the elect- ive franchise and the mode of election . This Committee shall consist of nine members. 3. A Committee on the Legislative De- partment, whose duty it shall be to report what amendments or changes are necessary in the provisions of the Constitution which relate to the Legislative Department which are not embraced in the jurisdiction of other Committees. This Committee shall consist of nine members. 4. A Committee on the Executive Ofii- cers for the State at large, whose duty it shall be to report such changes or amend- ments as may be necessary in that part ' ORGANIZATION. 3 relates to the Circuit Courts. Thursday.] COMMITTEE on RULES. [September 11. of the Constitution relative to Executive and Ministerial Officers for the State at Large. This Committee shall consist of seven members. 5. A Committee on Executive and Min- isterial Ofiicers for Counties and Districts, whose duty it shall be to report such amendments or changes as may be necessa- ry in that part of the Constitution relating to Executive or Ministerial Officers for Counties and Districts. This Committee shall consist of seven members. 6. A Committee on the Militia, whose duty it shall be to report what amend- ments and changes are necessary in that portion of the Constitution which’ relates to the Militia. This Committee shall con- sist of five members. 7. A Committee on the Judicial De- partment and Court of Appeals, whose duty it shall be to report what amend- ments or changes are necessary in those portions of the Constitution which relate to the Judicial Department and Court of Appeals, not embraced in the jurisdiction of other Committees. This Committee shall consist of nine members. 8. A Committee on the Circuit Court, whose duty it shall be to report what mendments and changes are necessary in that portion of the Constitution which This Com- mittee shall consist of nine members. 9. A Committee on County Courts, whose duty it shall be to report such amendments and changes as are necessary in the Constitution in the provisions thereof, under the title “Concerning County Courts.” This Committee shall consist of nine members. 10. A Committee on Education, whose duty it shall be to report what amendments are necessary in the Constitution in the provisions thereof relating to Education. This Committee shall consist of nine mem- bers. 11. A Committee on the Revision of the Constitution, whose duty it shall be to re- port what amendments and changes are necessary to be made in the Constitution in relation to the mode of amending and re- vising the same. This Committee shall consist of five members. 12. A Committee on Corporations, whose duty it shall be to report what amend- ments or changes to the Constitution are necessary in relation to private corpora- tions and franchises. This Committee shall consist of nine members. - 13. A Committee whose duty it shall be to report any changes or amendments to the Constitu- tion in the provisions thereof relating to towns, cities and other municipalities. This Committee shall consist of seven members. 14. A Committee on Revenue and Tax- ation, whose duty it shall be to report such amendments and changes as are necessary to the Constitution in the provisions there- of which relate to revenue and taxation. This Committee shall consist of seven members. 15. A Committee on Rules, consisting of thirteen members, with the President of this Convention as Chairman(the same Com- mittee already appointed), whose duty is shall be to report all rules and regulations necessary for the government of the pro- ceedings and the conduct of the business of this Convention. 16. A Committee on Crimes and Crimi- nal procedure, to which shall be referred, and which shall report upon all proposi- tions relating to crimes and criminal pro- cedure. This Committee shall consist of five members. 17. A Committee on Printing and Ac- counts, which shall supervise the printing that may be done for this Convention, and examine, audit and report upon all ac- counts created by this Convention. This Committee shall consist of three mem- bers. 18. A Committee on Enrollment, whose duty it shall be to see that all propositions on Municipalities, 4 ORGANIZATION. Thursday,] COMMITTEE ON RULES. [September 11 , matured and adopted by the Convention are carefully engrossed and preserved, and that the Constitution when completed shall be c'rrectly enrolled. This Committee shall consist of three members. 19. A Committee on General Provisions, whose duty it shall be to report what amendments and changes are necessary in the Constitution in the provisions thereof, under the style of “ General 'Provisions.” This Committee shall consist of seven members. 20. A Committee on Schedule, which shall prepare and report a proper schedule for organizing and putting in operation the government established by the Constitu- tion framed by this Convention, to wnich shall be referred all propositions relating to that subject. This Committee shall con- sist of nine members. Order of Business of the Day. 12. As soon as the Journal is read, the President shall call for petitions. Peti- tions having been presented and disposed of, reports, first from the Standing and then from Select Committees, shall be called for; next, motions and resolutions; and if on any day the whole of the Committees have not been called, or being called, shall not have finished their reports, or any report shall not have been disposed of, the Presi- dent on the next day shall commence where he left off on the preceding day. 13. The business specified in the preced- ing rules shall be done at no other part of the day than that between the meeting of the Convention and 12 o’clock, except by leave of the Convention. Of Decorum and Order. .14. When a Delegate is about to speak ‘in debate or deliver any matter to the Con- ~vention, he shall rise from his seat and respectfully address himself to “Mr. Pres- ident,” and shall confine himself to the question under debate and avoid person- .ality. 15. If any Delegate, in speaking or oth- erwise, transgress the rules of the Conven- tion, the President shall, or any Delegate may, call him to order; in which case the Delegate so called to order shall immedi- diately sit down, unless permitted to ex- plain, and the Convention, if appealed to, shall decide on the case; if there is no appeal, the decision of the President shall be submitted to. If the decision be in favor of the Delegate called to order, he shall be at liberty to proceed; if other- wise, he shall not be at liberty to proceed without leave of the Convention; and if the case require it, he shall be liable to censure. 16. If a Delegate be called to order by another for words spoken in debate, the exceptional words shall be immediately taken down in writing, that the President may better be able to judge of the matter. 17. N o Delegate shall name another Delegate present in debate. 18. When two or more Delegates hap- pen to rise at once, the President shall name the Delegate who first addressed the Chair as the one entitled to the floor. 19. No Delegate shall speak more than twice to the same question without leave of the Convention, nor more than once until every Delegate choosing to speak shall have spoken. 20. Whilst the President is putting any question or addressing the Convention, none shall walk out of or across the House; nor when a Delegate is speaking shall others entertain private discourse, nor shall any pass between him and the . Chair. 21. No Delegate shall vote on any queg- tion unless present at the bar of the House before the last name on the roll is called. 22. Every Delegate who shall be in the Convention when his name is called shall give his vote, unless excused by the Con- vention. 23. When a motion is made and sec- onded, it shall be stated by the President, ORGANIZATION. . 5 Thursday ,] COMMITTEE on RULEs. [September 11 . or being in writing, shall be handed to the Chair, and read aloud at the Secretary’s desk before debated or adopted. 24. Every motion shall be reduced to writing, if the President or any Delegate' desires it. 25. After a motion is stated by the Pres- ident and read, it shall be deemed to be in the possession of the Convention, but may be withdrawn or modified at any time be- fore a decision or amendment. Dignity and Privilege of Questions. 26. When a question is under debate, no _ motion shall be received but to adjourn, to lie on the table, for the previous question, to postpone to a day certain, to commit, or to postpone indefinitely; which several motions shall have precedence in the order in which they are arranged- And a motion to postpone to a day certain, to commit. or to postpone indefinitely, being decided in the negative, shall not be again allowed on the same day, unless at a dif- ferent stage of the proposition. 27. When a motion is made to refer any subject, and different committees are named, the question shall be taken in the following order: 1. To a Committee of the Whole. 2. A Standing Committee. 3. A Select Committee. 28. A motion to adjourn shall always be in order; that, and the motion to lie on the table, to suspend the rules, and for the previous question, shall be decided without debate. - 29. The previous question being moved and seconded, the question from the Chair shall be, “Shall the main question he now put?” and if the nays prevail, the main question shall not then be put. But a re- tusal to sustain the previous question shall not bar the Convention from forthwith proceeding to the consideration of the sub- ject. The eflect of the previous question shall be to put an end to all debate, except the right of the proposer of the measure under consideration to close the debate, the length of time to be fixed by the Conven- tion, and bring the Convention to a direct vote upon amendments reported by a Com- mittee, if any; then upon pending amend- ments, and then upon the main question. 30. Any Delegate may call for a divis- ion of the question, which shall be divided, if it comprehends questions so distinct that one being taken away, the rest may stand entire for the decision of the Convention ; a motion to strike out and insert shall be deemed divisable. 31. Motions and reports on any subject may be committed at the pleasure of the Convention. . 32. A motion to lie on the table, to post- pone or commit an amendment, thereby to separate it from the main question, shall not be in order. 33. A motion for reconsideration shall be in order at any time, and may be moved by any Delegate of the Convention who voted in the majority. If the motion to reconsider be not made on the same day, one day’s notice of the intention to move such reconsideration shall be required to be given. 34. No motion or proposition, difierent from that under consideration, shall be ad- mitted under color of amendment. 35. When a paper is first presented to the Convention, it shall be matter of right in any Delegate to have it read, before the Convention shall vote upon it. If the paper has been once read, or the reading dispensed with, and the reading be again required and objected to, it shall be de- termined by a vote of one-third of the Convention. 36. The unfinished business in which the Convention was engaged at the last preceding adjournment shall have the preference in the orders of the day, or in that class of business to which it appro- priately belongs; and no motion on any other business, unless a privileged one, shall be received, without special leave of the Convention, until the former is dis- posed of. 6 ORGANIZATION. Thursday,] COMMITTEE ON RULES. [September 11 , 37. The orders of the day shall be taken up at twelve o’clock on each day, unless otherwise ordered by two-thirds of the Convention. 38. The standing rules of the Conven- tion and the regular orders of business shall not be suspended or interrupted, unless by a vote of two-thirds of the Dele- gates present, 39. Petitions, memorials and other pa- pers addressed to the Convention, shall be dresented by the President or by a Delegate ‘in his place; a brief statement of the con- tents thereof shall be verbally made by the introducer, before received or dis- posed of. 40. Upon calls of the Convention, to take the yeas and nays on any question the names of the Delegates shall be called alphabetically, 41. No Delegate shall absent himself from the service of the Convention with‘ out leave first obtained, or unless he be sick or unable to attend. 42. Upon a call of the Convention, the names of Delegates shall be called over by the Secretary, and the absentees noted; after which the names of the absentees shall again be called, the door shall then be shut, and those for whom no sufficient excuse is made by order of those present, shall be taken into custody by the Sergeant- at-Arms as they appear; or may be sent for and taken into custody wherever to be found, by special messengers appointed for that purpose by the Sergeant. 43. No Committee shall sit during the sitting of the Convention without special leave. 44. All questions of order shall be noted by the Secretary upon the Journal, with decisions thereon, when an appeal shall be taken. 45. All questions relating to the priority of business to be acted upon, shall be de- cided without debate. 46. Every motion to alter, change, or .4!’ add to the standing rules of the Conven- tion shall lie one day on the table. 47. N o Delegate or other person shall visit or remain by the Secretary’s table while the yeas and nays are being called 48. No person except the Delegates, officers of the Convention, and ladies, shall be admitted within the doors of the Hall; nor shall any person, except the Delegates and oflicers be admitted upon the floor without permission or invitation of the presiding officer, except the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor of the State, Judges of the Court of Appeals and Superior Court, and such persons as have filled either of said ofiices, and all State ofiicers for the State at Large, when they may choose to attend the deliberations of the Convention. The President shall name the persons who shall act as reporters for the public press, but no reporter shall be admitted to the floor who is not an author- ized representative of a newspaper. The reporters so named shall be entitled to such seats as the President may designate. 49. It shall be the special duty of the Sergeant-at-Arms to preserve silence and order in the lobbies and galleries. Five minutes before the hour of meeting of the Convention each day the Door-keeper and Sergeant-at-Arms shall see that the floor of the House is cleared of all persons ex- cept those privileged to remain. 50. On the adjournment of the Conven- tion from day to day, the regular hour of meeting shall be ten o’clock, standard time. 51. Any two Delegates shall have the right to demand the yeas and nays on any proposition which may be submitted to the Convention, and have them entered on the Journal. After calling the yeas and nays, the Secretary shall proceed to call over the Delegates voting in the affirmative and negative, at which time each Delegate Wlll be permitted to correct his vote, if recorded wrong. ORGANIZATION. Thursday,] AYRss—WAsHme'roismMoHiiivRY. [Septem ber 11 _ Committee of the Whole. 52. Whenever the Convention shall re- solve itself into Committee of the Whole the President shall leave the Chair and designate some Delegate to preside as Chairman. 53. When the Orders of the Day are called for, the business in Committee of the Whole shall first be considered. But speclal orders, whether in Committtee of the Whole or in the Convention, shall take precedence of the general orders in the order of time in which they shall have been made. 54. Upon a proposition being committed to a Committee of the Whole House, the same shall be first read at the Secretary’s desk (unless otherwise ordered by a major- ity), and then again read for amendment by clauses or sections, leaving the preamble, if any, to be last considered. After re- port, the proposition shall again be read, if desired by a majority, for amendment ' and debate, before a question be taken. The body of any proposition shall not be defaced or interlined, but all amendments, noting the page and line, ‘shall be duly entered by the Secretary on a separate paper, and so reported to the Convention as the same shall have been agreed to, and the same shall be considered in the Con- vention in the order in which they were adopted in Committee; and all amend- ments made to an original motion in Com- mittee, shall be incorporated with the motion, and so reported. 55. It shall be in order to introduce and discuss any resolution when in the Com- mittee of the Whole, with a view to test the sense of the Convention upon the ques- tion proposed. 57. All questions, whether in Committee of the Whole or in the Convention (not privileged questions), shall be propounded in the order in which they were moved, except that in filling up blanks the largest .sum and the longest time shall be first put. ' l 58. The rules of proceeding in the Con- vention shall be observed in Committee, so far as the same are applicable; but no Delegate shall speak twice to any question until every Delegate choosing to speak has spoken ; nor shall the previous question he called. C. M. CLAY, J 11., HENRY D. MCHENRY, THOMAS H. HINES, J. PROCTOR KNOTT, CURTIS F. BURNAM, W. H. MILLER, L. T. Mooan, A. J. AUXIER, W. J. MCELROY, J. F. MONTGOMERY, Ron'r. Ronns, I. A. SPALDING, WM. GoEBEL. The PRESIDENT. The report is before the Convention and is open for amend- ment, commitment or debate. Mr. AYRES. I wish to offer an amendment. Amendment read, as follows: Resolved, That the order of business by this Convention shall be as follows: There shall be no Committees (Special or Stand- ing) appointed to consider any proposition to amend or change the existing Constitu- tion, but each section thereof shall be taken up and considered in the order in which the same now appears therein; and any change or alteration of any of such sections as may be proposed shall be finally dis- posed of before the succeeding or any sub- sequent section shall be taken up for con- sideration. Mr. WASHINGTON. I move that the rules reported by the Committee on Rules be taken up and considered seriatim,and the Convention resolve itself into a Commit- tee of the Whole for that purpose. Mr. McHENRY. That would be well enough. I intended, sir, to have made a motion to have it printed. It seems to me we could consider it much better after being printed, and a copy of the report laid upon the desk of every gentleman. I 8 ORGANIZATION. Thursday,] think that ought to be the case with all the rules, unless it be that rule providing for the appointment of Standing Committees. There is probably propriety, sir, in the Convention so disposing of that part of the report relating to the Committees. If the Convention sees proper to fix upon the Committees, that much of the report can be ,adopted, and the President then can go to work to appoint those Committees. In the meantime, the balance of the report ought to be printed and laid upon the desk of every gentleman, so that he can act ad- visedly upon the rules. We have made some alterations in the rules of the old Convention, none very material; and we have worked very faithfully since yester- day afternoon, and have done the best we could. We may have made some mistakes, however, and I think that the Convention ought to revise our work deliberately in regard to these rules, and I think they ought to be printed, and every gentleman see each one of the'rules that is to govern us; and then, after they are adopted, of course we will have them printed again; but nowI move that the report of the Committee be printed, and that it be made a special order for to-morrow at half-past ten o’clock. I would say that 150 copies ought to be printed. The PRESIDENT. It is moved and seconded that the report of the Committee be printed, and that it be made a special order for half-past ten o’clock to-morrow morning. Mr. MCHEN RY. I believe, before that motion is put, I will change the motion in this way: to have the report printed and recommitted, together with all amend- ments. Mr. WASHINGTON. I think that that committee is one composed of such ability, and they have worked so faithfully in the matter, that I second the motion of the gentleman from Ohio. Mr. MACKO Y. I should like to move in amendment made to the motion MCHENRY—WASHINGTON—MACKOY—KNOTT. [September 11. of the honorable Delegate from Ohio to the efiect, that the rule providing for the number of Committees be consid- ered and acted upon this morning, for the reason that it would give the President of the Convention time to perform his duties. It would expedite the matter, if he will accept that as an amendment. Mr. MOHENRY. I will not accept it. Mr. MACKCY. I will move it as an amendment, then. The PRESIDENT. It is moved as an amendment that Rule No. 11, which in cludes the composition of the Committees, be now considered. Mr. KNOTT. I hope that amendment will not be made. That is one of the most important of these rules, and one that ought to be the most deliberately con- sidered. I am abundantly content with the rule upon Committees as reported. I maintain that every member of this Con- _ vention should consider it as deliberately as I have myself. As to the matter of time, the world was not made in aday and we need not expect to make an accept- able Constitution by hurrying through the business before us. Of all matters ever committed to the attention of a delibera- tive assembly, the purposes for which we are convened are the most serious and im- portant, and We ought to take time and move deliberately, and. consider every step we take with the utmost care. I hope that the amendment will not 'prevail. We should have this list of Committees printed and considered deliberately by each mem- ber. It does not matter much as to a few days in the selection of Committees, The important matter is to have the work done correctly. The PRESIDENT. The motion is upon the adoption of the amendment of the gentleman from Covington, which is to consider Rule N o. 11 immediately. The motion being put, it was declared . lost. ORGANIZATION. ‘ ' a ‘ when they get ready. Thursday] Mr. SACHS. I would like to ofler a substitute for the motion of the Chairman of the Committee. Said substitute is as follows: That one hundred and twenty-five cop- ies of the Rules, as reported by the Com- mittee, be printed, and made the special order for Tuesday next. Mr. MCHENRY. I think the object of the gentleman from Louisville is accom- plished by my motion. have the report printed and recommitted to this Committee. If this Convention deems it proper to adjourn until Monday or Tuesday, that is an open question; and as soon as they do meet, the Committee is ready to report on the recommittal. The only difi'erence between the gentleman and myself is, I name one hundred and fifty copies. I am willing to have one hundred and twenty-five copies, which I think probably suflicient. Mr. SACHS. I am not particular as to the number of copies; but I want to leave the Convention in a condition to attend to other matters of business without adjourn- ment. There may be other matters of business to attend to, and then this would come up as aspecial order of the day for Tuesday. Otherwise, there might possibly be a motion to adjourn this Convention. Mr. CLARDY. It does appear to me very singular that we should want to post- pone this matter until next Tuesday. This Committee has made its entire report since yesterday. Now, we can have this matter printed, I suppose, and in the hands of the Committee some time this afternoon or in the morning; and according to the motion made, it will then be competent for that Committee to report it back at any time it gives them all the time they may want, and does not fix any specific time to report. They may report back as soon as they get ready, and think the substitute ought to be voted down. Mr. JEP. o. JONSON. 1 think the , SACHS——:MCHENRY--—CLARDY—JONS0N. My motion is to [September 11 . adoption of this substitute would be pav- _ ing the way for an adjournment of this Convention over until some time ‘next week. I am opposed to any such adjourn- ment. The President of this Convention must necessarily be at work. It is ad- mitted on all hands that he shall be at work. I don’t believe that his knowledge of the make-up of this Convention is suf- ficient to enable him, unassisted and alone, to intelligently go to work upon these im- portant Committees. I believe that it is as much the duty of the members of this Convention to stay here and assist our President in this work as in any thing they will be called upon to do, in the whole scope of our deliberations, at any time. I think, sir, we have come here for the im- portant purpose of doing the best work that can be done, and unless the founda- tion is laid properly, in getting the best Committees that are to be gotten, that work will not be done in the best manner‘, and I, therefore, oppose the substitute. Mr. SACHS. As everybody else, I be- _ lieve, who wishes to say any thing on the- question, has spoken, I desire to give my reasons for offering that substitute. These- rules ought to be, as is generally admitted, carefully considered. It is also stated that the President will need time to fill in the- names of these various Committeemen- Now, the object of my substitute was to accomplish both purposes. We certainly accomplish the purpose of giving time to the consideration of those rules by passing it over until nez'rt Tuesday. As to the’ other proposition, and to meet the criticism made by the gentleman who spoke last in opposition to my substitute, the President. may take it for granted that the majority, if not nearly all, of the Committee as named will be required. He can, in the meantime, do the greater part of that work, as suggested by the gentleman who last spoke against the substitute. The President can, in the meantime, make up his mind, consult with members of. the 10 ORGANIZATION. Thursday,] PnT'rI'r—M cDERMo'r'r—‘W HI'I‘A KER. [September 11 . Convention, and get such other light as he may deem necessary or desire for the pur- pose of filling out the names of the Com- mitteemen. Both things can be practical- ly done at the same time, if we willjust take the time and be deliberate in doing it. The question was then put upon the adoption of the substitute, and the same was rejected. The question was put upon the adoption of the motion of the gentleman from Ohio. ' Mr. PETTIT. I desire to make a mo- tion to amend, and that is, to print one hundred and twenty-five copies, and that it be made a special order for to-morrow morning at ten o’clock. I do this, sir, from the fact that the distinguished gen- tleman, the Chairman of the Committee on Rules, has intimated here that it is ‘even his purpose that this shall be printed and recommitted to that Committee for the purpose of having an adjournment of this House until Tuesday next. To that proposition I am unalterahly opposed I believe we ought to begin the session, and beginiit promptly for work, and not lose one hour or one day when we can profita- ably put it in for the work of this Conven- tion. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I would like 'to ask the gentleman one question for infor- mation; when could we get these printed copies so that we might study them? Mr. PETTIT. I doubt not that the Public Printer can have them in the pos- session of every Delegate by 3 o’clock this afternoon, or, at any rate, by morning. Mr. MCDERMOTT. When are we going to study it over, then ‘? We can not get it before the time comes to discuss it. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the amendment offered by the gen- man from Daveiss. The question was put and declared lost. Mr. PETTIT. I call for adivision. The PRESIDENT. Those in favor of the ‘substitute motion of the gentleman from Daveiss, will arise in their seats. I think the rule calls for tellers. The Chair will appoint the gentleman from Mc- Cracken and the gentleman from Daveiss. The tellers reported 29 in the affirmative and 43 in the negative, and the Chair thereupon declared the motion defeated. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs upon the motion made by the Dele- gate from Ohio. Mr. WHITAKER. I offer a substitute. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I rise to a point of order. The motion, I think,of the gen- tleman from Ohio is to commit. That motion, I think, takes precedence over motions to amend. We are going by the rules of the old Convention, and under them, section 26, a motion to commit takes precedence. The PRESIDENT. A motion to post- pone until a day certain takes precedence over a motion to commit. The motion to make this a special order for half-past ten o’clock is surely a motion to postpone the consideration of it until that time. Mr. McDERMOTT. I withdraw my objection, if that is the purport of his amendment. The PRESIDENT. Please report the substitute, so that the Chair may be in- formed. Mr. Whitakcr’s motion was read, as follows: I move the adoption of the report with- out amendment. The PRESIDENT. All of these mo- tions come in before such a motion, because the report is liable to amendment or com- mitment; and if these motions are made, they will have to be disposed of before the question comes on the final adoption of the report. Therefore, at this stage, the Chair will hold that this motion is not in order. The question is upon the motion made by the Delegate from Ohio to print 125 copies of this report, and recommit the same to the Committee on Rules. The motion to commit was carried. ORGANIZATION. 11 Thursday,] ALLEN—MOORE—KIRWAN—OOX. [September 11 . Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I would like to ask for information. At what stage of the game will proposed amendments to the Rules come in‘? The PRESIDENT. When these mo- tions are disposed of, and the matter before the House. Any gentleman who has an amendment to offer will please send it up to the Seeretary’s desk. These amend- ments will be printed along with the Com- mittee’s report. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. Are resolutions in order? The PRESIDENT. If there are no further reports from Special Committees, resolutions are in order; but before they are heard, the Chair will,'by unanimous consent, lay before the Convention the papers and documents in relation to the contested case of McChord versus Lewis; what is the pleasure of the Convention in regard to it‘? Without objection, such reference will be made. The Chair bears no objection, and the papers are referred to the Committee on the contested election case of McChord versus Lewis. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. I have a resolu- tion to offer, which is as follows: Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms of this Convention is hereby authorized to appoint ten (10) persons, to be known as Pages, whose duty shall be to assist the Sergeant-at-Arms in the performance of his duties. and that he be held responsible for the work of the persons so employed. Mr. MOORE. Are amendments now in order? The PRESIDENT. They are. Mr. MOORE. I move to amend by striking out ten and inserting five. Mr. KIR WAN. I have an amendment, as follows: Provided, That the sons of no menbers shall be selected as pages. Mr. COX. I have an amendment, as follows: Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms be requested to appoint five pages, and no more, from different parts of the State-— not more than one from any Congressional District—to serve this Convention as pages during this Convention. The PRESIDENT. N 0 further amend- ments are in order at this time, but they may be read, by unanimous consent, for information. Mr. MOORE. I accept that amend- ment in lieu of mine. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will now report the original resolution of the gentleman from Louisville, and the vari- ous amendments thereto, as proposed, in their order. The original resolution of Mr. M. K. Allen was here read. The amendment of Mr. Kirwan was read, as follows; Provided, The sons of no members shall be selected. The amendment of Mr. Cox was also read. The PRESIDENT. I want to explain the status of the amendments. The first amendment is in order, and must be voted upon first, because the resolution must be perfected before the substitute can be voted upon; so the question will be first upon the amendment No. 1. Mr. Kirwan’s amendment, upon a vote of the Convention, was adopted. Mr. Cox’s substitute was read. Mr. TWYMAN. I move an amend- ment to the substitute, in these words: And further, That the President be au- thorized to appoint one page, to be known as the Page to the President. Mr. SWAN GO. to offer to the substitute. substitute: That the Delegates from each Congres- sional District shall select one Page from their district: and from that number five shall be drawn by the President, and one to be appointed by the President. The amendment was rejected. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I rise to- inquire whether the Page to be appointed by the President is to be one of the seven, or whether he is outside of the seven. I have an amendment Amend, as a 12 ORGANIZATION. 0 Thursday] Tw YMAN—SPALDING—M CELROY—BIRKHEAD. [September 11 _ Mr. TWYMAN. My understanding is that the one appointed by the President is outside of the seven. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs upon the adoption of the substi- tute. Mr. SPALDING. I call fora division of the question, and that we vote first upon the appointment by the President of one Page. I do not suppose anybody will object to that. That part of the motion was read. The PRESIDENT. The question will come on the first part, unless you suspend the rules. Mr. SPALDING. I move a suspension of the rules, so that the second part may be acted upon. Mr. McELROY. Has not that proposi- tion just been voted down ‘? Mr. BIRKHEAD. Do I understand that there will be six Pages? The PRESIDENT. There will be eight altogether. The Chair will put the ques- tion on the first part of the resolution, which the Secretary will please report, so that there will be no misunderstanding. That portion of the substitute, upon being put to a vote, was defeated. Mr. KENNEDY. I have an amend- ment. 'Resolved, That the Sergean t-at-Arms be authorized to appoint six persons to be known as Pages, to assist him in his duties. The PRESIDENT. Your amendment is out of order. The question now comes on the latter part of the substitute, which is to allow the President of this Convention to appoint one Page. That part of the substitu‘e, upon a vote, was adopted. ‘ Mr. WEST. I have an amendment. The amendment was read, as follows : Amend so as to read: The members of each Congressional District shall elect a Page. The PRESIDENT, That is evidently out of order. There is part of the sub- stitute which has been adopted in prefer- ence to the original proposition, and after a substitute has been adopted, it can not then be amended; so that motion is evidently out of order. Mr. HARRIS. I wish to have this resolution read now. The PRESIDENT. It can be read for information . The resolution of Mr. Harris was here read, as follows: Resolved, That the salary of the Pages shall be $2 per day. The PRESIDENT. That is not in order until this matter is disposed of. There was an original proposition to which there was a substitute. That sub- stitute has been adopted, and the question is, how far that substitute amends the original proposition. Mr. MOORE. As I understand the proposition, there was a substitute offered to a resolution of one of the Delegates from Louisville, in which there was to be an appointment of five Pages by the Ser- geant-at-arms, to be chosen from different sections of the State. Then a substitute was ofi'ered. A part of the substitute was adoptedfiand the other part voted down. Don’t it bring up The PRESIDENT. It brings up that part of the original proposition that was not abolished by that part of the substitute which was defeated; so that the Secretary will please report the original proposition. The Secretary read the same. The PRESIDENT. The Chair wants to explain the parliamentary status. There was a substitute offered, and by making it divisible, and the Convention acting upon it as it did, striking out one-half of it, it became an amendment instead of a substi- tute. The Chair, therefore, holds that'the original proposition is amended by a part of the substitute that was adopted by the Convention; and the Chair holds further, that the original proposition, as amended ORGANIZATION. 13 Thursday,] FORG Y—KENNEDY—RAMSEY. [September 11 . by this amendment, is still open to amend- ment; so if this Convention wants to amend the first part of the original propo- sition, it is still open to amendment. Mr. FORGY. If in order, I desire to ofier an amendment by making the num- ber eleven, instead of ten, for the reason that there are eleven Congressional Dis- tricts, and we wish to treat all alike. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will or- der the Secretary, for the information of the Chair and the Convention, to read the pending amendments; then the Chair will decide as to whether the amendment of the Delegate from Edmonson is in order. The Secretary will please read the amendments that have not been acted upon by the Con- vention, and the Chair will decide whether they are legitimate and relevant. The amendment of Mr. Kirwan was read. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will now read the amendment to that. The amendment of Mr. Swango was read, as follows: That the Delegate from each Congres- sional District shall select one Page from his district, and from that number five shall be drawn by the President, and one to be appointed by the President. The PRESIDENT. That is not in order. It is not drawn in shape as an amendment to the original proposition. Read the next. The Secretary read the next amendment, as follows: Amend, by substituting six Pages, one to be appointed by the President, and five by the Sergeant-at-Arms. The PRESIDENT. There is one part of that amendment in order, and the other not. The one in reference to the appoint- ment by the Sergeant-at-Arms is in order, and the other is not order, and unless the gentleman changes it, it will be decided out of order. Mr. KENNEDY. I have an amend- ment. Mr. RAMSEY. I have sent up a reso- lution. The resolution ofi'ered by the gentleman from the county of ‘Nicholas (Mr. Kenne- dy) was read, as follows: Resolveed, That the Sergeantrat-Arms be authorized to appoint six persons, to be known as Pages, to assist him in his du- tics. The PRESIDENT. The Chair decides that amendment in order, and it is the only only one in order, strictly speaking, up to this time. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. amendment. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I rise to apoint of order. That question of appointing five Pages has been stated by the Chair, and having been stated by the Chair, everything else is out of order. The PRESIDENT. The amendment offered by the gentleman from the county of Nicholas (Mr. Kennedy) is the only amend- ment now legitimately before the Conven- tion, and the Secretary will please report it_ I have an The said amendment was read the sec 0nd time. Mr. McHEN RY. Imove to refer the whole subject to the Committee on Rules. A division of the vote was called for and the Chair appointed the Delegate from Daveiss, (Mr. Pettlt) and the Delegate from Logan (Mr. Coke) tellers, who re- ported the result of the vote as follows: Fifty-nine in the afiirmative, and forty in the negative. The PRESIDENT. The motion of the gentleman from Ohio prevails. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a resolu- tion. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order is the resolution offered by the gen- tleman from Hart. Mr. BUCKNER. I withdraw it, as the 14 ORGANIZATION. ‘ Thursday,] MCDERMOTT—MILLER—SPALDING—ALLEN. [September 11 . object I sought has already been attained. The resolution of the gentleman from Lincoln (Mr. W. H. Miller) was here read, as follows: Resolved, That a special Committee be appointed by the President, with directions to Obtain suitable rooms'for the use of the Standing Committees of this Convention. Said Committee will be associated with, and will act in conjunction with, the State Librarian. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I rise to a point of order. The statute, section 8, provides for this matter, and makes it the duty of the Librarian to furnish Committee rooms. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that that is in the discretion of the Con- vention; it can either adopt or reject resolutions. - Mr. MILLER. I will say on this sub- ject that on this morning I had a conver- sation with the State Librarian, and she was in doubt as to whether she would obtain these rooms, or should simply furnish them after they were obtained; and to relieve her of this embarrassment I thought it proper to introduce this resolu- tion so she can not be at a loss in regard to this matter, and let the Convention itself assume the responsibility of obtaining the rooms. I do it merely in justice to her, and I think the resolution should be adopted. We can not get along without suitable rooms for the meetings of Commit- tees. The Committee already appointed, and which has been acting, has found some difiiculty in obtaining suitable rooms for its sessions. The resolution, upon a vote being taken, was adopted. Mr. SPALDING. The Delegate from Hart (Mr. Buckner) offered a resolution awhile ago, and through inadvertence. withdrew it. I want to ofler it again in his name. Resolution read as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Rules be, and it is directed to report to the Con- vention what subordinate employee are necessary, and the number thereof. Mr. SPALDING. There are other sub- ordinates besides Pages that may be needed, and the Committee ought to do the whole thing at once. The resolution was adopted. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I have aresolution to ofi'er. Resolution read as follows: Resolved, That the Auditor of the State be, and he is hereby, directed to furnish this Convention with a tabulated state- ment of all the Judges and Chancellors, Commonwealth Attorneys and J ailers who are drawing salaries Irom the Treasury, and how much each one is drawing per year. Also state what amount has been paid out of the Treasury during the five years past, ending September lst, 1890, to special Judges, and in what districts said special Judges served. 2. That the said Auditor be, and he is hereby, directed to correspond at once with the County Clerks of the State, and find out what amount is paid to the County Judges of each county as a salary, and also what amount is paid the County Attorney of each county as a salary. SEO. 3. That the Auditor report the omount paid the State on claims of wit- nesses in Commonwealth prosecutions within five years past, ending September 1,1890. Also the amount paid Jailers. within the same period for boarding pris- oners by the State; also the amount paid to Grand and Petit Jurors during the same period. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move to amend the resolution by inserting “and also the amount paid to the County Superintendents of Schools.” The PRESIDENT. The Delegate will please reduce his amendment to writing. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I will accept the amendment of the gentleman from Lin coln. ‘ Mr. AUXIER. Also the amount paid to Commonwealth Attorneys and Jailers- Mr. PETTIT. I will ask the gentle- man to insert in his resolution, “ and also the amount paid the Commonwealth At- torneys.” ORGANIZATION. 15 Thursday] Mr. BOLES. I would also like to find out the amounts paid to J ailers in cases of felonies and misdemeanors. The amendment of Mr. Boles was with, drawn by him. Mr. SPALDING. I have not put my amendment in writing, but it is this: that he ought also to ascertain and report to this Convention the aggregate amount of the indebtedness of each county, precinct, town and city in the Commonwealth. Mr. MOORE. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from the county of Carroll (Mr. Cox) until to- morrow or next day. _ The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is granted. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Hardin (Mr- Harvey H. Smith). The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is granted. Mr. BULLITT. I desire to presenta motion to be read for information. The motion was read, as follows: Resolved, That a Committee be ap. pointed to confer with the Printer to this Convention, and ascertain what arrange- ment can beamade for the daily publication of the proceedings of the Convention for the benefit of the citizens, and report the same to this Convention at an early day. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that resolution is not in order, except by unanimous con sent. Is there any objection to the present consideration of that reso- lution ‘? Mr. PETTIT. I would suggest to the gentleman that he add to that, “and oth- ers.” I would state that there is a news- paper published in this town that wants to do this printing; and if it can be done for less, and more conveniently than the Pub- lic Printer can do it, I do not see why the Committee can not consult with others. Mr. SPALDING. I have sent up a resolution, and desire it read for infor- mation. Mr. MOORE. I rise to a point of or- Bo LES—SPALDING— Mooae— PETTIT. fi [September 11. der. We have elected a Printer to this Convention, and it is his duty to print whatever is necessary for the Convention to have printed. The PRESIDENT. Those questions, the Chair decides, are for the Convention to determine. The first amendment to the resolution under consideration was read. The PRESIDENT. The question is first upon the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Union, which the Clerk will report. Amendment read as follows : That the Auditor of Public Accounts is requested to ascertain and report to this Convention at as early 9. day as practica- ble, the aggregate indebtedness of each county, city, town and tax district in this Commonwealth, for what purposes incurred, whether bonded or floating, and the rate of interest thereon, and also what means have been provided and assets available for payment of same., Mr. McDERMOTT. I wish to offer an amendment. The Delegate came forward and inserted his amendment, which was accepted in the resolution of the gentleman from Union. Mr. BOLES. I would like to ask for leave of absence for the gentleman from Muhlenberg. The PRESIDENT. tion, it isfgranted. Mr. STRAUS. I desire to offer a reso- lution, to be read at the proper time. Mr. MARTIN. I move that reso- lutions and amendments be printed for the information of the Convention, and laid over for discussion, and made a special order for half-past ten o’clock to-morrow morning. The resolution of the Delegate from Bullltt (Mr. Straus) was read, as follows: Resolved, That the Clerk of the Court of Appeals be, and he is hereby, requested to furnish to this Convention the number of appeals now pending in the said Court and in the Superior Court, also the date of the filing of each appeal and the date when submitted and the name of the Judge hav- Without objec- J’ 16 ORGANIZATION. ' these officers, Thursday,] PETTIT—MCDERMOTT —-MUIR. [September 1 1 . ing charge of the record in each appeal, and also the number of pending appeals which have not been distributed among the judges. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, said amendment will be considered as pending, and printed among the other res- olutions. The Clerk will read‘the first amend- ment. First amendment of Mr. Spalding read. The amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Read the second amendment. Second amendment of Mr. Petrie read and adopted. Mr. PETTIT. I know very well that the law has been changed applying to and that they are now salaried officers, and have been since the first of July, I believe; but this is simply in that line of information that is desired, I believe, by the House. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment just read. The amendment was adopted. The third amendment was read. The PRESIDENT, The question is upon the adoption of the amendment just read. The amendment, upon a vote, was de- clared adopted. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I move to insert “for the last five years,” instead of “the last year.” We can get the information for five years as easily as for one; and it may help us because expenses may be much heavier for some years than others. The amemdment, upon a vote, was de- clared adopted. Mr. MUIR. I wish to offer an amend- ment: Resolved, For the information of the Convention that we have embodied in that printed report the amount paid by the Commonwealth for witnesses in criminal cases. It would be well enough to do that. and we could have a view of the whole matter. ' The amendment, reduced to writing, was as follows: Resolved, That the Auditor report the amount paid by the State on claims of witnesses in Commonwealth prosecutions within the year past ending September 1, 1890; also the amount paid J ailers within the same period, for boarding prisoners, by the State. Also the amount paid to Grand and Petit Juries during the same period. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I would suggest five years instead of one, because we wil‘ want an average. One year may be very much more than another. Mr. TWYMAN. There ought also to be included the amount paid to Grand and Petit Juries. The last amendment, upon a vote, was adopted. Mr. CARROLL. I have a motion to ofier. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order is the resolution offered by the gen- tleman from Bullitt, which the Secretary will please report. Mr. HARRIS. I ofler an amendment. The amendment was as follows : Resolved, That said clerk be also directed to report how many of said suits are equity; how many are common law, and how many are criminal. The amendment, was adopted. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I move to amend by striking out the clause to report what Judges have the record. Mr. STRAUS. It is a universal com- plaint throughout the State, and has been for years, that cases are very frequently held up indefinitely. If you go to the Clerk of the Court of Appeals, he may tell you what Judge has the record, but in many instances he will not tell you because he does not know. It is important that the bar throughout the State and this Convention may know which one of the Judges has been doing his work and which upon a vote, ORGANIZATION. 17 Thursday,] PHELPS— BULLITT—WHITAKER. September 11 , one has not been doing it, so that we may know whether the Court, as a whole, has been doing its full work. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. For obvious reasons, it is best for the Judges to distrib- ute these cases according to their own volition. It has been the habit, as I understand it, for the Judges to come together, and by some means, to make a distribution of cases submitted. It is not the purpose or object of this Convention to elicit information for the bar, as I under- stand. It is the purpose to adopta Con- stitution, and we can not legislate here so as to reach any Judge in particular. Therefore, I do not see the wisdom of singling out the name of any Judge who has any particular case, and to make that part of the proceedings of this Convention. I think it is entirely proper to point out how many cases there are under submission‘ which are undecided. It is entirely proper to know what work has been done by the Court of Appeals, and how much work has accumulated on the hands of the Court of Appeals; but, to save my life, I can not see any wisdom in making public, and publishing to the world, how many cases are in the hands of this Judge or that Judge; and I think it decidedly improper, and hope that that part will be stricken out. Mr. BULLITT. The reason why that amendment should prevail is because we have no control over the Court as yet. One of the rules of the Court is, that the fact to whom or to which of the Judges a case has been submitted is sacred. Now, if we make that order, and the Clerk will not obey it, this Convention will simply stultify itself by making an order that it can not enforce. The Clerk’s duty is to obey his master-that is, the Court of Ap- peals; and the Clerk will obey the order of the Court of Appeals, as against any order that is made by this Convention. 1 think the amendment should prevail, for the reason we are seeking that which we can not obtain. Mr. WHITAKER. I don’t approve of the sentiment of the resolution in all its particulars—only so far as it tends to elicit information that this Convention desires or needs. For another purpose I do ap- prove of it, and that is, we desire to know, not whether Judges are doing their duty, or whether they are workng up to the full capacity of their labor, but how much judicial force is necessary to be put upon the bench to do the business required of them; and if we can ascertain how far they are behind, or how much more busi- ness they have to do than they can, then we can obtain the intormation that will enable us to furnish more judicial force to the State. Mr. STRA US. The Delegate from Pa- ducah and the Delegate from Louisville misunderstood that part of the resolution. It is not intended to criticise or censure any Judge of the Court of ,Appeals , but it would not be fair to the Court unless the resolution brought out the full state of the work. In other words, the report of the Clerk ought to show exactly the condition of the docket and of the work, and ought to show also the exact work performed by each one of the Judges. It is a mistake to say that there is any secrecy about which one of the Judges has the record. After the records have been distributed and submitted, the Clerk of the Court of Ap- peals is at liberty to tell which one of the Judges has the record. We can not tell whether the present judicial force of the State has performed all the work it can do, unless every question put in that resolution is answered. Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire to offer an amendment. Tne amendment is as follows: Amend by inserting, “ and the date when submitted,” after the word, “ filing.” Mr. STRAUS. I accept the amend- ment. Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to offer a resolution. 18 ORGANIZATION. Thursday,] HENDRICK— MACKOY—MCDERMOTT. [September 11 , The PRESIDENT. Is it an amend ment to the amendment, or tojthe original proposition ‘? Mr. HENDRICK. Mine is aresolution to refer this whole matter under considera- tion to the Committee on Rules. I will reduce it to writing. The PRESIDENT. That motion need not be made in writing. Mr. HENDRICK. I will state it dif- ferently I move that the whole matter under consideration, including the original resolution and each amendment, be re- ferred to the Committee on Court of Appeals when appointed. If you will pardon, Mr. Chairman, it occurs to me that there are a great many things called for in these resolutions and these amend- ments that it would require at least four months to get. It seems to me we are not sitting here as a Grand Jury, but as a Constitutional Convention. While I do not object, and do not mean to be under— stood as objecting to the reasonable wishes of any Delegate upon this floor, it does seem to me that a number of matters are called for that are not necessary, and which can not be obtained in a reasonable time; and I therefore move to refer it to a Committee appointed by this House in its wisdom, or by the Chair, who shall he em- powered in its discretion by this House to ‘call for all matters that will aid at in the discharge of its duties. I will name the Committee on the Court of Appeals when appointed. The resolution was, upon a vote, de- clared adopted. Mr. MACKOY. offer. The PRESIDENT. There is another resolution that is pending that the Secre- I have a resolution to Atary will please report, and then your resolution. The SECRETARY. The gentleman from county of Henry offered the follow- ing resolution : Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed to furnish each member with two daily or weekly papers, to be selected by them. Mr. McDERMOTT. I will yield the floor to any gentleman who wishes to speak against that. I do not wish to take up the time of the House unnecessarily and if any member of the House desires the floor, I will yield it to him , but if not, I have a word to say on the subject. Mr. JEP. C. JONSON. I believe in these Delegates being informed properly. I want them to have the benefit of any- thing that will conduce in any sense to the proper discharge of their duty. But I fail to see what is contained in the daily publication, an average of which we have among us every day, that can give us any sort of enlightenment, anv sort of knowl- edge that will enable us to‘ discharge our duties. For one, I am opposed to the res- olution. As a matter of expense it is a matter of prime importance. It has been urged against all the members of the Leg- islature for years past that this was a useless expense. It has been criticised by all the people of the State, and I think it ought to be voted down. Mr. LASSING. I am opposed to the resolution offered to furnish two or any number of papers to the Delegates to this Convention. I believe that every Delegate who wants to read the newspapers should buy them and pay for them as his con- stituents at home do. This has been a crying evil in the State of Kentucky and other States for maay years. It is a fact that reformation is demanded by the peo- ple in our Legislature, and I think that we, assembled here as the Delegates of the people to frame a new organic law, should set ‘an example to future Legislatures in the line of ecomomy and'reform. I hope the resolution will not prevail. The resolution, upon vote, was rejected. The SECRETARY. The Delegate ‘from the city of Covington oflers the fol- lowing resolution: Resolved, That the Clerks of the several Circuit, Common Pleas, Chancery, Law ORGANIZATION. 19 Thursday,] and Equity, and Criminal Courts in this tate, be requested to furnish to this Con- vention the number of cases pending and undisposed of in the said several courts at the present time, the number of cases brought in each of said courts per year, and the number finally disposed of in reach of said Courts per year, for the said period of five years last past. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I move that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts, when organized. The motion, upon a vote, was carried. Mr. BURNAM. I have a resolution which I beg to offer. The resolution was read by the Secretary, and 1s as follows: It is hereby resolved as the sense of this Convrntion, as follows: That the word “ white ” in the first-line of the eighth section of the second article of the present Constitut'on, entitled “Con- cerning the Legislative Departmeni; ” that the vho‘e of article tenth, called “ Con- cerning Slaves,” and that the third section of the thirteenth article, entitled “ Bill of Rights," shall be stricken out, and compose no part of the Constitution proposed to be submitted by this body to the people for ratificatiuo said provisions being in con- flict with the Crnstitution of the United States, the supreme law of the land. Mr. BURNAM. Large bodies move slowly, and we have properly been con- cerning ourselves thus far with the organ- ization of the House, and getting ready for business. It seems to me, however, that it is time now to consider other mat- ters, and I think, if there is any resolution that ought to pass this House unanimously, and without debate, it is the resolution which I have the honor to introduce. In order that the House may be familiar wlth the purposes of this resolution, I will read the clause to which it relates. In section eight of the second article of the Con- stitution, the words are as follows: Every free white male citizen of the age of twenty-one years, who has resided in the State two years, or in the county, town or city in which he offers to vote, one year next preceding the election shall - as be a voter. * '3 PHELPS—~— BURNAM. [September 11 . The tenth article reads as follows: The General Assembly shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of their owners, or without paying their owners previous to such emancipatirn, a, lull equivalent in money for the slaves so emancipated; and providing for tteir re- moval from the State. They shall have no power to prevent immigrants to this State from bringing with them such persons as are deemed slaves by the laws of any of the United States, so long as any person of the same age or description shall be continued in slavery by the laws of this Sqate, etc. The second section of the same article is as follows: The General Assembly shall pass laws providing that any free negro or mulatto hereafter immigrating to, or being eman- cipated in, and refusing to leave this State or having left, shall return and settle within this State shall be deemed guilty of felony, and punished by confinement in the Peni- tentiary thereof. The third section reads: In the prosecution of slaves for felony, no inquest by a Grand Jury shall be neces- sary; but the proceedings in such prose- cutions shall be regulated by law, except that the General Assembly shall have no power to deprive them of the privile go of an impartial trial by a petit jury. Now, the third section of the thirteenth article of the present Constitution, entitled the “Bill of Rights,” reads as follows: The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction; and the right of the owner of a slave to such a slave and its increase is the same, and as inviolable as the right of the owner of any property whatever. Now, sir, I suppose that we have been sent here to legislate for freemen, and not for slaves. The Constitution of the United States is in entire conflict with all these provisions to which I have referred in the resolution; and it is a principle that will be acknowledged, no doubt, not only by every lawyer, but by every sensible man, that where any provision of the State Con-' stitution or its laws is in conflict with that of the General Government, the latter, 20 ORGANIZATION. Th ursday.] FIELD—MCHENRY—BURNAM. [September 11 . prevails and the former is invalid. I be- lieve we could do no wiser or better thing than at once, by unanimous consent. to strike out these provisions in our present Constitution. If it be the wish of this House that this resolution should be laid over, unacted upon, until the Committee on the Bill of Rights, or on any other por- tion of the Constitution which we may be called upon to change or amend, shall be appointed, I shall not object to that. Mr. FIELD. I move that the resolu- tion be referred to the Committee on Revision of the Constitution, when ap- pointed. Mr. McHENRY. I think it is better, sir, that it be printed and laid upon the table, and then we can refer it to the proper Committee at the proper time. I think we are all for that resolution, when we come to understand it; and if the mo- tion is in order, I move the printing of the resolution, and that it be laid upon the table. At any time it can be referred to the proper Committee. The motion of Mr. McHenry, upon a vote, was carried. Mr. BURN AM. My attention has been called by the gentleman from Union to the fact that in the Bill of Rights there is a provision guaranteeing rights of proper- ty in slaves. That, also, should be strick- en out. Mr. McHEN RY. I would suggest that it just be printed and go in the orders of the day. I am inclined to vote for it as it is. If it goes into the orders of the day under my motion, it does not require a two- thirds vote to take it up. The PRESIDENT. It is moved and seconded that the resolution be printed and be allowed to go into the orders of the day. Mr. WASHINGTON. I was just about to move an amendment. I understand the written resolution to be that the word “ white” be stricken out from section eight, article two of the Constitution. Be- fore that word occurs the word“ free.” I am unable to see what function that word per- forms, and I move to amend by striking out the word “free.” The presumption is we are all free. Mr. BU RNAM. A man in the peniten- tiary of Kentucky is not free for the time being. (Laughten) The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, the amendment of the gentleman from Campbell will take the same di's- position as the original proposition, as amended. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I have a resolu- tion which I ask to be read and referred to the Committee on Rules. The resolution was read, as follows: Resolved, That the privileges of the floor of this Convention be, and they are, given to all accredited representatives of the press, and that the Secretary shall, at all reasonable times, allow them access to the Journal, papers and proceedings of this Convention. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such reference will be made. Mr. SPALDING. I object to that. I think the Speaker ought to have charge of that. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to introduce a resolution. The PRESIDENT. The resolution of- fered by the Delegate from Wolfe will now be read. The resolution was read. as follows: Resolved, That the Auditor of Public Accounts be, and he is hereby, directed to draw his warrant on the Treasurer in fa- vor of John P. Cassilly, J. H. Sublett and P. N. Myers in the sum of $20.00 each, for two days’ services as Stenographers during the temporary organization of the Con- vention. Mr. PHELPS. I beg leave to say one word in reference to that resolution; it is not mine. This Convention, at the time we first met, passed a resolution asking these gentlemen to act as Stenographers during the temporary organization, and after they have acted at our request, it ORGAN IZATION. 21 Thursday,] MACKOY—CLARDY—MCHENRY. seems to me that we cannot very well refuse to pay them. The resoulution, upon a vote being taken, was declared adopted. The resolution of Mr. Clardy read, as follows: Resolved, That the Printer of this Con- vention be, and he is hereby, directed to print 3,000f copies of the proceedings of this Convention daily, and furnish to each member five copies of same, and reserve the others for general distribution after the labors of this Convention shall have been completed. Mr. Lassing moved to amend by insert- ing “ 1,500 ” instead of “3,006.” Mr. MACKOY. I move that the reso- lution be referred to the Committee on Printing. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to give the reason why this resolution was offered. It will be necessary, or at least useful, for the people to know what this Convention has done, and to have it in a permanent form when its labor shall have been finished. If we print the proceedings as we go along, a certain number of copies we would like to send to our_constituents in the difi‘erent counties that we represent. Five would be furnished to each member for this purpose. The rest would be reserved and kept on hand, and when the Convention is through with its work these would be bound and constitute a volume containing the proceedings of this Convention for general distribution in the State. This is the object I had in view in presenting this resolution. Mr. McHENRY. The resolution was passed which was offered by the gentleman from McCracken, appointing a Committee of three to confer with the Public Printer on this subject, with a view of making a report; and I think it is proper to refer the resolution of the Delagate from Chris- tian to this Special Committee that is to confer with the Public Printer, and see upon what terms the publication can be made, and let them make a deliberate re- port upon that subject, so that the House can act advisedly, and see how many copies we will have, and how many it will be proper to bind and distribute daily among the people. Mr. CLARDY. I have no objection to that reference. Mr. MoHENRY. I move, then, that it be referred to the Committee just indi- cated by the resolution adopted and offered by the gentleman from McCracken. Mr. LASSING. If desire to offer an amendment; if not in order, then to be read for information. The PRESIDENT. The motion takes precedence over the amendment, but by unanimous consent it can accompany the resolution. The resolution of Mr. McHenry was adopted. Mr. MoHENRY. I move that we ad- journ until ten o’clock, standard, time to- morrow. The motion, upon being put, was de- clared carried, and the Convention there- upon adjourned. September,,11 . @mweniion guard. — K E N T U C K Y —- CCDNSTITUTICDNAL CONVENTIQN- Vol. 1.] FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 12, 1890. Friday,] WASHINGTON—ALLEN—MOORE. [No. 5 [September 12 . The Convention met at 10 o’clock A. M. The SECRETARY. The President in- formed me yesterday evening that, per- haps, he would not be here at the opening hour, and desired Mr. Washington, of Campbell county, to preside in his place until his return. It is now the hour for opening the Convention. Mr. WASHINGTON, of Campbell county, came forward and called the Convention to order. The PRESIDENT pro tem. If there is any minister present, he is invited to offer prayer. Rev. Mr. Penick: Most Gracious God, we humbly beseech Thee, as for the people of the m monwealth of Kentucky in general, so especially for their representatives in Con- vention assembled, that Thou wouldst be pleased to direct and prosper all their endeavors as will best conduce to the ad- vancement of Thy glory, the good of Thy church, the safety, honor and welfare of Thy people; that all things may be so ordered and settled by their endeavors upon the best and surest foundation, that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and righteousness, may be estab- lished among us for all generations, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Chairman, I think the resolution read as having been offered by me was amended so as to call for the information asked for during the last five years. I remember I accepted such an amendment. The PRESIDENT pro tem. That is the recollection of the Chair, and without objection, the Secretary 'will so correct the Journal. Which was done, and so appears in the Journal; and as corrected, the Journal was approved. The PRESIDENT pro tem. then pro- ceeded with the order of business. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I have a resolue tion. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I call for the regu- lar.order of business. Petitions are first, I believe. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The reso- lution is out of order at present. The business in order under the rules under which we are proceeding are petitions; are there any petitions? Mr. BURNAM. I have a resolution and I suppose it will be acted upon at once. I was instructed by the Committee on the contested election case of McChord versus Lewis. - _ The PRESIDENT pro tem. It is not in order at the present time. Mr. KNOTT. It is entirely in order. The motion comes from a Standing Com- mittee, and is one perfectly proper now. The PRESIDENT pro tem. It is not in order under the rules of the Convention of 1849 under which we are acting. Mr. BURNAM. I was instructed by the Committee on the contested election case of McChord versus Lewis to ask that ' a subpoena duces tecum be issued by the President of this body, addressed to the Sergeant-at-Arms, directing him to have before the'Committee, on or before half-past 2 ORGANIZATION. Friday,] ALLEN-MCHENRY—BUCKNER. [September 12 . three o’clock on Tuesday next, the Clerk of the County Court of Washington county, directing him to bring with him the poll- books of the last election, showing the votes that were cast for the candidates for Delegate to this Convention. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The sub- poena may issue. Resolutions are now in order. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I offer this resolu- tion'. Mr. McHENR I. I was a little inat- tentive, sir. Have you passed the calling of Committees? The PRESIDENT pro tem. We have Mr. MeHENRY. I would like to go i back to that, with the permission of the gentleman who offered the resolution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. With the consent of the Delegates, it can be done. Mr, C. T. ALLEN. I withdraw my resolution. - ‘ Mr. MCHENRY. The Committee on Rules, to whom was referred various reso- lutions in regard to the appointment of Pages for this House, and to whom was also referred the resolution offered by the Delegate from Hart, that that Committee report what oflicers are necessary, have had that subject under consideration, and have directed me to make a report. Be- fore the report is read, I want to say, on behalf of the Committee, we were quite unanimous in the conclusions we came to. They were to this effect: The feeling of the House on some of those resolutions was, that we appoint some ten or a dozen Pages; but the Committees felt that half that number was quite suflicient They are in one another’s way, running over one another, and we are running over them, and some of them are big enough to run over some of us. In addition to that, a good-many gentlemen who were candi- dates for Delegates to this Convention- I was one of them—criticised the action of the Legislature in appointing so many Pages, and being extravagant in that re- gard; and we think we ought to set an example, and come up to what we preached in the last canvass. I will ask to have the report read, which we offer as a substitute: At the same for all of those resolutions. time, we have not finished all of our work. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Does the gentleman intend that as a complete state-- ment of the contents of the Committee’s report‘? The rule seems imperatively to- require a verbal statement of a Commit-v tee’s report, - Mr. McHEN RY. Yes; that is a verbal‘ report of what we have done. The Committee’s report was read, as fol-7 lows: The Committee on Rules report as fol- lows: ]. That in addition to the Page already authorized to be appointed by the Presi- dent of the Convention, there be four additional Pages appointed by the Sergeant-- at-Arms—one from each Appellate Court District—and to be between the ages of ten and seventeen years; the compensa tion to be two dollars per day. 2. That the Sergeant-at-Arms be author- ized to appoint a Cloak-room Keeper, whose compensation shall be two dollars per day. 3. That the Librarian’s Porter be ap- pointed Janitor of this Convention, whose- duty it shall be to keep the hall cleaned, lighted and heated, and to furnish water. For his services he shall receive two dol- lars per day. The PRESIDENT pro tem. What will you do with the report? Mr. BUCKNER. I move its adoption. A vote being taken, the Committee’s report was declared adopted. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Is there any thing further from Committees? Mr. DEHAVEN. I desire to offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The reso- lution is out of order. The Chair has not called for motions or resolutions. Are there any further reports from Commit- tees; if not, motions and resolutions are now in order. ORGANIZATION. 3 Fr'.day,] DEHAVEN—PH ELPS-—-MOORE. [September 12. Mr. DEH AVE N. I offer my resolution, then, sir. , Mr. BURNAM. I wish to say that I have reduced to writing my report from the Committee on the contested election case of McChord versus Lewis, which I will present. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. offer a resolution. Mr L. T. MOORE. resolution. The PRESIDENT pro ism. The Sec- retary will read the first resolution. Resolution of Mr. C. T. Allen read, as follows: Resolved, That the Librarian is author- ized to furnish, at cost price, stationery to the members of this Convention from the supply that is now, or that may be here- after, on hand. I desire to I desire to ofl'er a Mr. MOORE. The Legislature, in its act calling us together, has provided the means for getting stationery, and fixed the sum at $25. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. That is true. But it we are to go on the streets of Frankfort to buy our stationery, it will cost us $40. I do not see how, the State can be injured to allow her officers to furnish our station- ery to usat the same rate that it furnishes stationery to the State oificers. Mr. MOORE. Do you propose that we pay the Li brarian‘? , Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Yes; out of our own funds. Mr. BRON STON. 1 do not know that the construction of that is understood by all the members. It occurs to me the proper construction of the act is that $25 is appropriated for the supply of stationery. I see that some of the Delegates are draw- ing the $25 to be used in any way that they please. If this resolution means that they are simply to use $25 in the purchase of stationery, I shall support it; but if it means that the Delegates are to draw $25, and then have the Librarian furnish it, I shall oppose it. ' Mr. C. T. ALLEN. My resolution is that we draw the $25 and purchase from the Librarian at cost. Mr. BRONSTON. If the Delegates are to use the $25 for the purpose of stationery, it occurs to me they can buy it from the Librarian, if they see proprr, or from any- body else, if they see proper. The PRESIDE NT pro tem. The Chair thinks the Delegates can purchase for themselves, or through somebody else who can get it cheaper. Mr. MOORE. I would like to submit this question: whether, under a resolution of this body, the Librarian will have any right to sell paper furnished her by the act of the Legislature.’ The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair does not understand that to be the scope of the reso‘ution. It means that we shall obtain it at cost price’; Mr. CL ARDY. I call for the reading of the resolution. Resolution read. Mr. CLARDY. It. seems to me that is a very plain proposition. It auth )rizes her to furnish any member stationery out out of this 3525 allowed to each member. He can spend five dollars or ten dollars or any other part of it, and take the balance of it home or buy presents for his family. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that the resolution be laid on the table. the members are entitled $25, that is sufficient. And on that I call for the yeas and nays. The result was announced, as follows: Yeas—42. Askew, J. F. J‘acobs, R. P. Auxier, A. J. Jonson, Jep. C. Ayres, W. W. Johnston, P. P. Beckham, J. C. Kennedy, Hanson Berkele, Wm. Lewis, J. W. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J . Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S; B. Martin, W. H. McDermott, E. J. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. I think if 4 ' ORGANIZATION. Friday,] Pettit, Thos. S. Pugh, Sam’l J. Ramsey, W. R. Smith, H. H. Spalding, I. A. Trusdell, George , Twyman, I. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Goebel, William Hanks,‘ Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Hogg, S. P. Holloway, J. W. West, J. F. Hopkins, F. A. Young, B. H. N ays—45. Allen, C. T. Graham, Samuel Allen, M. K. Harris, Geo. C. Amos, D. C. Hines, J. S. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, Thomas H. Bennett, B. F. Kirwan, E. E. Boles, S. H. Knott, J. Proctor Bourland, H. R. Lewis, W. W. Brown, J. S. McElroy, W. J. Buchanan, Nathan McHenry, H. D. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, Will. Clardy, John D. Miller, W. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Petrie, H. G. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Quicksall, J. E. Rodes, Robert DeHaven, S. E. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam. E. Smith, W. Scott Farmer, H. H. Swango, G. B. Forrester, J. G. Whitaker, Emery Forgy, J. M. Williams, L. P. V. Funk, J. T. Wood, J. M. Glenn, Dudley A. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The ques- tion recurs on the original resolution. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that it be referred to the Committee on Rules. The motion was seconded, and upon be- ing put to the House, was declared lost. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer an amendment to that resolution. Mr. WEST. I desire to offer an amend- ment. Mr. W. H. MILLER. While Mr. Bronston is reducing his motion to writ- ing, I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Pulaski, Mr. John S. May, indefinitely. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, the leave of absence is granted. Mr. GLENN. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from the Second District of Covington, and also for the BaoNsroN—MILEa-GLENN. [September 12 . Delegate from Boone county. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, the leave of absence is granted. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington was read, as follows : That said resolution be amended as fol- lows: That no stationery be furnished by said Librarian except upon payment for same on delivery by the Delegate so ob- taining it. Mr. MCHENRY. That is the meaning of the original resolution as I understand. The Legislature, when it passed the law calling this Convention, provided that we should receive the same compensation that members of the Lower House received, and, in addition to that, provided that we should _receive $25 each to pay for our stationery. Now, that first resolution im- plies and says—there can be other reason- able construction to it—that we have the privilege of going to the Librarian and purchasing out of that $25 or out of our own pocket. We have to furnish ourselves with stationery, and if 31325 will not do it, we must pay out of our own pocket any additional; and if it more than pays for the stationery, then we can put the balance of that $25 in our pockets. As I under- stand, the Librarian makes contracts for the stationery to be furnished oflicers around the Capitol. She may be able to get it upon better terms, and probably gets better, than we can. This resolution sim- ply authorizes us to go to the Librarian and buy our stationery at the figure that it cost the State of Kentucky; otherwise she can not sell it to us now. Mr. MOORE. Why can not we buy it without any resolution at this time? Mr. MCHENRY. I do not know that she is authorized to sell it. Mr. MOORE. Have we any legislative power to authorize her to sell it? Mr. McHENRY. I think she will sell it if we pass this resolution; otherwise we will have to run over town here for our own stationery, and probably can not get such as we want. ORGANIZATION. 5 Friday,] YOUNGé—PETTIT—SPALDIN(Bl—WHITAKER. ‘ Mr. PETTIT. I would like to ask the distinguished gentleman from Ohio what additional compensation, at the close of the session, we will be compelled to pay the Li- brarian for attending to our wants here. Mr. SPALDING. I want to say, in the line of argument of the gentleman from Daveiss, that this will impose a con- siderable burden upon the Librarian, and she is already overworked; and if she is to make out an account and file away vouch- ers every time she sends articles up here, it will add very materially to her labors. The PRESIDENT pro tem., recogniz- ing Mr. Young as a Delegate from the Fifth District of Louisville, Mr. YOUNG. No, from the Fourth District, the “ swell ” District. (Laughter). It seems to me that this is a very little matter. We have been allowed our money by the State of Kentucky to buy station- cry, and now we want to traffic with the State because she buys stationery cheaper. It does not seem to me that it is in keep- ing with our position to come in and want to try to save one or two dollars by dealing with the State, because the State buys cheaper, and is a wholesale dealer. If we want stationery, the proper thing to do is to go into the open market, and for the one or two dollars that might be saved I do not think we should use the stores of the State for this purpose. The straightforward way, I think, is to go into the open market and purchase our station- ery, and not traffic with the State to save a dollar or two. Mr WHITAKER. What objection is there to the individual members buying this stationery wherever he please? Mr. YOUNG. I do not want to put his burden on the Librarian, nor do I want to put myself in a position, when, having been allowed a certain sum for stationery from the State, to save a dollar or two out of it by buying from the State. Mr. AUXIER. If we were a legislative body, we might authorize the Librarian to sell stationery, if it is furnished by the State. If it is not furnished by the State, and she buys that stationery herself, she is authorized to sell it to the Delegates with- out any resolution. If she is not author- ized to sell it, no act of this body can empower her to sell that stationery. And I concur with the gentleman from Louis- ville, that when we have an appropriation made for the purpose of buying our'sta- tionery, we ought to take our money and go where we please and buy it, and not save adollar at the cost of the State. We don't want to deal with the State nor with the State Librarian. There is another ob- jection to it. It might open up a door for fraud; and this body has no right to do it, and ought not to do it, and I think we ought to carry that resolution. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. This matter is al- ready covered by an adequate provision, and it seems to me that these resolutions are altogether unnecessary. I therefore move that the consideration of the whole subject be postponed indefinitely. Mr. DEHAVEN. I second the motion of the gentleman from Washington. I think this is a very grave matter, and there seems to be a diversity of opinion upon this ' question; and I think the Delegates on this floor ought to have an opportunity of looking into such a vital question as this. (Laughton) And I think that the motion made by the gentleman from Washington is eminently in order; because, in my humble judgment, from the discussions that we have had upon this subject this morning, I do not think that the Constitu- vtion we propose to make will be worth a cent unless this question is settled. (Laugh- ter.) I therefore second his motion to postpone indefinitely. The motion was adopted. Mr. WEST. I have a resolution to offer. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Will the gentleman kindly withhold resolutions for a moment? There are so many that it breeds confusion. [September 12 . ' 6 ORGANIZATION. Frid ay,] RAMSEY—SACHS—FARMER. [September 12 , Resolution of the vDelegate from Estill read: Resolved, That this Convention will now assign seats to the members thereof by lot, in the following manner, viz: The Secretary of this Convention shall write the name of each Delegate upon a separate piece of paper, every such piece being as nearly alike as may be, and place the same in a box on his table. He shall then prepare similar slips of paper, omit- ting the r-ames, and placing thereon the number of each seat in this hall, and the same shall be placed in a separate box, and then after having shaken both boxes well he shall proceed to draw from same as follows, to wit: The President shall first draw a slip of paper from the box containing the names of Delegates, and the Secretary shall im- mediately draw from the other box con- taining the numbers a slip of paper there- from, and the number thus drawn shall be the number of the seat which shall be assigned to the Delegate whose name was drawn, and said drawing shall proceed in similar manner until all the Delegates are assigned to seats. Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to offer a sub- stitute. The substitute was read, as follows: Resolved, That this Convention now proceed to assign seats to its members by lot, in the following manner: The Secretary shall place the name of each member under sixty years of age upon a separate strip of paper, as nearly alike as possible, and place all of said slips in a box and draw them out one at a time, shaking the box before each drawing, and each member shall, as his name is drawn, select his seat and have right to occupy the same during the Con- vention. Before the drawing, all members sixty years of ago and over shall have the right to select choice seats. Mr. SACHS. I ofler a substitute. The substitute was read, as follows: Moved, That members of this Conven- vention continue to occupy the seats now occupied by them, respectively. Mr. RAMSEY. In offering the substi- tute which was read prior to the last substitute offered, I did not do so in any complaining spirit. I am well aware of the fact that a number of gentlemen have been lucky enough to secure desirab'e seats upon the floor of this Convention, and I 4 am not so selfish as to desire to disturb those gentlemen in the fortunate locations they have been able to secure. There are gentlemen, perhaps, who prefer to “bear the ills they now have, rather than to fly to others they know not of.” Still, there are other gentlemen who are unfortu- nately situated in this hall, who would like to have a change. I ofler this substitute in a spirit of fairness, and in a spirit of justice and of right. But what I have seen of this Convention so far, I believe that spirit has prevailed. I do not believe, Mr. President, that it is fair, just or right that members of this Convention should select their seats, as has-been done, some of them, at least, one month before the elec- tion held in August. It seems to me that that is obtaining an unfair advantage over these gentlemen who came in late, and had to take back seats; and it is certainly a departure from that scriptural injunction, “In honor we should prefer one another.” I can not see any objection to the substi- tute. It seems to me to be perfectly fair. It puts us all upon an equal footing, and carries out that doctrine which so many of us have preached upon the stump: “ Equal rights to all, and exclusive privi- leges to none.” I hope the substitute will be adopted. Mr. FARMER. I am opposed to long speeches, and bringing up matters worth nothing. I should think we ought to drop this whole subject. I am an old man, but have never been in a legislative body. Hence, I selected no seat, and there was one left for me over in the corner—the worst seat in the Convention. (Laughter) I would “rather bear the ills I have than fly to others I know not of.” I can get a seat somewhere. It is my opinion that we should lay it upon the table. (Laughten) Mr. PETTIT. I move you that it be ORGANIZATION. '7 ‘occupy seat No.1 upon this floor. Friday] referred to the General Committee on Rules. They are well provided, I believe, with good seats. Mr. FARMER. I move that the whole thing be laid on the table. Mr. RAMSEY. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. MILLER. I second the call. Mr. SPALDING. Allow me to call at- tention to the fact that the Delegate moves that we lay all the motions on the table. Mr. WV. H. MILLER. I rise toa point of order. The rule prescribes that no amendment shall be separated from the main amendment by a motion to lay it on the table. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The mo- tion was to lay the whole matter on the ‘table. The yeas and nays were then called, and in explanation of his vote, Mr. Blackburn said: I shall vote against laying these mo‘ tions on the table for this reason. If these seats had been selected by the Delegates‘ chosen by the people to this Convention, I would not have objected; but I am in- formed that they were selected by persons without authority from the Delegates. To rebuke that interference, if for nothing ‘else, [shall vote against it, and now pledge myself, no matter what seat I shall draw, ‘to yield it to any gentleman who may desire it. Mr. BRONSTON. In explanation of the vote I am about to cast, because I am usually quite selfish, I have the honor ,to The manner in which I got it makes me quite attached toit. About two weeks before the Convention assembled I received a polite note from the Librarian,informin g ‘me that the seat had been assigned to the Hon. John Dishman, upon his nomination by the Democratic party; but inasmuch as he had been defeated on the final election, that that seat was vacant, and she assigned it to :me because I was a friend of some friend FABMER—RAMSEY—MILLER—SPALDING. ‘ DeHaven, S. E. [September 12 . who was a friend of somebody else. I like this seat, and would like to stay. It suits me very well; but, Mr. ‘Chairman, I believe it is nothing but fair and proper that each Delegate shall be put in the same box, and every man shall have the right to draw for his seat and take his chances. Therefore I vote nay. (Applause) Mr. JEP. C. JONSON. Having been assigned a seat by the selection of a friend, and being perfectly satisfied with it and my neighborhood, nevertheless, I am con- strained, in deference to my ideas of fair- ness, to vote nay. ' ~ The result of the vote was as follows: Ayes—43. Allen, C. T. Hines, Thomas H. Alien, ZYL'K. Holloway, J. W. Amos, D. C. Jacobs, R. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Kirwan, E. E. Ayres, W. W. Lewis, W. W. Berkele, Wm. McDermott, E. J. Birkhead, B. T. Blackwell, Joseph McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Brown, J. S. Montgomery, J. F. Brummal, J. M. Muir, J. W. Carroll, John D. Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. Petrie, H. G. Coke, J. Guthrie Sachs, Morris A. Durbin, Charles Smith, H. H. Edrington, W. J. Spalding, I. A. Elmore, T J. Trusdell, George English, Sam. E. Twyman, I. W. Farmer, H. H. Whitaker, Emery Forrester, J. G. Williams, L. P. V. Funk. J. T. Young, B. H. Goebel, William N aye—41. Askew, J. F. Hopkins, F. A. Auxier, A. J. Jonson, J ep. C. Beckham, J. C. Johnston, P. P. Bennett, B. F. Kennedy, Hanson Blackburn, James Lewis, J. W. Brents, J. A, Martin, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Miller, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Buckner, S. B. Moore, Laban T. Bullitt, W. G. Pettit, Thos. S. Burnam, Curtis F. Phelps, John L. Chambers, G. D. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. 8 ORGANIZATION. 8 [September 12 . Rodes, Robert Glenn, Dudley A. Smith, W. Scott Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. ' Swango, G. B. Hendrick, W. J. West, J. F. Hines, J. S. Wood, J. M. Hogg, S. P. The motion was sustained. Mr. AUXIER. I have a motion to offer. Mr. HOPKINS. I sent the second res- olution to the Secretary’s desk, which, by some oversight, has not been called up. I wouldlike to have the same called up and read. The PRESIDENT pro lem. The res- olution will be called up in its order. The resolution of the gentleman from Floyd (Mr. Hopkins) was read, as fol~ lows: Resolved, That the Reporter of this Convention be, and he is, directed to copy his report of the entire proceed- ings hereof upon a Type-writer, and that the same be free and open at all times for the inspection of any member hereof; also, for the public press. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I move that it be referred to the Committee on Printing. The motion was put to the House, and carried. Mr. DEHAVEN. I ofl‘er a resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: _ ' Resolved, That at 12 o’clock on the day next after announcement of the Standing Committees, the Secretary of the Conven- vention be directed to read the present Constitution, and where no amendment is proposed to any section, it shall be in- lormally passed over; and where any Dele- gate may desire to amend any section thereof, he shall offer his proposed amend- ment or amendments in writing, which shall be printed and referred by the Presi- dent of the Convention to the appropriate Committee without debate. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that it be referred to the Committee on Rules. The motion being put, was carried. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. I desire to ofier a ‘resolution. l The resolution was read, as follows: 'Friday,] AUXIER-Horxms—McDERMo'rT—DEHAvEN. Doris, W. F. Quicksall, J. E. Forgy, J. M. Ramsey, W. R. WHEREAS, Experience has proven that the present Constitution of Kentucky is inadequate to the needs of the State; there- fore, Resolved, That it is not the intention of ‘ this Convention to readopt the same with- out amendment or revision thereof. Mr. FORRESTER. I desire to ofier a substitute for that motion. The substltute was read, as follows: Resolved, That a Committee of five be appointed by the President to prepare and report their views as to whether this Convention should readopt the present Constitution, change or amend it. Mr. SPALDING. I move that both of those resolutiohs be laid on the table. The motion being put, was declared carried. Mr. HARVEY H. SMITH. I have a. resolution to offer. The resolution was read, as follows : Resolved, That no original resolution’ offered to the Convention proposing any amendments to the Convention shall be discussed on its merits till it shall have been referred to the appropriate Com- mittee. Mr. BRONSTON. I understood that he asked not its adoption, but that it be referred to the Committee on Rules. Mr. HENDRICK. I think the gentle- man from Lexington is in error. I call for the reading of the resolution. Mr. Smith’s resolution was reported. Mr. EDRINGTON. I desire to ofier a resolution. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that the res- olution just reported he referred'to the Committee on Rules. That is a very im- portant rule. Mr. KENNEDY. I have a substitute to offer. The substitute was read, as follows: Resolved, That no resoolution proposing any change or amendment in the Consti- tution shall be in order until after the regular Standing Committees shall have been appointed; nor shall any discussion on the merits of such resolution be in ORGANIZATION. 9 Friday,] order until after the same shall have been referred to its appropriate Committee. Mr. BRONSTON. I move to refer the substitute and the original resolution to the Committee on Rules. The motion was put and carried. Mr. RODES. I have some resolutions in my hand that I will ask to,be printed, and then referred to the appropriate Com- mittee. - The PRESIDENT pro lem. We will consider them in their order. The Secre- tary will read Resolution N o. 7. Mr. MOORE. With the permission of the House, I will withdraw my resolution. Mr. HENDRICK. I ofier a resolution. The resolution was read, as follows: Resolved, That the rule as to privileges of the floor be amended by adding the following: And all persons who by name have received, from Congress or the Legis- lature of any State, thanks for distin- guished public service. Mr. HENDRICK. I desire that to be referred to the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, it is so ordered. I Mr. RODES. I offer the following res- olution: The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention, that sections 35 and 36 of the present Constitution, article 2, should be retained substantially in its revision, so far as limiting and restricting the Legislature in the creation of debts against the State; and that the principle involved in said sections should be extended and applied in a similar manner, as to the creation of in- debtedness by counties, cities or towns, or other political or corporate subdivisions of either. Resolved, That section 33, article 2, of the present Constitution, should be preserved ; but should be enlarged, soas to prohibit the State from becoming a subscriber to, or shareholder in, any company or corpo- ration, or a ' joint owner with any person, company or corporation, except as to such ownership as may accrue to the State by operation or provision of law; nor shall the Legislature create any debt, except by Baonsron—Rones—Hnnnnrox—Moons. [September 12, law, which shall be irrepealable until the indebtedness therein provided for shall have been fully paid or discharged. Resolved, That the Legislature should have no power to pass any law authorizing the State or any county, city or town, or ' any subdivision of either, to contract any debt or obligation in the construction of any railroad, or any similar enterprise, nor give or loan the credit of either to or in aid of the construction of the same, Resolved, That no act of the Legislature shall authorize the investment of trust.- fund by executor, administrator, guardian or trustee, in the bonds or stock of a pri- vate corporation. Resolved, That article 13, section 20 should be enlarged by adding thereto the words. “for making any irrevocable grant or special privilege, franchise, or immu- nities.” Resolved, That taxes be levied and collect- ed by general laws, andfor public purposes only. They, shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territori- al limits of the authority levying the tax. Resolved, That the Legislature shall make no appropriation for charitable, in- dustrial, educational or benevolent purposes, to any person, corporation or community, not under the absolute control of the State; nor to any denominational or sectarian institution or association, in the aid or for the support of same. Mr. RODES. I ask that the resolutions be printed, and be referred to the Com- mittee on Rules. Under the rules of the- old Convention, they would go to various Committees. I therefore ask that resolu- tions 1, 2, 4 and 7 be referred to the Com- mtttee on the Legislative Department; resolution No. 5, to the Committee on the Bill of Rights; resolution No. 6, to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. MOORE. I have a substitute for the fourth section, which I will offer. The substitute was then read by the- Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the Legislative Depart- ment of the government of this State should be inhibited from passing any local or private bills, and it it is not possible to provide by general laws for all subjects of legislation, then the Legislative De- 10 ORGANIZATION. Friday,] AUXIER—MCDERMOTT—RODES. [September 12. partment should be inhibited from pasting any local or special laws authorizing the creation, extension or impairing of liens; regulating the affairs of counties, cities, towns, wards, school districts or other political subdivisions of the State; or changing the name of persons, places; or changing the venue in civil or criminal cases; authorizing opening, alterin; or maintaining roads, highways, streets or alleys; relating to bridges or ferries or incorporating ferry or bridge companies, except for the erection of bridges crossing streams which form boundaries between this and any other State; vacating wards, town plats, streets or alleys; relating to cemeteries, graveyards or public grounds, not of the State; authorizing the adoption or legitirhation of children; locating or changing county seats, erecting new counties or changing county lines; incor- porating cities, towns or villages, or chang- ing their charters; for the opening and conducting of elections or fixing or changing the place of voting; granting divorces; erecting or changing school districts; creating offices, or prescribing the powers and duties of officers in counties, cities, towns or villages, elec- tions or school districts changing the laws of descent or succes~ion, regulatiig the practice or jurisdiction of or changing the rule of evidence in any judicial proceed- ing, or changing methods of collection of debts or the enforcing of judgments, or prescribing the efiect of judicial sales of real estate, regulating the fees and extend- ing the powers and duties of Aldermen, Justices of the Peace, Magistrates or Con- stables; regulating the management of public schools, the building or repairing of school-houses and raisirg money for such purposes ; fixing the rate of interest afiect- ing the estate of minors or persons under disability; remitting fines, penalties or forfeitures, or refunding money legally paid into the treasury, exempting property from taxation, regulating labor, trade, mining or manufacturing; creating corpo- rations or amending, renewing or extend- ing the charters thereof; granting to any corporation, association or individual any special or exclusive privileges, or immunity to any corporation, association or individ- ual the right to lay down a railroad track; nor shall the General Assembly indirectly enact such special or local law by the partial repealing of a general law; but laws repealing local and special acts may be passed; nor should any law be passed granting powers or privileges in any case where the granting of such powers and privileges shall have been or can be granted by general law, nor where the courts have power to grant same. The PRESIDENT pro tent. The Chair is of the opinion that a large portion of the substitute does not relate to matter contained -in the original resolution, and is, therefore, out of order. Mr. AUXIER. ' I move that the reso- lution be postponed indefinitely. The PRESIDENT pro tem. A motion to commit has precedence over a motion to postpone indefinitely, and the motion is out of order. Mr. MCDERMOTT. We don’t know yet what committees are to be selected, and I move to amend in that particular. Mr. RODES. They are set forth there. The Clerk will please read them. Mr. McDERMOTT. I withdraw my objection. The motion being put, was declared carried. The PRESIDENT pro item. It is now 12 o’clock. The time has expired for the introduction of motions and resolutions, except by leave. What is the pleasure of the Convention‘? Mr. THOMAS H. HINES. I make a. motion to suspend the rules and postpone the orders of the day. The motion being put, was declared lost. Mr. BECKHAM. Would it be in order now to offer a resolution? The PRESIDENT pro tem. Resolu- tions are not in order. Mr. McHENRY. What is in order? The PRESIDENT pro tem. That de- pends on the pleasure of the Convention. The gentleman moved a suspension of the rules with regard to the rule requiring that at 12 o’clock no further resolutions shall be introduced on that day, and the motion was lost. Mr. McHENRY. There is nothing in the Orders of the Day, is there‘? ORGANIZATION . 11 Friday,] McHENRY—Pn'r'rr'r—PHELPS. [September 12 . The PRESIDENT pro tem. Not. that I know of. Mr. MoHENRY. Why can not reso- lu ions be now introduced? The PRESIDENT pro tem. The only reason is that the law under which we are acting forbids. Mr. PETTIT. I move that we recon- sider the mot‘on under which the vote was taken for the suspension of the rules. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I second that motion. I think the vote was taken under a misapprehension. Mr. SACHS. I move that we adjourn till to-morrow morning. I think my mos takes precedence. . Mr. HOLLOWAY. I move to amend “until Tuesday at 11 o’clock.” Mr. L. T. MOORE. And on that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. BOLES. I second the call. The vote resulted as follows: Yeas—17. Allen, M. K, Goebel, William Askew, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Bennett, B. F. Holloway, J. W. Berkele, Wm. Johnston. P. P. Buckner, S. B. Kirwan, E. E. Carroll, John D. Petrie, H. G. English, Sam. E. hitaker, Emery Funk, J. T. oung, B, H. Glenn, Dudley A. N AYS—67 . Allen, C. T. Hopkins, F. A. Amos, D. C. Jacobs, R, P. Applegate, Leslie T. Jonson, J ep. C. Auxier, A. J. Kennedy, Hanson Ayres, W. W. Lewis, J. W. Beckham, J. C. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James McDermott, E. J. Blackwell, Joseph McElroy, W. J. Boles, S. H. McHenry, H. D. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Brents, J. A. Miller, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Montgomery, J. F. Brown, J. S. Moore, J. H. Brummal, J. M. Moore, Laban T. Buchanan, Nathan Muir, J. W. Bullitt, W. G. Nunn, T. J. Burnam, Curtis F. Pettit, Thos. S. Chambers, G. D. Phelps, John L. Clardy, John D. Phelps, Zack. DeHaven, S. E. Pugh, Sam’l J. Doris, W. F. Quicksall, J. E. Durbin, Charles Ramsey, W. R. Edrington, W. J. Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Sachs, Morris Farmer, H. H. Smith, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Smith, W. Scott Forgy, J. M. Spalding, I. A. Graham, Samuel Swango, ,G. B. Hanks, Thomas H. Trusdell, George Harris, Geo. C. Twyman, I. W. Hines, J. S. ' West, J. F. Hines, Thomas H. Williams, L.P.V. Hogg, S. P. The question then recurring upon the motion to adjourn until tomorrow morn- ing, it was put to the House, and a divi- sion being called for, the motion was lost. Mr. APPLEGATE. I would like to ask leave of absence for Dr. O’Hara and Judge Field until Tuesday morning. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, it is granted. Mr. WHITAKER. I was requested to ask leave of absence for the gentleman from Boone. The PRESIDENT pro ism. Without objection, it is granted. " Mr. MCDERMOTT. I would like to ask leave of absence for the gentleman from Garrard. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, it will be granted. Mr. LASSING. I would like to ask' leave of absence for the gentlemam from Bullitt. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, it will be granted. Mr. SPALDING. I would like to ask leave of absence for the gentlemen from Covington, Mr. Mackoy. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, it will be granted. Mr. BULLIT. I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Rowan, until Mon- day. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, it will be granted. . Mr. W. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to 12 ‘ ORGANIZATION. Friday,] YOUNG—BECKHAM—M CHENEY. [September 12 . ask leave of absence for the gentleman from Mercer. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, it is granted. Mr. YOUNG. If there is not objec- tion on the part of the House, I would like to makeasingle suggestion. It will be impossible to do anything tomorrow. We cannot do anything until the Com- mittees are constituted. These resolutions have to be received. Gentlemen have prepared them, and they have a right to ask the Convention to hear them. It seems to me that we can put in two hours to-day hearing the resolutions, which the gentlemen desire to offer. When we ad- journ this afternoon, let us adjourn to meet Monday morning. A great many members will want to go home this first week. I apprehend we cannot do any business to-morrow. The President pro tem. will not announce his Committees until to-morrow, and it is simply a loss of time staying here doing nothing, and I do not think the public or the State will derive any benefit from it. I, therefore, suggest, would it not be better to hear the resolutions now, and come back Tuesday morning, and let us then buckle down to work. A great many members are asking for leave of absence, and I suppose the House will grant any man who asks it leave of absence. Mr. BECKHAM. Will the gentleman allow me to makea suggestion‘? I quite concur in the most that he says, but as yet we have no rules. The President of this body, until we have some rules, has no authority to appoint any Committees. If the Convention has rules under which it can operate, authorizing the President to appoint Committees, it might be very well to adjourn until Tuesday morning, or say Wednesday, to give him the time; but I beg leave to suggest to the gentleman from Louisville that nothing can be done in that direction until something is done with these rules. These rules have not been adopted. I, for one, am willing to abide by the judgment of the Committee- in regard to those rules, and adopt them as a whole. Mr. YOUNG. Let us now take action upon the Committees to be formed for the management of the business of this House. Then give the time to the President to appoint these various Committees, and return here and go to work. Mr. MoHENRY. By permission, I would simply state that there is no neces- sity for having these rules adopted by the House. The President knows very well what the Committees will be, and he will have that matter under consideration, and he will have his Committees substantially fixed up, and can announce them very soon after the Convention shall have adopted the rules and decided upon the Committees. The Chairman knows now what will be the proper Committees, and if the Convention, when they come to consider the rules, changes them in some slight degree, the President can rearrange his Committees very soon after we shall have agreed upon the rules. I understand these rules are not yet printed. They can not be laid upon our tables until to-mor- row; and I think that we can well adjourn until Monday morning. I have no objec- tion to adjourn until Tuesday, if the majority are Willing. I do not think we will make much headway to-morrow, except, if we do meet here, we can adopt the rules. They will be printed, and will be laid upon our tables to-morrow morn- ing. There are so many gentlemen get- ting leaves of absence, I think it well enough that we adjourn until Monday. Mr. CLAY, the President, here took the Chair. Mr. McHENRY. There is not a copy of the rules in the House. Mr. YOUNG. These papers show the Committees. Mr. BRONSTON. I rise to a point of order. According to my recollection, the ORGANIZATION. 13 Friday,] WASHINGTON—SACHS—ENGLISH—ULARDY. [September 12 . report as made by the Committee on Rules, was recommltted to that Committee, with instructions to be printed and report the same back to the House; and there is no report of the Committee on Rules now before the House. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is correct. The only thing in order is the motion to adjourn. Mr. WASHINGTON. It is probably proper that I should explain, having just come from the Chair, that the vote had already been taken upon that motion, and a division was called for, when the Presi- dent arrived and took his seat, and I ‘think it is proper to proceed with that vote. A division was called for upon the motion to adjourn. Mr. SACHS. If I understand it right, the vote was taken upon the motion to adjourn until Tuesday, and not upon the motion to adjourn until Monday. The PRESIDENT. The vote was taken upon the motion indicated by the gen tle' man on my left, and was lost; and then the motion to adjourn, and that is the motion now pending before the Conven- tion. Mr. ENGLISH. I move that when we do adjourn, we adjourn to meet Monday at 3 o’clock. The PRESIDENT. That motion takes precedence over the motion to adjohrn. Mr. L. T. MOORE. The motion to adjourn was voted upon, and a division called for. I submit that no amendment to that motion is in order. The PRESIDENT. The result was not announced; but at any rate the Chair will be liberal and decide that the motion is in order. The question before the Convention is this, that when this Convention adjourns it adjourns to meet again on Monday at 3 o’clock P. M. Mr. CLARDY. I call the yeas and naya Mr. MILLER. I second the call In explanation of his vote, Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I desire to say, in explanation of my vote, that I do not see how this Convention can get to work until the report of the Committee on Rules has been acted upon. My information is that ‘the printed report of those rules will be laid upon our desks some time to-day— certainly before 10 o’clock to-morrow morning—and we can devote ‘to-morrow to the discussion of those rules, because the President can not appoint his Commit- tees, nor can we get to work, until the rules are adopted. We might as well remain here to-morrow and Monday morning, if necessary, and discuss and adopt a Code of Rules. If we adjourn now, to meet Monday or Tuesday, then we have to discuss and adopt a Code of Rules first. We gain time by meeting again to- morrow, to discuss the rules and adopt them. Therefore, I vote nay. The vote resulted as follows: YEAS—IS. Allen, M. K. Funk, J. T. Applegate, Leslie T. Goebel, William Askew, J F. Hendrick, W. J. Bennett, B. F. Holloway, J. W. Berkele, \Vm. Johnston, P. P. Buckner, S. B. Kirwan, E. E. Carroll, John D. Petrie, H. G. English, Sam. E. Whitaker, Emery Farmer, H. H. Young, B. H. HAYS—64. Allen, C. T. Hines, Thomas H. Amos, D. C. Hogg, S. P. Auxier, A. J. Hopkins F. A. Ayres, W. W. Jacobs, .1’. Beckham, J. C. J onsc'n, J ep. C. Birkhead, B. T. Kennedy, Hanson Blackburn, James Lewis, J. W. Blackwell, Joseph Lewis, W. W. Boles, S. H. Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. McDermott, E. J. Brents, J. A. McElroy, W. J. Bronston, C. J. MeHenry, H. D. Brown, J. S. Miller, Will Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Bullitt, W. G. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. 14 ORGANIZATION. Friday,] MCDERMOTT—PETTIT—HINES. [September 12. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. i The PRESIDENT. The question is Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J. ] Pettit Thos. S. Clardy, John D. , Phelps, John L. Coke, J. Guthrie DeHaven, S. E. Pugh, Sam’l J. Doris, W. F. Quicksall, J. E. Durbin, Charles Ramsey, W. R. Edrington, W. J. B'oles, S. H. Elmore, T. J. Sachs, Morris Forrester, J. G. Smith, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Smith, W. Scott Glenn, Dudley A. Graham. Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Twyman, I. W. Hines, J. S. West, J. F. Mr. MCDERMOTT. To satisfy every- body, and let those gentlemen go home that do not care especially what the rules are, and give the Chair nevertheless a chance to know what Chairman he will select, and ample time to do it, I offer the following resolution. The PRESIDENT. Withoutobjection, the resolution can be read for informa- tion. Hearing objection, the only question before the Convention is the motion to Spalding, I. A. Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George adjourn. Mr. PETTIT. I rise to a pint of order. There is a motion pending, and that is a motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion to suspend the rules, and postpone the orders of the day was lost. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Daveiss is right in his point of order, and it is sustained. Mr. PETTIT. I would say that I have no objection whatever to the resolution, but let us get to business properly. It is for this purpose that I made the point of order. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Franklin will please restate his resolu- tion. Mr. THOMAS H. HINES. My motion is to reconsider the vote by which the motion to suspend the rules and postpone the orders of the day was lost. This motion being put to the House, was declared carried. l l l l l l now upon the motion to suspend the rules and postpone the orders of the day. The motion, upon being put, was de- clared carried. Mr. McDERMOTT. I now offer my resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Rules be requested to report Saturday morning at 10 o’clock, and that the consideration of that report be made the special order for that time, and that no other business be considered on that day, and that when we adjourn on Saturday we adjourn until Tuesday morning at 10:30 o’clock. Mr. SPALDING. I move to amend that by inserting Wednesday instead of Tuesday, because after the Committees are \ named the Chairman will need a couple of days to select these Committees. If we adjourn Saturday, let us give him until Wednesday to appoint Committe s. Mr. McDERMOTT. I will accept the amendment if that is the sense of the House. Mr. BOLES. I would know much bet‘ ter how to vote if the President will say how much time he will need to report upon the Committees; but I do not want to wait two days if it is not necessary. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Upon that reso: lution I call for a division of the question, and that we take a vote upon the proposi- tion to have the Committee to report, and thaa no other business be considered to-morrow except the report of the Com- mittee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. I think the Chair to-morrow will be better able to tell how much time he will need, than to-day. Mr. MoDERMOTT. The reason for that motion is that I want to give the assurance to all gentlemen who want to go home, that no other matters , of importance will be disposed of during ORG AN IZATION. 15 Friday,] MILLER—MCDERMOTT—DEHAVEN. [September 12 . their absence; and ,I want those gentlemen to go away feeling that they are not neg- lecting the interest of their constituents. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is a little slow‘in recalling the counties of the various gentlemen. But it will conduce to good order and to the dignity of the Convention if gentlemen will not speak until the Chair has recognized them. It may occasion some delay, but will be much better in the long run. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I simply have this suggestion to make, that there seems to > be some objection to adjourning until Wednesday. If anshorter time be given, it will meet the views of quite a number of gentlemen better than Wednesday, and I am willing to support the original resolu- tion offered by the gentleman to postpone the ma‘ter until Tuesday, instead of Wednesday. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Do you ofi'er to amend the resolution to that effect? Mr. W. H. MILLER. I do. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I do not accept the amendment, because I think the President will need more time. It will be the most important duty he will have to discharge; and I think he should have sufficient time to discharge it properly, Mr. DEHAVEN. It seems to me, that if we adjourn now, to meet at ten o’clock in the morning, and a special order is made for the Committee on Rules to re- port at that time, we will have all to- morrow to consider those rules and either adopt or reject them. After that shall have been done, and the Committees de- termined according to those rules, then I am ready and willing to adjourn to any day that the President of this Convention deems necessary, in .order that he may appoint his Committees; but he can tell better himself, as he has suggested, on to-morrow what time he will need, than he can tell now; and I think, therefore, that we ought not to adjourn now to meet again on Tuesday or any other day, but adjourn to meet again in the morning to consider these rules, and then we can ad- journ to meet at any time the Chairman deems necessary. Mr. McELROY; It seems to me we had better first vote on the proposition to adjourn and consider the rules to-morrow at 10 o’clock. If. on tomorrow, it is the mind of this Convention to adjourn a day or two, it can be done. If not, I for one have come here to stay until we make ' a‘ Constitution, and I give notice now that I will vote against these adjournments. I want the rules considered to-morrow, and then if the gentleman from Louisville can convince this body that they ought ‘to ad- journ for a few days, that will be time enough to consider it, and I move a divi- sion of the question in that way. The first part of the resolution was read. Mr. SPALDIN G. I understand that the gentleman embraces the rest of that down to adjournment, “ and that no other business be considered on that day.” A vote being taken, that much of the resolution was adopted. The balance of ‘the resolution, as fol- lows, “and that when we adjourn on Saturday we adjourn untill Wednesday morning at 10:30 o’clock,” was read. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of that part of the res- olution. Mr. CL ARDY. I move that that part be laid on the table. The PRESIDENT. That motion is not in order. A division of the Vote was called for on the motion before the House, and the mo- tion was defeated. Mr. MoHENRY. I move that we now adjourn until 10 o’ clock to-morrow morn- ing, standard time. The Convention thereupon adjourned. ,Qnnventinn guard: -——KENTUCKY—- CONSTITUTICDNAL CCDNVENTIQN- Vol. 1. FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 13, 1890. No. 6 Saturday,] PETTIT—LEWIs—MILLER. [Sept ember 13. At the hour of 10 A. M., standard time, the PRESIDENT (Mr. Clay) called the Convention to order. The Rev. Mr. Penick offered the follow- ing prayer: Most Gracious God, We humbly beseech 'Thee, as for the people of the Common- wealth of Kentucky in general, so espe- cially for the Representatives in Conven- tion here assembled, that Thou wouldst be pleased to direct and prosper all their doings to the advancementof Thy glory, the good of Thy Church, the safety, honor and welfare of Thy people, that all things may be so ordered and settled by their en- deavors upon the best and surest founda- tion, that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and righteousness, may be established amongst us through all genera tions, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order is the reading of yesterday’s Journal. The Clerk thereupon proceeded to read the Journal. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, I move you, sir, that the Clerk be directed to omit these extracts that he has been reading, as ‘the reading of them entails a continual waste of time. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Clerk will omit such reading. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I suppose, as there are two Lewises in this Convention, the Journal should show which Lewis. The CLERK. We have it here. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The resolution offered on yesterday by the gentleman from Warren provided that it should be ‘the word “ printed.” _“printed” and referred. I failed to hear I move to have the Journal corrected in that regard. The PRESIDENT. It is moved and seconded that the Journal be corrected in that regard. The Secretary will please report that part of the Journal indicated by the gentleman from Lincoln. The Reading Clerk thereupon road the portion indicated. The PRESIDENT. Is that correct? Mr. MILLER. It is. Mr. WILLIAMS. I rise to a question of privilege. That part of the Journal which reads that Mr. Williams made a motion to adjourn until Tuesday is incor- rect. I made no such motion. I voted on the question and voted against it. The PRESIDENT. By unanimdus con- sent, the Journal will be corrected. The READING CLERK. I beg the gentleman’s pardon. It is here Holloway. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Journal of yesterday's proceedings will stand approved. The Chair will lay before the Con vention, first, a communication from the Sergeant-at-Arms, which the Secretary will please read. The Reading Clerk thereupon read said communication, as follows: Fnxnxron'r, KY., September 12, 1890. Hon. 0'. M. Clay, J72, President Consti tutional Convention: Sirzln obedience to orders, I have to leave at once for Washington county, to summon W. F. Booker, of said county, to appear here to testify in the case of McChord against Lewis, and as I have no assistant to leave in my place, I ask 2 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] BURNAM—MCHENRY—PETTIT. [September 13 .. that you allow Capt. Bart. Jenkins to act as Sergeant-at-Arms until my return. RoB'r. TYLER, Sergeant-at-Arms C. C. Mr. BURNAM. I move that his re- quest be granted, sir. The PRESIDENT. It is moved and seconded that the request of the Sergeant- at-Arms just read be granted. The vote being taken, the motion was carried. The PRESIDENT. In pursuance of‘ the resolution heretofore adopted, the President appoints the following Commit- tee, viz: W. G. Bullitt, Hanson Ken- nedy, E. J. McDermott, C. T. Allen, and Sam’] J. Pugh to confer with the Printer of this Convention, and ascertain what arrangements can be made for the daily publication of the proceedings of the Convention. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order this morning is petitions. Are there any petitions? The next thing in order is reports from Standing Committees. Are there any reports from Standing Commit- tees? Mr. ‘MoHENRY. The Committee on Rules, to whom was recommitted the re- port made day before yesterday, reporting a set of rules for the government of the Convention, have had the matter again under consideration, and have directed me to report the rules, with certain amend- ments and corrections, which were agreed upon by the Committee. If the Delegates will take the printed rules—the printed report which is now lying on their desks- they can then see what suggestions, addi- tions and amendments the Committee make to the report as originally presented; and I now move that the report be read— not the report as I have it there, sir, but the members’ original printed bill, and I will explain the amendments as we come to them. In the meantime, it will be for the Convention to consider each rule as it is reported by the Secretary. Take it up by paragraphs and let it be read, and add’ any suggestions to it, and I will call the attention of the Convention whenever a paragraph is changed from the original. printed report. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from’ Ohio moves that the report be read by paragraphs, and, as read, that the Commit- tee first explain their amendments to each- paragraph. Do you propose to act by paragraphs‘? Is that iincluded in the mo-> tion? Mr. MCHENRY. Yes, sir; by para- graphs. The PRESIDENT. The motion is that it be read by paragraphs. The vote being taken on that question, the motion carried. The PRESIDENT. The motion is adopted, and the Secretary will carry out that order. The Chair will explain, that as each paragraph is read, it is then subject to amendment and debate, and each paragraph will be considered as an individual proposition. The Reading Clerk thereupon proceeded to read Rule 1. Mr. PETTIT. I have an amendment. to that paragraph, sir. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the amendment. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment offered by Mr. Pettit, which is- as follows: Strike out in paragraph 1, line 3, “and on the appearance of a quorum;” also strike out in line 3 the words, “the preced- ing day.” Mr. PETTIT. It will make the para» graph read as follows: “ He shall take the Chair every day precisely at the hour to which the Convention shall have ad- journed on the preceding day, and cause the Journal to be read.” It is apparent under the operation of the rules, as report- ed by the Committee, it requires every morning the President of the Convention to first ascertain whether there is a quorum ORGANIZATION. 3 Saturday,] MCHENRY—CLARDY—PUGH. [September 13 . present. Would it not be infinitely better, and facilitate the proceedings of the House, that he should take the Chair pre- cisely at the hour designated, and then, after reading the Journal, or before the reading of the Journal, if there is any ob- jection to proceeding to business, that any member may make the point of order that there is no quorum present. Mr. MoHEN RY. Mr. President, we took that rule from the rules of the Con- vention of 1849, and I think there is agood deal of force in the suggestion made by the gentleman from Daveiss, and, so far as I am concerned, I rather think it is an improvement. The way our rule reads now, there must be a quorum present be- fore the Journal shall be read. Of course, we cannot proceed to business unless there is a quorum, and, therefore, the point can be raised at any time. 1 am inclined to think it is a good amendment, but I would like to hear from some other members of the Committee. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the .amendment. The vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Are there any fur- ther amendments to paragraph No. 1 ? If there are none, the Secretary will please read paragraph N o. 2. The Reading Clerk thereupon read par- agraph No. 2. Mr. CLARDY. I rise to ask aquestion. I would like to know if a vote was taken upon the adoption of the paragraph after it was amended? The PRESIDENT. By unanimous consent, it was considered adopted. There were no further amendments. If any gen- tleman insists upon a vote, the Chair will take it. Are there any amendments to paragraph No 2? If not, the Secretary will read the next paragraph. The Reading Clerk thereupon read par- agraph No. 3. The PRESIDENT. Are there any amendments to that paragraph? If not, the Secretary will proceed with the read- ing of the next paragraph. The Reading Clerk thereupon read par- agraph 4. The PRESIDENT. Are there any amendments to that paragraph? If not, the Secretary will proceed with the read- ing of the next paragraph. The Reading Clerk thereupon read par- agraph five. The PRESIDENT. Are there any amendments to that paragraph‘? The Chair hears none. The Secretary will pro- ceed to read the next paragraph. The Reading Clerk then read paragraphs six and seven. The PRESIDENT. Are there any amendments to the sixth and seventh par- agraphs? If not, the paragraphs will be considered as adopted, and we will pro- ceed with the next paragraph. The Reading clerk then read Rule 8. Mr. PUGH. I have an amendment to offer to that. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the amendment. The amendment was then read, as fol- lows: “Amend Rule 8 by inserting imme; diately after the word ‘President,’ in the second line thereof, the words, ‘ or Presi- dent pro tem. while acting as such.’ ” Mr. MoHEN RY. The Committee has. no objection to that amendment. The PRESIDENT. Without objection , and the Chair hears none, the amendment will be adopted. Rule 9 was then read. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, that is considered as adopted. Section 10 was then read. Mr. PETTIT. I have an amendment to propose. The PRESIDENT. Report the amend- ment. The amendment in question was read, as follows: 4 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] MCHENRY—SACHS—PETTIT. [September 13, Page 2, line 10, strike out “ at least two- thirds,” and insert a “majority.” Mr. MCHENRY. That amendment is the usual rule applied to almost all parlia- mentary bodies. We considered, sir, that it would be better, as we are engaged in such important work, that no business whatever he done unless there were at least two-thirds of the members present. The rule, as reported by the Committee, will have the effect, or tendency at least, to keep more of us here. We do not want it to obtain here, as it has in the Legislature, for members to be running off and keeping away and obstructing the business of the Convention by not being present, and I do not think any Constitutional amendment ought to be adopted unless there are two- thirds of the Delegates here; and our Com- mittee, sir, was unanimous in changing the rule. I believe that rule was in the old Constitution. But it is different from the rule of the Legislature. Their rule went upon the same ground. The Committee oppose the amendment offered by the gen- tleman from Daveiss, and think two-thirds should constitute a quorum, and if gentle- men leave us here with a less number than that, we can have a call of the House, and have them brought in and stop work till they are brought back. Mr. SACHS. Mr. President, I would like to ask the Chairman of that Commit- tee one question; if we have two-thirds of ‘the Delegates elected as a quorum, what would be two-thirds? Would it be 66 or 67 ? Mr. MCHE N RY. It would necessarily be 67. Sixty-six would not be two-thirds. (Laughter and applause.) Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, the Chairman of the Committee has stated what I conceive to have been the motive which prompted the Committee in urging that two-thirds of the Delegates constitute a quorum, but I take it, sir, that this is not a good precedent to begin this Convention by establishing. It is a departure from the spirit and the genius of our institutions, and I can readily see where more harm can be the result of it than good. A ma- jority constitutes a quorum in the Con- gress of the United States. A majority constitutes a quorum in the Legislature of Kentucky. A majority constitutes a quorum in almost every State where a Constitution has been formed save and alone under the old Constltution of Ken- tucky. I conceive to-day that the same ideas are not in vogue that were then in vogue in Kentucky. There is entirely adifi'erent era, and a majority, under all circumstances, in this government of ours, should control. Let us take but a slight glance at the condition in which we would place ourselves. Here, it will require two- thirds of the members to be present before the Convention can transact any business at all, and those who are acquainted with legislative proceedings know that a two- thirds rule requiring a quorum may delay this Convention, in the transaction of its business, and inure to the benefit of class legislation; whilst a majority rule facili- tates, at every point, legislation, and it is in the interest of the masses and in keep- ing with good government. Why, sir, Mr. Jefl‘erson lays down the rule. He says that a majority in any deliberative body shall control its proceedings and shall con- stitute a quorum. Then why shall we here to-day depart from it? I predict that if we have any other rule establishing a quorum, this session will not have pro- ceeded one month before we will regret the action that causes such a number of Dele- gates to constitute a quorum. If the inter- est is everywhere manifested in this Con- vention that is in my section of the State, every member’s conscience will compel him to be present at the important pro- ceedings of this Convention, and if his conscience does not compel him to take part and be present whenever he can con- sistently with his duties to his family, I ORGANZIATION. 5 Saturday,] J ONSON—MCHENRY—PETTIT. [September 13 . take it that the lash of public opinion will keep him here and compel him to dis- charge his duty, and under those circum- stances we will always have two-thirds at least, and the rule designed by the Com- mittee will have no force or effect. Mr. JONSON. Mr. President, I would prefer to insert three-fourths instead of two-thirds. The proposition assumed by Mr. J efl'erson is true, but as applied by the gentleman from Daveiss, it is not true. Majorities do rule, and must, necessarily, in a republican form of government; but for us to say that we shall meet here and declare fifty-one members a quorum, and then go forward and say that, upon a vote upon important matters afi'ectin g the inter- ests of the present generation and genera- tions to come after us, twenty-six, being a majority, shall rule twenty-five, is not the spirit of the rule contended for by the great leader of democracy and free govern- ment. Neither is it the spirit of that great leader to say that thirty-four is a majority of a hundred. It is not a major- ity; and I move now, sir, that we insert three-fourths instead of two-thirds. The PRESIDENT. The question is first upon the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Daveiss. Mr. MOHENRY. Mr. President, I just want to say one word, sir. The rule of the majority governing in the Legislature is because, the Legislature being composed of two bodies, there is another House to revise their work. Now, the proposition of the gentleman who moved to amend is, to let the amendment be voted upon by twenty-six men. If we have a bare quo- rum here, fifty-one members, then twenty- six, a majority, is a quorum. I recognize that fifty-one members can put into this Constitution any thing that they may see proper; but the proposition now is, if we have a quorum of fifty-one mem- bers, the majority of that quorum can pass any amendment to the Constitution of the State; and I can not but think that it is better to fix it at two-thirds; and we simply followed the rule of the old Convention. That is all I have to say about it, sir. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the amendment ofl'ered by the Dele- gate from Daveiss, which is to strike out two-thirds and insert a majority. ‘The question being taken on the adop- tion of said amendment, it was decided in the negative. Mr. PETTIT. I call for a division. The PRESIDENT. It is too late. The result has been announced. Mr. PETTIT. Is it too late to call for the yeas and nays‘? The PRESIDENT. It is too late for the yeas and nays, also. The question is now upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from McLean, to strike out two- thirds and insert three-fourths. And the vote being taken thereon it was decided in the negative, and said amend- ment was defeated. The PRESIDENT. Are there any more amendments? Without objection, those paragraphs will he considered as adopted, and the Secretary will read the next paragraph. The Reading Clerk thereupon proceeded with the reading of the rules and various subsections, which were adopted. till sub- section 2of paragraph 11 read, as follows: 2. A Committee on Elections, to which shall be referred and which shall report upon all propositions relating to the elect- ive franchise and the mode of election. This Committee shall consist of nine members. ‘ ' Mr. McHENRY. Mr. President, the Committee direct me, sir, to move this amendment, namely, to strike out the word “seven” and insert “nine,” in subsection 2; and I will say, sir, that they have in- creased the number of members upon the Committees. While on the floor, 1 will state that the Committee on Judicial ' 6 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] SPALDING—MCHENRY—Bnnn'rs: [September 13. Department and Court of Appeals, in the report and in the printed bill, is put at “seven,” and the Committee directed me, when that matter came under considera- tion, to change that to ‘-nine;” and the same with regard ‘to the Committee on Circuit Courts. They have fixed that at “ nine.” The Committee on Education we have fixed at “ nine.” I will call attention again, sir, when those sections come up Then, the Committee on Municipalities we fixed at “eleven,” and the Committee on Revenue and Taxation at “nine.” The Committee on Crimes and Criminal Pro- cedure we fix at “ nine,” Mr. SPALDING. I would just call your attention, Mr. McHenry, to the fact that the word “ punishments” is inserted‘ after the word “ crimes.” I Mr. MCHENRY. Yes, I will call that up when the time comes. I will move to strike out “seven” and insert “nine” in these respective Committeeswhich I have mentioned. The PRESIDENT. The Chairman, in behalf of the Committee on Rules, moves to strike out “seven ” and insert “ nine ” in the Committees mentioned. The vote being taken thereon,the amend- ment was adopted. ‘ The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the fifth paragraph. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the paragraph. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such Eparagraph will be considered as adopted, and the Secretary will read the next paragraph. The Reading Clerk thereupon read sub- section 6. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, said paragraph will be considered as adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the subsection 7. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no amendment suggested. If there is no objection, the paragraph will be considered as adopted. Mr. MCHENRY. We move “ nine’ there in place of “ seven.” The PRESIDENT. The Chairman, in behalf of the Committee on Rules, moves to strike out “seven” in the rule just read, and insert in lieu thereof “nine.” The vote being taken thereon, the motion was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the next paragraph. The Reading Clerk thereupon read sec- tions 7 and 8. Mr. BRENTS. Mr. President, I have an amendment to offer. Mr. McHENRY. The motion of the Committee, sir, is to insert “nine” instead of “seven.” The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks that the gentleman on the left (Mr. Brents) arose first and addressed the Chair, but by parliamentary usage and custom, amend- ments ofiiered by Committees have prece- dence, so the Chair will put the amendment offered by the Committee first; but the Secretary will read both amendments for information. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment offered by Mr. Brents. The PRESIDENT. The question will be first upon the amendment ofl‘ered by the Committee to strike out “ seven ” and insert “ nine.” Mr. JOHNSTON. I have an amend- ment to offer at the proper time, and will ask to have it read for information. The PRESIDENT. It will be sent up and read for information. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment offered by Mr. Johnston, as follows: ' 1. The members of the several Commit- tees created to consider matters pertaining to the Legislative Department of our Gov- ernment, shall constitute a Committee to be known as the General Committee on the Legislative Department, and all (11163. tions referred to the said several Commit- tees shall, after consideration by them, be submitted to said General Committee for CRGANIZ ATICN 7 to this Convention. ‘vention. Saturday,] MCHENRY—BRENTS—ALLEN. [September 18. its action, before being reported to this Convention. The Chairman of said Gen- eral Committee on the Legislative Depart- ment, shall be named by the President of (this Convention, and it shall be his duty to convene his Committee upon the request of any one of the Committees whose mem 'bers belong to said General Committee. 2. The members of the several Com- mittees created to consider matters per- taining to the Executive Department of our Government, shall constitute a Com- mittee to be known as the General Com- mittee on the Executive Department, and all questions referred to the said several Committees shall, after consideration by 'them, be submitted to said General Com- mittee for its action before being reported The Chairman of said General Committee on the Executive De- partment shall be named by the President ‘of this Convention, and it shall be his duty -to convene his Committee upon the request "of any one of the Committees whose mem- bers belong to said General Committee. 3. The members of the several Commit- tees created to consider matters pertaining to the Judicial Department of our Govern- ment, shall constitute a Committee to be known as the General Committee on the Judicial Department, and all questions re- "ferred to the said several Committees, shall, after consideration by them, be sub- mitted to said General Committee for its action before being reported to this Con- The Chairman of said General Committee shall be named by the Presi- dent of this Convention, and it shall be his duty to convene his Committee upon the =.request of any one of the Committees whose members belong to said General Commitee. The PRESIDENT. The question is first upon the amendment proposed by the Committee to strike out “seven” and in- sert “nine.” The vote being taken thereon, resulted in the affirmative, and the motion was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The question now will be upon the amendment offered by the .Delegate from Clinton, which the Secre- "tary will please report. Mr. MOHENRY. That amendment is mm the last page of the printed report. That is the same as the one now printed and referred to the Committee. Mr. BRENTS. No; it is not exactly the same. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the amendment. ' The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment offered by Mr. Brents. Amend by striking out subsections 7, 8 and 9 of Rule No. 11, and inserting in lieu thereo : “A Committee on the J udi- cial Department of fifteen members, and the Chairman ot said Committee shall ap- point from the members of said Commit- tee three sub-committees, one on the Supreme Court, one on Circuit Courts, and one on County Courts; and said sub- committees shall report to the Committee herein provided.” Mr. C. T. ALLEN. offer an amendment. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the amendment. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment to the amendment ofiered by Mr. Allen, as follows: Amend by inserting, “ A Committee on the Constitution as a whole to be composed of eleven members, whose duty it shall be to arrange in proper order the various articles, sections, &c., of said Constitution.” The PRESIDEN T. The gentleman will perceive that this is not an amendment to the amendment, but an amendment to the original proposition. It is not now in order, but will be voted upon when in order. The question is first upon the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clinton. Mr. BREN TS. Mr. President, difi'ering with the Committee, I feel it to be proper that I should give some reason for offering the amendment. In 1849 the Convention adopted the customary proceeding of hav- ing three Committees, one on Appellate Courts, one on Circuit Courts and one on County Courts, consisting of ten members each. These Committees were appointed, and went to work and made their_reports, and those reports were debated and consider - I would like to 8 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] BRENTS—SPALDIN(Jr—WASHINGTON. [September 13. ed by the Convention, and nearly a month after the appointment of these Committees the Convention came to a halt. There were conflicts between the reports of the Committees, and the Convention then and there saw that they had made a mistake, and created a joint Committee by consoli- dating these three Committees, and re- committed the whole work to this Joint Committee; then this Committee made a report to the Convention, and the Conven- tion proceeded harmoniously and adopted a judicial system for Kentucky. We ought to profit by the mistake made by the Delegates of that Conven- tion. We ought to be benefited by their experience. Now there is a general demand throughout the State of Ken- tucky for some reform in the Judicial Department of Kentucky. It is said that criminals escape justice; it is said that there is delay in the trial of civil ac- tions; that there is delay in the trial of appeals, and there is a demand that this Convention shall agree upon a judicial system that will reform the present sys- tem and bring about speedy trials, and at the least expense to the people. Already that question has been brought up among the Delegates of this Convention and some are in favor of abolishing Circuit Courts and establishing County Courts in lieu thereof; others adhere to the Circuit Court system. Now, if we have three Committees and they undertake this work, there will, perhaps, arise conflict between these Committees, and their reports may conflict with each other, and there may be a want of system and a want of harmony and a want of consistency between these reports; and I think this matter should all be taken into consideration by one Com- mittee. you might say one mind, duly deliberated, and then this Committee re- port to the Convention an harmonious, consistent and complete judicial system for Kentucky; and I cannot see that this can be accomplished by any other manner of proceeding. I conceive that a Committee on County Court might report in favor of a County Court system, and a Committee on Circuit Court report in favor of the present system, or in favor of retaining a Circuit Court system. There will be con- flict between the two Committees, and it may be, if we adopt the Committees as advised by the Committee on Rules, we will have to do just what the Convention of 1849 did, consolidate the Committees and recommit their report to the Commit- tee thus consolidated. N ow, so far as the number is concerned, I am indifferent to that ; you may insert fifteen or twenty-one, or three times nine, and put it at twenty- seven, but I am in earnest, believing that it is necessary and important that we should have but one Committee on the» Judiciary system, in order that this matter may be properly considered and an har- monious, consistent and complete system reported to this Convention for its consid- eration. Mr. SPALDING. The proposition of the Delegate from Clinton was first consid- ered by the Committee favorably, but upon reflection it occurred that this difliculty might arise. The Chairman of the Com- mittee is allowed to select the sub—commit» tees; that Chairman will be a lawyer, and will, doubtless, have well-defined ideas about how he wants the judicial system arranged; and it puts it in his power to give a color to these sub-committees by selecting from the members of the Com- mittee those gentlemen who agree with him in his views. It makes, as it were, a kind of an autocrat of him; and I think, individually, that, as the matter was not before the Committee, it would be much better to adopt the Committee’s report, and then, if any addition 1S needed. adopt the amendment of the gentleman from Fayette, which would make all these Com- mittees appointable by the President, and not by the Chairmen of the Committees. Let them all constitute a general Commit-- ORGANIZATION. a Saturday,] WASHINGTON—JOHNSTON. [September 13 . tee, the Chairman of which will be named by the President of the Convention. I think it would be better, and at the proper time I will favor that amendment; but for the present I think that‘ the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clinton should be voted down, and the Commit- tee’s report adopted; and then, if we want to add the amendment of the gentleman from Fayette, we can do it. Mr. WASHINGTON. I must confess that I am so strongly impressed with the wisdom of the proposed amendment that I can not forbear ofiering a remark or two in support of it. The Courts of this Com- monwealth constitute but one judicial sys- tem. They may be said to be, in a certain sense, a unit. They revolve within the same judicial orbit. Jurisdiction is con- ferred upon one Court with reference to some jurisdiction withheld from another Court. Jurisdiction is withheld from one Court with reference to jurisdiction con- ferred upon some other Court. The term ‘of one Court is fixed with reference to the terms of other Courts. In this condition of things, it is perfectly obvious that, to the eflectual working of such a system as that, harmony is absolutely indispensable; and it occurs to me that the appointments of Committees with reference to this great subject—I call it great, because I believe it to be one of the most important which will engage the attention of this Convention- ought to be made with reference to the requirements of the situation. Now, it occurs to me that if you appoint these Committees independently of each other, it will be impracticable to secure harmony of work and action, and that degree of efficiency, to say nothing of the quality of work done by Committees, which it is pos- sible to obtain if you appoint one large Committee, as'suggested by the gentleman from Clinton. and subdivide it into smaller Committees. By doing this, the attention of the sub-committees are concentrated upon their particular work. Their work, when completed, is reported to the entire Committee, ‘consisting of fifteen members. They confer with each other in reference to these matters, and in this way better results are produced, it seems to me, in every respect. It not only conduces to harmony, but it conduces to the efficiency of the work done, and to the character of the work done, to say nothing of the expedition of it; and for these reasons I shall vote for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Clinton. Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, the amendments I have offered recognize the independence of the three coordinate and co-equal branches of government. Every Committee appointed to consider matters pertaining to one of these branchesjshould act in harmony with every other Commit- mittee considering subjects pertaining to the same department. This harmonizing process must be gone through with before the work can become a part of the Consti- tution. I submit that it can be accom- plished better in a General Committee- formed of these several Committees, than it can on the floor of this Convention. The plan I have suggested recognizes every Committee proposed by your Committee on Rules, but it goes further, and groups- them for work according to the character of the ‘subjects referred to them. The President names a Chairman for each one- of these Committees. The amendments do not disturb, in any sense, the organ- ization proposed by the Committee on Rules. It simply brings together the several Committees who are considering subjects pertaining to each one of the sep- arate co-ordinate and independent depart- ments of government. Before we can have final action in this Convention, that must be done. Gentlemen who are more familiar with the courts than other departments of government, dwell upon the necessity for this arrangement for the Judicial Depart-4' ment alone; but every word said as to the: necessity for harmonious action on questions 10 ORGANIZATION. Saturday , ] BRONSTON—BECKHAM—NUNN. [Septem ber 1 3 . pertaining to the Judicial, is equally appli- cable to Committees dealing with matters pertaining to the Executive and Legisla- tive Department. Every thing done here pertaining to one of these independent branches of government, must harmonize with every other thing done pertaining vto it, and I believe that object is accom- plished by the suggestion that I have made; and if it is in order now, the amendment of the Committee having been adopted, I move my suggestion as a sub- stitute to that amendment. It does not antagonize any thing that has been done, but looks to harmonious action in all three of the departments. Mr. BRONSTON. I have but a single suggestion to make. I concur fully with what has been stated by the Delegate from Campbell, that it is necessary to have harmony in the action of the several Com- mittees relating to the judicial department; but it occurs to me that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Clinton de- feats the very purpose for which it seems to be ofiered. Instead of preserving har- mony it will, in my judgment, produce discord,. I fear that the proceedings of the Committee will certainly produce dis- cord, as far as the work of this entire body is concerned. In other words, if the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee is empowered to appoint sub-committees, you destroy the harmony which you desired to preserve by having the one head, namely, the President of this Convention to direct the work of this whole Convention. The President of this Convention, in selecting and appointing his Committees unquestion- ably will exercise his best judgment in allotting the work to those best adapted for it. If you delegate to any other person the power to sub-divide that work, of necessity you inject a new mind, who is considering one thing or subject rather than considering the whole, and therefore you will produce discord. But it occurs to me that the purpose can be accomplished by the amendment offered by the gentle- man from Fayette, which will be con- sidered by the Convention hereafter, which brings together these various Com- mittees on Courts into one Committee of the Whole, as it were, for that particular department, with the Chairman selected not according to the judgment of any individ- ual member of that Committee, but by the President of this Convention, who has the work of the whole body before him, and who in that way preserves harmony throughout the whole; and it occurs to me that is decidedly a better way to do it than to have the Committees appointed as recommended by the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks that the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Fayette is a substitute to the amendment offered by the member from Clinton, and the question will first be upon the substitute. Mr. BECKHAM. I have an amend- ment that I would like to present if it is in order now. The PRESIDENT. It is not in order now, but will be as soon as one amendment is disposed of; but the Delegate can have it read for information by sending it up. Mr. BECKHAM. I will read it my- self. The PRESIDENT. Without objection’ the Delegate will report the resolution himself. Mr. NUN N. (As Mr. Beckham starts to read.)‘ I desire to ofi’er a substitute to meet the views of the gentleman from Lexington. The PRESIDENT. The substitute or the amendment is not now in order,but it can be read, if there is no objection, for the in- formation of the Convention. The gentle- man from Shelby will first read his amend- ment. Mr. BECKHAM. “This Committee,” that is, the Committee No. 7, “ this Com- mittee shall, upon the request of its Chair- ORGANIZATION. 11 Saturday,] BOLES—MCHENRY—SPALDING—LEWIS. [September 13 . man, together with the Chairman of the 'Committees designated in paragraphs 8 and. 9, meet in joint SGSSIODLWlth the other two Committees, and they shall all make joint report.” I think that ought to rreet the views of the Committee, as well as of the Delegate from Clinton, as it secures una- nimity of action, and report upon the part of ‘these three Committees, and there we have twenty-seven members. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman will understand that his amendment is not in order at this particular juncture, and also the amendment of the gentleman from Crittenden. The question now pending is upon the amendment to the amendment, in ‘the nature of a substitute, proposed by the Delegate from Fayette county. ‘ Mr. BOLES. I would like to have it read; I didn’t catch its meaning. Mr. MOHENRY. Where does it come in? Mr. SPALDING. It comes in-at the end of that rule. ' The Reading Clerk then read the amend- ment of Mr. Johnston. Mr. BRENTS. I believe that the amendment or substitute of the gentle- man from Fayette county meets the end I desire, and I will accept it in lieu of the amendment that I offered. The PRESIDEN T. Without objection, the gentleman can accept the amendment. ‘The Secretary will now report the amend- ment pending, the first amendment after the amendment of the gentleman from Fayette. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I ask that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Crittenden be read for information. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the amendments in order. The first amendment offered, I think, was that ofi’ered by the Delegate from Cald- well. Mr. MCHENRY. What has become of the amendment ofi'ered by the gentle- man from Fayette? The PRESIDENT. That has been ac- cepted and is now pending, but still liable to amendment; and as several amendments are pending, the first amendment is the one now before the Convention, which the Secretary will read. The Reading Clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. C. T. Allen. The PRESIDENT. That is not an amendment to the amendment, but to the original paragraph; so the Secretary will report the next amendment. The Reading Clerk then read the amendment offered by the gentleman from Crittenden (Mr.§Nunn), as follows: That the words “and Court of Appeals,” in first and second lines of Section 7, and strike out all after the word department in line four of said section down to and in- cluding the word committee in line five. The PRESIDENT. That is also an amendment to the original proposition, so the question is now upon the adoption of the amendment offered in the first place by ‘ the gentleman from Fayette and accepted by the gentleman from Crittenden. Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. President, when the Committee had this subject under con- sideration, they came to the conclusion that the three Committees—the Commit- tees on Appellate Courts, Circuit Courts, and County Courts—would be the three most important Committees that we would have. They recognized the fact that there might be a collision of jurisdiction upon those Committees, and that subject was considered, and we carefully considered the amendment offered. by the Delegate from Clinton; but upon reflection, sir, the Committee thought that, in the event of a collision of those Committees, the Conven- tion could afterwards provide something, either in Committee of the Whole or in some other way, that would harmonize the work of the Committee; but since hearing the amendment ofl‘ered by the Delegate from Fayette, and upon consultation with those members of the Committee on Rules 12 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] KNo'r'r—J OHNSTON—AUXIEB—BRONSTON. [September 13. with whom I could confer since the debate has been up, we are disposed to accept that amendment, sir, thinking it is a good one, and, so far as I have the authority to say, it, I think the Committee does not object to the amendment ofiered by the gentleman from Fayette. Mr. KN OTT. Mr. President, I was profoundly impressed with the wisdom of the plan proposed by the Delegate from Fayette. I simply desire to ofler this sug- gestion by way of amendment, if he sees proper to accept it, that will, in my judg- ment, simplify the matter; and that is, in place of having a separate Chairman for each of the joint Committees upon the several departments of government, that the Chairman of ,the first Committee named for each department shall, ea: ofiicz'o, be the Chairman of the General Com- mittee. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate accept the amendment? Mr.JOHNST()N. I have no objection to it. The PRESIDENT. Do you accept it? Mr. JOHNSTON. I have no objection, if the subject-matter remains unchanged. The PRESIDENT. The Chair under- stands that the Delegate from Fayette accepts the amendment offered by the Delegate from Marion. Will the Delegate from Marion come up and see that the Clerk gets it properly inserted? Mr. AUXIER. Mr. President, I desire to make an inquiry of the Delegate from Fayette. Does the amendment he offers direct the subordinate Committee ,to report to this General Committee, or does it direct them to make their report to this Conven- tion, and then let the President refer it to the General Committee? The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Fayette will please answer. Mr. JOHNSTON. The amendment pro- vides that all matters pertaining to one of the departments, after being considered by the several Committees, shall, before being reported to the Convention, be submitted for consideration to this General Committee. The object is to bring matters before the Convention in a harmonious shape. If several Committees, considering differ-- ent phases of the same subject, report to the Convention before going through this- har'monizing process, there will be conflict and difficulty in arriving at a conclusion desired, but if they are all brought to- gether, and the different propositions made to harmonize, then you come before the Convention in much better shape, and the Committee composed of the several Com- mittees appointed to consider matters cen- cerning one department can harmonize on subjects belonging to that department a great deal better than this Convention can of a hundred Delegates. Mr. KNOTT. At the request of a num- ber of Delegates, I will withdraw the amendment I made, and will be perfectly content with the amendment of the gen- tleman from Fayette. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Marion withdraws his amendment. N ow, the question is upon the ‘adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clinton, as amended by the amendment of the Delegate from Fayette. Mr. BRONSTON. The amendment is- a substitute. The PRESIDENT. It is accepted by the gentleman from Clinton. It is substan- tially the same as the amendment offered by the gentleman from Fayette. Mr. BRONSTON. I understand that. the amendment is offered as a substitute. The PRESIDENT. It is accepted by the Delegate from Clinton, so it becomes his amendment. Mr. BU RNAM. Before the vote is put. upon the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Fayette, it seems to me that the House ought to act upon the amendments- suggested by the Committee on Rules, that the word “nine” shall be substituted in lieu of “ seven,’ in line 6 of snbsection 7 ORGANIZATION. 13 Saturday,] MCHENRY—BURNAM—JOHNSTON—ALLEN. [September 13‘. and for the word “ seven ” in the fourth line of subsection 8; and also that the word “the” should be stricken out in the first line before the words “ Circuit Courts,’ and an “s” added to the word “court,” maklng it read “A Committee on Circuit Courts.” To this I suppJse there will be no objection, and in order that there be no doubt as to what may be before the Con- vention, that there may be no mistake on the subject, I think we ought to take up those. Mr. McHENRY. Mr. President, the section 8 has not been brought up before the Convention; we are on 7. Mr. BURN AM. They are parts of a common whole. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks there is no doubt about that. Mr. MCHEN RY. I would like to know, while I am on the floor, where the amendment of the gentleman from Fay- ette comes in. The PRESIDENT. If adopted, it will be inserted wherever he indicates. Mr. JOHNSTON. I offer it as a sub- stitute for sections 7, 8 and 9 of Rule 11 of the report of the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Fayette county. The vote being taken on that amend- ment. it was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The first thing now in order is the amendment proposed to the original proposition by the Delegate from Caldwell, which the Secretary will please report. The Reading Clerk then amendment of Mr. Allen. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Mr. President, we are approaching the serious work of this Convention, and I am glad to know that the Delegates are seeking for the fullest and the best information on that subject. The Committee on Rules have provided for three Committees, one on the Court of Appeals, one on Circuit Courts, and one on read the _ County Courts. Should their recommern- dation be accepted by this Convention, which I think is well for us to accept, it becomes necessary, as I think, to strike out the words “Judicial Department,” and other words as indicated in my amend- ment. The Judicial Department comprises the whole Judiciary system of the State. the Appellate Court, the Circuit Court and the County Court, and it strikes me as unnecessary to have the words “Judiciary Department.” I think it advisable, Mr. President, to have a separate and inde- pendent Committee on Appellate Courts and one on Circuit Courts and one on County Courts. There are gentlemen in thls Convention who favor the elevation of the County Court system, and there are other gentlemen who favor a retention of the Circuit Court sysem, and I think it best that these divis- ion of the Judicial Department should be separate and independent for works of sep- arate and independent Committees, and it is for that reason that I have offered the amendment which has just been read by the Secretary. To put the whole Judicial Department of the State under. I might say, the control, to some extent, of one Committee, does not strike me as advis- able. It is better, I think, to have a Com- mittee on each system of Courts, and my amendment is framed simply to reach that end, that we may have three separate independent Committees on the three kinds of Courts we have in this State, and then let each Committee recom- mend such changes and amendments to stitution as they think are required. Mr. McHEN RY. I think the Commit- tee has reported this matter not inconsist- ent with the idea of the gentleman from Caldwell. This section reads, “ A Commit- tee on the Judicial Department and Court of Appeals, whose duty it shall be to re- port what amendments and changes are ' necessary in those portions of the Consti- tution which relate to the J udicicl Depart- 14 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] BLAcKBURN—QUIcKsALL—NUNN—McHENRY. [September 13 . ment and Court of Appeals, not embraced in the jurisdiction of other Committees.” The other two Committees are, one on Circuit Courts and one on County Courts. We want one of the Committees to have cognizance of such other Courts in Ken- tucky. Some of them we do not know how to denominate. We do not know whether they come under Circuit Courts or County Courts; but we want to give one of the Committees cognizance over such matters as as are not embraced in these other two Committees. The Circuit Courts would, perhaps, have jurisdiction of the Common Pleas Courts and the Equity Courts, and then there may be smaller courts. And we simply provide that the first Commit- tee named shall have jurisdiction over all those Courts, unless they belong absolutely to the County Court system or the Circuit Court ‘system; and I think if we should leave it just as it is, it will not be inconsist- ent with the argument made by my friend from Caldwell. Mr. BLACKBURN. It occurs to me that the action of the Convention in adopting the amendment offered by the gentleman from Fayette has obviated the necessity of the amendment ofi'ered by the Delegate from Caldwell. 7, 8 and providing for this Court system, are grouped by the amendment ofiered by the gentleman from Fayette, and we may fairly conclude they will be the Committee on the Judiciary System. I think that is sufficiently provided for without creating any other Committee. Mr. QUICKSALL. If it is not out of order, I have an amendment. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, it may be read for information. The Reading Clerk then read the amend- ment of Mr, Quicksall, as follows: Amend by confederating the Committees suggested in the 8th and 9th sections of Rule 11 with the Committee named in section 7. The PRESIDENT. The question is first on the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Caldwell. ‘ The question being put on the amends ment as announced by the Chair, was lost. - The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the next amendment. The Reading Clerk then read the next- amendment, and a vote being taken upon it, it was declared lost. The next amendment was then read, and a vote being taken on it, it was declared lost. ' The PRESIDENT. Now please report the next amendment, Mr. Secretary. The amendment of the Delegate from Crittenden was then read. Mr.‘ NUNN. I understand that the amendment of the gentleman from Fay- ette covers all points made in my amend- ment, and I withdraw it, The PRESIDENT. The question is now upon the amendment of the gentle- man from Morgan, which the Secretary will pleae report. The resolution of Mr. Quicksall was reported, and a vote being taken upon the same, it was declared lost. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no further objections or amendments to paragraph 7, and the same will be consid- ered as adopted. The Secretary will read the next section. The Reading Clerk then read the next section of Rule 11. Mr. McHENRY. The Committee de- sire this change in that rule to be made. It reads now “A Committee on the Circuit. Court.” They want it to read “ A Com~ mittee on Circuit Courts.” I, therefore, move to strike out the word “the,” before the word “ Circuit,” and insert the letter “s” after the word “ Court.” It will then read “ A Committee on Circuit Courts,” whose duty, etc., instead of “ A Committee on the Circuit Court.” The motion of the Delegate from Ohio being put, it was declared adopted. ORGANIZATIO N. 15 Saturday,] MCHENRY—SMITH—CLARDY—LEWIS. [September 13 .4 The Reading Clerk thereupon read sec- tion 9 of Rule 11. Mr. MoHEN RY. I move, as an amend- ment, to insert 9 instead of 7 in that rule- The motion being put, it was declared adopted. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, paragraph 9, as amended, will be considered as adopted, and the Clerk will read the next paragraph. Section 10 of rule 11 was then read. Mr. MoHENRY. I am directed to move to strike out the word “seven ” and insert “nine” in the fourth line of this rule. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from ‘ Ohio, in behalf of the Committee, moves to strike out the word “seven ” and insert the word “nine” in the fourth line there- of. The motion being put, it was declared adopted. Mr. SMITH. I have an amendment to propose creating a sub-committee on State Universities, to consist of five members. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman will send up his amendment, andthe Clerk will read it. The amendment of the gentleman from Hardin was then read by the Read- ing Clerk. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to say, sir, that Kentucky has no State Universities. The motion is entirely out of order. The PRESIDENT. That is not apar- liamentary point. . Mr. CLARDY We have an A. and M. College, but we don’t want it to be a State University. Mr. SMITH. I suppose the question of whether we should have any State Univer- sities is for the Convention to determine. It is anticipated in my amendment to take in the A. and M. College, and such other State Colleges as may come up in the Con- vention. Mr. McHEN RY. The rule reads this way : “A Committee on Education, whose duty it shall be to report what amend- ments are necessary in the Constitution, in the provisions thereof relating to educa- tion. This Committee shall consist of nine members.” That embraces every thing. We first had that consisting of seven members, but we thought the Com- mittee was so important that we after- wards changed it to nine. It will be a serious question before this body whether we shall abolish the oifice of Superintend- ent of Public Instruction and the Superin- tendents in the different counties. This Committee will certainly have jurisdiction of the affairs indicated by the gentleman from Hardin. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. It‘ occurs to me that too much consideration can not be given to this matter of education, and that the subject of the amendment _is one of sutlicient importance to engage the atten- tion of a sub-committee; and for that reason I shall cordially support the amend- ment, Mr. MoHENRY. I would like to say that the amendment is indefinite, in that it does not say whether the sub-committee shall be appointed from the Committee or independent of it. Mr. SMITH. Upon reflection, I believe that the matter is properly embraced in the Committee as named by the Commit- tee on ‘Rules, and I withdraw my amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, that paragraph will be considered adopted; and the Secretary will read the next para- graph. The Reading Clerk thereupon read sec- tion 11 of Rule 11. The PRESIDENT. Without objecQ‘ tion, that paragraph will be considered as adopted. . Mr. FARMER. I move that the Com- mittee be increased from five members to ine members. The motion being seconded, was put by the President and carried. 1e ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] MCHENRY—MOORE—LEWIS—M ILLER. [September 13 . The Reading Clerk thereupon read the twelfth section of Rule 11. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, that section will be considered as adopted, and the Clerk will read the next section. The Reading Clerk then read section 13 of rule 11. Mr. MoHENRY. The amendment the Committee wishes in that is to strike out the word “ seven” and insert “eleven.” It is a very important Committee, in which all the cities and towns will be interested more or less, and we conclude it would be better to have a large Committee, and I _ therefore move that eleven shall be the number of that Committee. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I think the country is interested in that too. The question on the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Committee was put and carried. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I move to amend that section by inserting the word “counties” ‘between the words “to” and the word “ towns” of that section, so that it shall read “A Committee on Mu- nicipalities, whose duty it shall be to report any changes or amendments to the Constitution in the provisions thereof, re- lating to counties, towns cities and other municipalities.” The question being put on the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington county, it was declared adopted. A division was called, upon which the President announced that the amendment was carried. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would like to ask where that word is to be inserted. I didn’t catch the remarks of the gentleman. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. Between the word “to” and the word “ town,” in the third line of that section, making it read ‘~ re- lating to counties, towns, cities and munic- ipalities.” ‘ Mr. BLACKBURN. I wish to call the attention of the Convention to paragraph 5, and to ask if the very point sought to be covered by the amendment ofi'ered by this gentleman is not embraced in that? There I think is a Committee which has jurisdiction of the matter now suggested, and I therefore move a reconsideration of the vote by which that amendment was adopted. The question being put upon the motion for reconsideration, it was declared lost. The PRESIDENT. Without further objection, that section, as amended, will be considered as adopted, and the Clerk will read the next paragraph. Section 14 of Rule 11 read by the Clerk. Mr. McHEN'RY. We move to strike out “ seven ”'and insert “ nine.” Mr. SMITH. I move to amend by in- serting “eleven.” That is a very impor- tant Committee—as much so as the Com- mittee on Municipalities. The PRESIDENT. The amendment of the Committee will first be voted upon. The question upon the adoption of the amendment ofirered by the Committee on Rules being put, it was declared adopted. Mr.SMITH. I withdraw my amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. Without further objection the section, as amended, will be considered as adopted. The Clerk thereupon read section 15 of Rule 11. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, that section will be considered as adopted. The Clerk then read section 16 of Rule 11. Mr. MCHENRY. I am directed to move to insert the word “punishments” after the word “ crimes,” so that it will read “A Committee on Crimes, Punish- ments and Criminal Procedure; ” and, then we also move to increase the number from five to nine. The word “punish- ments” is inserted on the first line and also on the third. ORGANIZATION. 17 Saturday,] The question being put on the adop- tion of the amendment offered by the Committee on Rules, it was declared adopted. The Clerk thereupon read section 17 of Rule 11. DELEGATE. Imove to strike out the word “three” and insert “six.” This is an important Committee. I Mr. McHENRY. Make it five or seven. The DELEGATE. then. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the amendment proposed by the Delegate, it was declared adopted. The Clerk then read section 18 of Rule 11. Mr. JONSON. There ought to be at least seven on that Committee; and there- fore I move to strike out “three” and insert “seven.” All this printing has to be revised and the Journal correct— ed, and it will require not _only a very large amount of labor, but a very particu- lar sort of labor, requiring the closest at- tention; and it will necessarily be weary- ing and will require relays, one set to re- lieve the other, and three men will not be enough. Mr. McHENRY. I think he has made it too large. Mr. J ON SON. Will not the Journal have to be compared? It seems to me it will necessarily have to. I will make it five. Mr. McHENRY. Well, the Committee will be satisfied with that. The PRESIDENT. The Committee ac- cepting that amendment, and there being no further objection to the section, it is adopted, and the Clerk will read the 19th section. The Clerk then read section 19. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, that paragraph will be considered as adopted. Mr. McHEN RY. Right here, after that. I am directed by the Committee to move a new Rule as No. 20: “A Committee on Make it seven, McHENnY—JoNso'N—MooBE—KNoTT—SPALDING. [September 13 . Division, Titles and Arrangement of the Constitution, whose duty it shall be to an range in proper order the various ar- ticles and sections of the Constitution to be framed by this Convention, and to entitle the same. This Committee shall consist of five members.” That is the amendment, substantially, as offered by the gentleman from Caldwell. Mr. BRONSTON. Is that Rule 20? Mr. L. T. MOORE. It is section 20 of Rule 11. Mr. BRENTS. Section 20 here pro- vides for a Committee on Schedule. The PRESIDENT. This amendment does not do away with that Committee; it is just inserted prior to it. Mr. KNOTT. Will not the new rule offered by the gentleman from Fayette be Rule 21 ‘2 Mr, McHENRY. That rule, I believe, will be 22. It don’t matter about that. We can fix the numbers afterwards. The Clerk can do that. The PRESIDENT. The Chair submits the question as to the amendment pro- posed by the Committee, and that is on the insertion of the new rule just read. The question on the adoption of the amendment being put, it was declared to have been carried. Mr. McHEN RY. I now move that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Fayette be an independent rule, and num- bered 21. Mr. SPALDING. I desire to amend that. The Committee named by the gen- tleman is really three Committees, and I think it will be better to have those put, one after the Committee on Legislative Affairs, one after the Committee on the Judicial Department, and one after the Committee on Executive, and let the Clerk correct the numbers. The question being put upon the amend- ment of the gentleman from Union (Mr. Spalding), was declared by the President to have been carried, 18 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] ALLEN—MCHENRY—HARRIS—HANKS—AUXIER. [September 13 . Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I offer a resolution to amend Rule 11, by adding the following paragraph: “ A Committee on Prison and Prison Management, 8w.” Mr. MCHENRY. I call the attention of the gentleman from Caldwell to Rule 16, where we have provided “A Commit- tee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure.” We inserted the word ‘~ pun- ishments” to cover the very subjects in- dica'ted by the gentleman; and I think that Committee will have control and jurisdiction of the subject-matter indi- cated by the gentleman, and we made that committe nine members. If he wants eleven, we do not'object to it; but that committee certainly has jurisdiction of the matters embraced in his resolution. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I read the Rule 16, and I don’t know what the intention and purpose of the Committee on Rules was in that regard. I look upon prison management and convict labor as one of the great questions of the day, and I think that it is important enough to put it in the hands of a separate and independent com- mittee; but if Rule16 covers that question, I withdraw my motion. Section 21 was then read by the Clerk. Mr. McHENRY. The Committee sim- ply desire to change the number of that which is now 20 to 24 or 25, or whatever the last number of the Committee will be. What will be the right number? The CLERK. The Committee on Di- vision Titles and Arrangement will be No. 20, and the three committees of the gentle- man from Fayette will be 21,22 and 23, and this will be 24. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Secretary will make the numbers con- form to the fact. Mr. HARRIS. I wish to ofl‘er an amendment, to come after the twentieth section. Mr. Harris’ amendment was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Amend report of the Committee on Rules by adding, after paragraph 20, Rule 11, page 6, printed rules: A Committee on the Location of the Capital of the State, whose duty it shall be to prepare and report any changes or amendmen is to the Constitution necessary to provide for the permanent location of the Capital of the State. This Committee shall consist of five members. Mr. McHENRY. Make that seven. Mr. HARRIS. I have no objection. The question being put upon the adops tion of the amendment, it was declared carried. Mr. McHENRY. I now submit that that Rule should be made N o. 24, and the schedule Committee be made 25. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such will be the order of the Convention. Mr. HANKS. It is of very great im- portance, I think, that there should be a Committee on the subject of Charitable Institutions in this Commonwealth, and I would ask that the report of the Commit- tee be amended by the appointment of such a Committee, for there is quite a num- ber of people in the State who would come under said institutions, and who ought to be protected. Mr. Hanks’ resolution was sent up and read by the Reading Clerk. Amend the report of the Committee on Rules by adding a Committee on Charity and Charitable Institutions, to consist of seven members. Mr. AUXIER. I have an amendment to offer to that. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman from Pike will send up his amendment to be read. The amendment offered by Mr. Auxier was then read by the Reading Clerk. The PRESIDENT. That is identical with the resolution of the gentleman from Anderson county. Do you withdraw it? Mr. AUXIER. If that is the case, I do. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that that resolution be amended so as to include internal improvements and all institutions, _ owned by the State. ORGANIZATION. 19 Saturday,] MILLER—TWYMAN—SPALDING—MCDERMOTT. [September 13 . The PRESIDENT. The gentleman will please put his amendment in writing. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I withdraw my amendment. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Anderson. The question on the adoption of the amendment being put, was declared to have been carried, and the amendment was adopted. Paragraph 12 of the Rules was then read and adopted as reported by the Com- mittee. Paragraph 13 of the Rules was then read and adopted as reported by the Com- mittee. Paragraph 14 was then read by the Clerk. Mr. TWYMAN. I move to amend that section by inserting after the word “seat” the words “ assigned him.” Mr. SPALDIN G. That won’t do. Mr. TWYMAN. If there is any ob- jection to the amendment, 1 will withdraw it. Paragraph 14 was then read and adopt- ed as reported by the Committee. Paragraphs 15, 16, 17 and 18 were then read, and- there being no objection to either of said paragraphs, they were adopted. Paragraph 19 was then read. .Mr. BOLES. I desire to ofier an amend- ment to that by adding thereto at the end thereof the following: “Nor shall any Delegate speak more than half an hour in any speech, unless by the unanimous consent of the Convention.” Mr. MoDERMOTT offered the following amendment: Amend the 19th section by addingthere- to the following words: No speech or ex- planation shall be made by a member, after those voting in the afiirmative have voted. Before a vote is taken on a motion to re- consider, the person who made the original motion shall have the right to conclude the debate, by speaking ten minutes thereon, or b y allowing any other member to speak in his place. This right to speak shall not be prevented by the passing of any motion not subject to debate. ‘ The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the amendment ofiered by the Dele- gate from Barren county. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the amendment of the Delegate from Barren county, it was declared to have been lost. Mr. McDERMOTI‘. I will explain-my purpose in ofi'ering my amendment. It is to prevent that confusion which results from members waiting until they see how half of the members vote before they make their speeches, and then have the ‘House wait during roll-call for them to speak. By giving the members ten minutes apiece, you will give every one a fair chance to be heard. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the amendment offered by the gentleman from the Fifth District of Louisville, it was declared to have been lost. Mr. President Clay here left the Chair and called upon the gentleman from Bar- ren county (Mr. Boles) to act in his stead. The CHAIRMAN. There being no further objection to the rule under con- sideration, it will be considered as adopted, and the Clerk will read the next section. The Reading Clerk thereupon read par- agraph 20. The CHAIRMAN. There being no objection to that paragraph, it is consid- ered as adopted by the Convention, and we will proceed with the reading of the rules. The Clerk thereupon read paragraph 21. Mr. SPAL DING. There was an amend- ment sent up a while ago which you had better read—no, I believe it was on the next rule that the amendment is offerred. Section 21, without objection, was adopt- ed by the House, and the Reading Clerk .then read paragraph 22. 20 ORGANIZATION. S_aturday,] Mr. MCHENRY. The Committee di- rect me to offer as an amendment to that, the additon, which the Clerk will please read from the report of the Committee sent up. The Reading Clerk thereupon read said amendment as follows : The President’s name shall be called last. During roll call no debate or explanation of a vote shall be given, except by the unanimous consent of the Convention. Mr. MCHENRY. Our object was to prevent speeches being inserted during roll-call. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to amend that by striking out the words “ or explan- ation of a vote.” Mr. M0 HENRY. That is the very thing we what to put in. We don’t want any speeches put in during the roll-call. If a Delegate wants to explain, let him do it before the vote, during the debate, or if absolutely necessary, let him get leave of the Convention and do it after roll-call. Mr. BRONSTON. I think that the proposition must be to save time. To pre- vent the discussion or debate pending roll- call, and of course, the ultimate purpose must be to save time. It occurs to me, possibly, that a great many Delegates on this floor may not desire to engage in a general discussion, and yet, may desire to accompany their votes with a short explan- ation. In all parliamentary bodies, and in this one above all others, it is important sometimes, to explain a vote. Frequently a gentleman who does not care to enter in a ‘general discussion before the Convention, will want to accompany his vote with a short explanation. ‘ Mr. MCHENRY. And the effect of it is that gentlemen, by way‘ of explaining their votes, will insert arguments upon the floor, and those arguments, of the gentle- men whose names have been called, can not answer. Some other gentlemen whose names come afterwards, could probably get MCHENRY—BRONSTON—YOUNG—CLARIDY. [September 13 . up and answer the argument; but it is not fair to insert a speech during roll-call. It frequently occurs in Legislative‘bodies that the result of a vote is changed by a speech put in after roll-call. It invariably produces confusion. If a gentleman wants to explain his vote, let him do it just pre- ceding the roll-call. Our idea was that gentlemen must explain their vote in ad- vance of the previous question, but by leave of the House, they could explain it after- wards. We can not consent to the amend- ment of the gentleman. Mr. YOUNG. It seems to me that we should not start out with any rule which would prevent free discussion. A man might be detained providentially, he may be sick, or some of his family may be sick; and I think every one should be allowed the fullest opportunity to explain their votes. That is a question which is always subject to the direction of the Chair, and if a gentleman unduly abuses the right, some gentleman can call him to order or the Chair may call him to order; but it seems to me to be unfair to say that a gentleman shall not explain his vote. If this privilege is abused, the House will soon correct it and the President will cor- rect it. But I say let the circumstances surrounding each part of the case govern that case. I did not agree with the Com- mittee on that subject, and said so yester- day; and after hearing what has been said this morning, I am further of the opinion that it is in the direction of stifling expres- sion of opinion at a time when a man has a right of expressing his opinion, and giv- ing a reason for his vote. Mr. CLARDY. I simply want to en- dorse what has been said by the gentleman from Ohio, the Chairman of the Commit- tee on Rules, and to say that where there is a real necessity to explain, ample pro- vision is made in the Convention by stating that they make explanation by the consent of the Convention. The Convention will. 'not be unreasonable in a matter of that ORGANIZATION. 21 Saturday,] BRONSTON—GLARDY—WHITAKER—HINES. [September 13 . kind. The adoption of this Rule will save much time, and where there is any necessity for any explanation, no doubt the Conven- tion will grant it. Mr. BRONSTON. a question? Mr. CLARDY. Certainly. Mr. BRONSTON. The amendment of the gentleman provided that he may do it with the consent of the Convention. Does it_not provide that he can not do it. except by the unanimous consent ? Mr. CLARDY. That is the wording of it. Mr. MCHENRY. The word “unani- mous” is there, and we meant it to be there. Mr. WHITAKER. I believe it is rea- sonable to suppose that the members of the Convention will be liberal in this regard, and that all necessary discussion will be permitted, to enable every member of this body to vote intelligently, when it comes upon the passage of any matter; and, when it comes their vote, either aye or nay, will determine the sense of this body. 1 fear if an explanation of votes is allowed during roll call, this habit will run into the making of speeches on the merits of the question, rather than explaining votes, un- til we will get into confusion, and take up twice the time which would otherwise be necessary. I hope that the report of the Committee will be adopted, and that all discussions and all explanation of vote during roll call will be shut off. I think the vote itself is the best explanation of the vote of any gentlemen. Mr. J. S. HINES. It so happens in de- liberative bodies like this, that sometimes those who are a little backward about en- gaging in the original discussion, wait until the previous question is moved, and then are cut off; but at the same time desire their constituentslto know their reasons for their votes. When a previous question is moved and carried, under the rule of the Committee, those gentlemen are cut off Will you permit me from any explanation. And I desire es- pecially to answer that one argument against the amendment, that a speech made in explaining a vote may change the resultof it. I want to say, if speech made during roll call would have the effect to change the result, the Convention ought to have that speech. If any gentleman has a reason for his vote, sufiicient to change the result, of the vote on the question, let us, by all means, hear his reason. Mr. SPALDIN G. There are several objections to the amendment in my mind, some of which have not been stated. The gentleman from Russell (Mr. Hines) has given the strongest one. He says if he has a reason strong enough to change the result of a vote, he ought, therefore, to give it. Then you ought to open the de- bate at any time during roll-call, and you never would get through. If one member gives his reason for voting, there is no reason why other members can not give theirs. It is a very delicate matter for the presiding oflicer to decide what is a per- sonal explanation and what is debate. The line of demarkation between those is very hard to define; and this rule of the Committee will relieve the presiding oflii- cer of the Convention of that embarrassing position. There is still another objection. Many questions are not debatable; a mo- tion to lie upon the table, the previous question, to adjourn, and several others. Now, if a Delegate has a right to explain his vote on one, I presume the amend- ment would give him a right to explain on all of those. So that it would result in this, that a question which could not be debated on the floor before the roll-call was begun, during the time that the roll was being called could be debated by any gen- tleman. I think, taking it all around, it is a much better plan to adopt the rule as reported by the Committee. I do not, for a moment, presume that this House will withhold unanimous consent to explain his vote from any gentleman desiring it. 22 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] HANKS—MCDERMOTT. [September 13 . Mr. HANK\‘. In addition to What the gentleman from Russell has said, that the fact that a word of explanation during roll-call may change the vote is a splendid reason for allowing the explanation, I desire to say that there are a number of gentlemen here who are so placed in this hall that they will not be recognized as readily as some other gentlemen. If they have arguments to make upon any propo- sition, they may be overlooked—not inten- tionally, of course. The gentleman from Union has argued that, under the amend- ment, if adopted, Delegates will argue and debate during roll-call upon motions to adjourn and other non-debatable mo- tions. Allow me to say that our Presi- dent, who presides over our deliberations here, will not permit such a thing, as the gentleman from Union certainly knows. I think, in all fairness to these gentlemen, that the amendment should be adopted. It seems to me that expression of opinion should be allowed. on all questions, whether when giving a vote or otherwise. They are only allowed to speak once on a ques- tion, and if they refuse to take up tho time of the Convention in the original debate, they certainly should have the right to take up a small portion of the time explaining their vote. Therefore, I think this rule cutting ofi explanation of votes should not be passed, so that the constituents of every Delegate can know exactly how he stands on all propositions. Mr. BRONSTON. In offering that amendment I desire to say one word, and that word will be more in the nature of an apology than otherwise. I have the great- est respect for the experience and wisdom of the gentlemen who compose this Com- mittee on Rules, and it was with great re- luctance that I offered the amendment, because I am convinced, from the careful reading of the report of the Committee, that they have given to each and every matter ‘before, them the most careful con- sideratio", and, of course, they could not have overlooked as important a matter as the one now before this Convention. But the reasons given by the distinguished gen; tleman from Union, even if I had a doubt about the propriety of this amendment before, would have removed my doubt, and have convinced me of its importance and its prime necessity. The principal reason given by him as against this amendment proposed, was that it would enable a Dele- gate upon the floor to discuss a question which otherwise could not be discussed, and he cited a motion to adjourn, that the Delegate in explaining his vote upon the motion to adjourn, mightinfiuence the vote of other members, either for or against that motion, Now, if he has a good reason, if he has a reason which he feels he ought to give to his constituents at home, as to why he votes for or against that proposi- tion, ought not he be permitted to express that reason; and if in expressing that rea- son he convinces other Delegates on this floor that they should vote thus or so, is there a Delegate on the floor who would not be much obliged for the information and the additional light he would get in that manner. I assume that every Dele- gate upon this floor desires all the light and information upon the subjects, upon which he is called upon to vote, that can possibly be given. And, if after the great flood of light which would result from a general discussion has been thrown upon the mat- ter, if by a simple suggestion from a Dele- gate an additional ray should come out that would cause him to change his vote, that would convince him that he has made a mistake, and that he ought to vote other- wise, instead of any Delegate being de- sirous to shut that off, it occurs to me that he ought to be exceedingly thankful for the additional light which would enable him to do that which we all want to do, and that is to do right, and that which is for the best interest of the people who sent us here. This is in the nature of a gag rule, and 1, upon this floor, will op- ORGANIZATION. as Saturday,] MCDERMOTT—MOORE—BIRKHEAD—HANKS—JONSON. 4.. * [September 13 . pose any effort to stifie dissussion, in what- ever form that discussion may come; and if a suggestion made explaining a vote convinces me I have cast a vote wrong- fully, I would have that suggestion in order thatI may change the vote that I have already cast. One other suggestion “and I have done. It occurs to me that the ultimate purpose of the Committee in offer- ing the rule is to prevent too much discus- sion. The amendment I offer will aid the gentlemen in that case. Instead of requir- ing, as do the Committee on Rules, that every Delegate who may desire, shall go on the floor and discuss a question, those Delegates who do not desire to enter into the discussion, can in a few words explain their votes during roll-call, and thus save a great deal of time. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I Wish to offer an amendment to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lexington. If he thinks that it is so important to debate during roll-call, I have an amendment which will suit him. Amend by inserting, all speeches must be made during roll-call, The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk suggests to me that your amendment is not in or— der. I am not much of a parliamenta- rian. Mr. MCDERMOTT. The gentleman from Lexington has convinced me of the correctness of his position, and as we don’t want any gag law, I think we had better have a full discussion during roll-call. That was the reason for sending up my resolution. ' Mr. L. T. MOORE. I trust that none of the gentlemen of the Convention will be alarmed by the statement that this is in the nature of a gag law. That argument applies as well to the rules we have adopted in allowing the previous question, motion to adjourn and other motions to be de- bated. I desire to say to the Delegate from Anderson county that this will not be used by the innocents of this body to make . such rule. —‘ explanation of their speeches, but by the most astute, the gentlemen who know what impression they can make on the the rest of the D-.-legates by injecting a speech in the body of the vote. That will be the purpose, practically, of the amend- ment proposed by the gentleman. It will not at all be used by the innocents, those who are too modest to speak when debate is proper. It will be used by those who debate as much as they choose and then will inject a speech afterwards. Those are the reasons that induce, me offer the rule as reported by the Committee. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I just want to sug- gest that the very argument used by the gentleman from Lexington is an argument against his amendment, and that is that he wants all the light he can get. I am in favor of that, but I think by adopting the rule of‘ the Committee, we will force or turn on all the light before the voting be- gins. But this amendment may shut off some light until the roll-call has begun. The explanation he gives can be answered as some of the gentlemen have said, by suggesting that in all probability there will be advantages sought and obtained, that gentlemen will resort to argument in ex- plaining their vote. And I want to re- view and press the point of the gentleman from Ohio that this amendment will be used to enable gentlemen to make argu- ments during the vote. I want to shut off all that and compel them, if they have any light which ought to be considered, to give us that light in the regular argument, and not wait until after the voting has begun and a good many Delegates have voted. Mr. HANKS. I desire to offer an amendment to that amendment. The CHAIRMAN. The amendment is not in order. Mr. J ONSON . I am opposed to all gag laws. It is said that this rule is a gag law; I don’t so regard it. I think we need some I think if we look across to our 24 ORGANIZATION. éaturdayj BRONSTON—PETTIT—HAN KS. September 13 , national capital, where there is a body which has been under the administration and domain of general parliamentary law for a few months recently passed, every gentleman ought to conclude that there should be rules for this body. And every- body agree that these rules ought to have some meaning and some force; and it seems ~ to me to now permit the amendment ofier- ed by the gentlemen from Lexington, is to strike down every solitary rule adopted by this body, or that will be adopted by it. It seems to me that no rule would be sacred. I am in favor of a full and free expression of opinion. I heard it kind of surmised on the other side of the house that this :Convention was composed of a set of maidenly-disposed Delegates, who were not ready to get up and give ex- pression to their opinion. I was amazed at that. Certainly, nothing that has occurred here could have lead to such an impression. I heard a gentleman say that he thought it was the most resolute body he had ever been before, andI believe he was right. I believe the determination and make-up of this Convention is lion-like. I have seen no disposition to reticence anywhere; and, I believe, at the proper time, on all sub- jects we will have a full and free discussion and expression of opinion by everybody. The CHAIRMAN. The Reading Clerk will please report the original rule and the amendment of the Committee, also the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lexington; which was done. The CHAIRMAN. Idon’t know wheth- er I am correct, but I take it that the ques- tion is upon the amendment ofiered by the gentlemen .from Lexington. Mr. SPALDIN G. Upon the amend~ ment offered by the Committee. Mr. J. S. HINES. I desire a division of that amendment oflfered by'the Committee. The CHAIRMAN. A division of the question is asked for, and the Clerk will read the first portion of the amendment or" the Committee, which was done. The question being put upon the adop- tion of that part of the amendment pro- posed by the Committee on Rules, it was declared carried. The CHAIRMAN. The question is now on the last part of the amendment proposed by the Committee, which the Clerk will please report; which was done. Mr. BRONSTON. I submit that my amendment to that has priority. The CHAIRMAN. The President of the Convention has been ruling otherwise, and 1 shall follow him. Mr. BRONSTON. I don’t think that has been the case. Mr. PETTIT. I want to say that is a well established rule that has been fol- lowed by most parliamentary bodies. I observed the action of the President this morning, and it is perfectly proper. Your action was in accordance with the prece- dent established by the President. It is apparent that the Committee must have the right to perfect their work before any amendments can possibly be oflered to it. Then you have a perfect report of the Committee, and then all amendments are in order. Mr. BRONSTON. If this amendment of the Committe is adopted— Mr. PETTIT. Your amendment is then order. Mr. BRONSTON. On that I call the ayes and nays. Mr. HANKS. I second it. The CHAIRMAN. The ayes and nays are demanded by the Delegate from Lex- ington and seconded by the Delegate from Anderson. All you who are of the opin- ion that the amendment of the Committee should be adopted, will say aye; those contrary, say nay; and the Clerk will call the roll. Mr. BRONSTON. I withdraw my call the ayes and nays. What I want the ayes and nays on is the motion to-strike out the words. You are now proposing to adopt the amendment, ofl'ered by the Committee, ORGAN IZATION . 25 Saturday,] BRONSTON-—_—HANKS-—B ECKHAM—MCHENRY. [September 13, When that is adopted, the next thing will be on my amendment to strike out certain words. I did not desire to call the ayes and nays on the first proposition. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Lexington withdraws his call for the ayes and nays. ‘ . The question was then put on the adop- tion of the amendment of the Committee on Rules, and declared to have been car- ried. Mr. BRONSTO N. Now, the question is on my motion to strike out, and on that, I call for the ayes and nays. Mr. HANKS. I second it. The CHAIRMAN. The proposition is on the adoption of the amendment of the gentleman from Lexington, upon which he demands a call for the yeas and nays. Those in favor of his amendment will say yea, and those contrary nay, and the Clerk will call the roll. Mr. BECKHAM. I call for a report of the amendment ofi’ered by the gentleman from Lexington. The Clerk thereupon read said amend‘ ment. The result of the roll-call was as follows: ‘mas—21. Askew, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Beckham, J. C. Holloway, J. W, Blackburn, James Hopkins, F. A Boles, S. H. Johnston, P. P. Brents, J. A. Miller, Will Bronston. C. J Phelps, John L. Brown, J. S. Phelps, Zack Buchanan, Nathan Swango. G. B. DeHaven, S. E. West, J. F. Hanks, Thomas H. Young, B. H. Hines, J. S. NAYs—Zl. Allen, C. T. Kennedy, Hanson Amos, D. C. Kirwan, E. E. A yres, W. W. Knott, J. Proctor Bennett, B. F. Lewis, J. W. Birkhead B. T. Lewis, W. W. Blackwell, Joseph Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R Brummal. J. M. Buckner, S, B. Bullitt, W. G. McDermott. E. J. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, Henry D. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Chambers, G. D. Moore, Laban T Clardy, J. D. Muir, J. W. Doris, W. F. Nunn, T. J. Durbin, Charles Pettit, Thomas S. Edrington, W. J. Pugh, Sam‘l J. Elmore, T. J. Quicksall, J. E. Farmer, H H. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. ‘G. Sachs. Morris A. Forgy, J. M. Smith, H. H. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. Jacobs, R. P. Jonson, Jep. C. The CHAIRMAN. The question now recurs on the adoption of the twenty-second section, as amended by the Committee on Smith, Scott Spalding, 1.. A. Twyman, l. W. Whitaker, Emery Williams,L.P.V. Rules. Are there any further amendments to be offered ? If not, it will be considered as adopted. Section 28 was then read. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the rule will be considered as adopted. Section 24 was then read. The CHAIRMAN. Withoutobjection, the rule will be considered as adopted. Section 25 was then read. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the rule will be considered as adopted. Mr. MOHENRY. We have now adopt- ed all the sections except section 26. There are various amendments to this re- port, but we have adopted the Committee’s, Ithink. Do I understand that the report now is adopted as to the Committees? If that is so, the President can go to work and appoint his Committees, and we can finish this report at any other time. We can hardly finish it in time for the gentle- men who are going West to get on upon their train; and 1 was going to suggest that we adjourn now, and suggest that we adjourn until Tuesday at 3 o’elock. Mr. PETTIT.‘ Make it Wednesday morning at 11 o’clock. Mr. MoHEN RY. I am not particular about that; I will accept that amendment. 26 ORGANIZATION. Saturday,] MCHENRY—MCELROY. [September 13 . Mr. McELROY. I move, as a substi- tute, that we adjourn Monday at the regu- lar time. Mr. McHENRY. The President of the Convention will want to adjourn until at least Tuesday. I don’t care to adjourn at all so far as I am concerned, but the Presi- dent wants to make up his Committees and we have now adopted that much of the report and he can go to work on the Com- mittees. I think he can get through with the Committees by Tuesday, but some gentlemen want to adjourn longer, and probably I shall vote for Wednesday. Mr. McELROY. I think the gentle- man who has just taken his seat, or myself, must have misunderstood the President. I don’t understand that the President wishes the Convention to adjourn until Tuesday. He may want that time to make his Com- mittees, but I think it would be a very wise thing for as many as possible of the Con- vention to be with him, to counsel with him, and give him aid in forming his Com- mittees. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Ohio has moved to adjourn untsl Wednesday at 11 o’clock, and the gentle- man from Allen moves, as a substitute, to adjourn until Monday at 10 o’clock. The question will be first put on the longest time. Upon the vote being called on the ques- tion of adjourning until Wednesday at 11 o’clock, it was declared to have been car- ried, and the Convention thereupon ad- journed. gZum/eniiun guard. —— K E N T U C K Y —- CONSTITUTIONAL CCDNVENTIQN - Vol. 1.] Wednesday,] FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 17, 1890. BULLITT. [September 17. The Convention met, pursuant to ad- journment, at 11 o’clock A. M., being called to order by the President (Mr. Clay). Prayer was offered by the Rev. Mr. Bagby. The Journal of Saturday’s proceedings was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order will be petitions. Mr. BULLITT. I desire to file the report of the Committee appointed to con- fer with the Printer, to provide for the printing of the proceedings. It seems that all parties are anxious to get this matter disposed of. The PRESIDENT. It can be before the Convention by unanimous consent. There is an unfinished report now before the Convention. Mr. BULLITT. I know that, and I desire unanimous consent. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, the report may be read. The report was read, as follows: SEPTEMBER 17, 1890. To Hon. 0. M. Clay, President Constitu- tional Convention .' Your Committee, appointed for the pur- pose of ascertaining what arrangements can be made for the publication of the proceedings of this Convention, beg leave to report as follows: 1. That the proceedings of this Conven- tion should be printed daily. 2. That the Official Reporter to this Convention be directed to take down in short-hand the proceedings of this Con- vention, in the order in which said pro- geedings are had, and that he be directed ‘ to arrange the work of his associates in such a manner as to furnish copy to the Printer to this Convention as rapidly as possible. 3. That the Printer to this Convention be directed to lay upon the desk of each member of this Convention, at 10 o’clock each day, the printed proceedings of the preceding day; but said Printer shall print only 125 copies before correction by the Convention and members. 4. That 1,000 copies of said proceedings be printed and bound in law-calf or good paper, using type not smaller than minion and that in making up the forms for said printing, the Printer shall follow the form, style, etc., to be found in the Debates oi the Massachusetts Convention of 1853. 5. That said 1,000 bound volumes shall be used in the following way and manner, v1z.: One copy to each Circuit Clerk’s ofiice in the State. One to each County Clerk’s office. One to each County J udge’s oflice. One to each member and officer of this Convention. One to each public officer at the capital of the State. Fifty copies for the State Library. Fifty copies for exchange with other States and Territories. And the balance of said 1,000 bound vol- umes may be sold by the Librarian to any one wishing to purchase same at a price [to be fixed by the Printer and Librarian, and the proceeds thereof conveyed into the Treasury by the Librarian. 6. That, in addition, said Printer shall‘ [No. 7 2 . ORGANIZATION. Wednesday,] KNo'r'r—AnLnnflMoHnnnY. print 3,000 copies, the proceedings of each day being cut and stitched together, for distribution among the people of the State by the members of this Convention, in such manner as the Convention may di- rect. 7 . That the Printer to this Convention shall receive for his work the same com- pensation as now allowed by law for doing similar work, and a fair and reasonable in- crease on same for all work he may do at night. 8. That the Secretary and Reporter of this Convention be directed to prepare for publication the proceedings of last week, and that they do so as soon as possible, and when done, they furnish same to the Printer. 9. That the Official Reporter be, and he is authorized, to appoint a Page, who shall be under his control; and said Page shall receive 5the same compensation as other Pages employed by this Convention. W. G. BULLITT, C. T. ALLEN, E. J. MCDERMOTT, Hanson KENNEDY, SAM'L J. PUGH. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the consideration of the report? The Chair hears none, and the report is before the Convention for debate, commit- ment or amendment. Mr. KNOTT. I move that it be print- ed, and lie on the table until after the ac- tion of the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. It is moved that the report be printed and postponed until the report of the Committee on Rules. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I desire to call the attention of the Convention to the fact that we have been in session one week, and not one word on this matter of printing the proceedings of the Convention has been said. I think it advisable that this matter of printing be settled, and settled to-day. If we print and recommit, ‘and put it off until another day, we have that much more matter accumulated on our- hands for the Printer to-morrow or the next day. The Committee to whom this matter was referred have conferred with. the Public Printer, and have made the best report it can, and I suggest to the gentle-- man from Marion. as well as to the mem- bers of the Convention, that this matter be disposed of, that the Printer may proceed with his work. And I suggest, if the gen- tleman from Marion wlll allow me, that we take up the report of that Committee-- se'rz'atim, in order that the various clauses may be explained. The PRESIDENT. The question be- fore the Convention is on the motion of the Delegate from Marion to print the‘ report and postpone further consideration until the Committee on Rules has disposed. of it. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was declared to have been carried by 43 to 38. The PRESIDENT. The next thing in order is the report of the Committee on Rules, and the Secretary will begin where- he left off last Saturday. Mr. MoHENRY. By unanimous con.. sent, I want to go back to the eleventh section. I believe it is the one that provides. for the Committees, and I desire to offer the following amendment to that section.. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary wil. report the amendment. Amend paragraph 22, which was the. first paragraph offered by the Delegate from Fayette, by adding the words, on line eleven, “ and shall be ex oficio a mem- ber of the Committee on Legislative De_ partment.” Mr. MoHENRY. I will make this ex- planation. The rules, as we left them the other day, the Committee thought, were not sufiiciently definite, and we make this- change. In the Judicial Department we- say the Committees on Circuit Courts and County Courts shall sit in joint session with that on Court of Appeals; in the [September 17 .. ORGANIZATION. 3 Wednesday,] HARRIS—J ONSON--.MC HENRY. [September 17 . Executive Department, that the Committee on Executive Ofiicers for the State at Large and the County Oflicers shall sit in joint session. In the Legislative Depart- ment, we have a Committee on Revenue and Taxation, and Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure, and we provide that they shall sit in general Committee; and it is provided furthermore that the President shall appoint a Chairman ot each one of the Committees, and that he shall be ex ofiicio a member of the first-named Committee. For instance, he will be a member ea: oficz'o on the Committee on the Court of Appeals and of the Executive Department for the State at Large, and the other one will be on the Legislative De- partment. That is the change we made, and the Committee direct me to move this amendment. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment oflered by the Committee on Rules. The question being put, it was declared to have been adopted. Mr. HARRIS. In offering the resolu- tion calling for a Committee on the Loca- tion of the Capital, I wish to say that I did not do so as the champion of any par- ticular locality, or as the opponent of any particular locality. I felt that the subject was one of great importance, and that this Convention ought to settle it. I thought that the Committee on Rules had inad- vertently omitted it. Since its adoption, I -have reflected about it, and had a consulta- tion with some other Delegates; and I believe that is the only subject which may be in the nature of a firebrand in this Convention. I know it is likely to excite some local antagonisms and conflicts, and I am very much inclined to think that this subject had better be postponed indefinitely, or until some later stage of the proceed- ings. With the idea of withdrawing the resolution, I ‘now move to reconsider the voteby which that resolution was adopted. The PRESIDENT. It is moved ‘and seconded that the vote by which the rule was adopted, providing for a Commit- tee on the Location of the Capital, be re- considered. Mr. J ON SON. Unless the motion is mode to reconsider on the same day that the measure is passed, there must be notice of one day given of the intention to make the motion. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is correct. It can only be done by unanimous consent. DELEGATES. Object! Object! The PRESIDENT. It can only be done under suspension of the rules, then. Unless such motion is made, it is out of order. Mr. HARRIS. I wish to give notice that 1 will make that motion to-morrow. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will enter such notice. The Secretary will read the next paragraph of the report of the Committee‘ on Rules. The PRESIDENT. Without objec- tion, the paragraph just read will be con- sidered as adopted. Mr. MoHENRY. The Committee have an amendment to offer there. The Com- mittee moved an amendment at the end of the third line, to insert the words “or to amend.” Have you got that there? The SECRETARY. Yes; but I don’t think it has been acted upon. The PRESIDENT. The question will be on the amendments of the Committee. The question being put upon the amend- ment of the Committee, it was declared carried. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, I submit an amendment. The amendment offered by Mr. Pettit read, as follows: Amend page 8, section 26, line 2, by inserting atter the word adjourn the fol- lowing: “ A call of the House.” Mr. PETTIT. I think that is neces- sary. 4 ORGANIZATION. Upon the vote being taken, the amend- ment of Mr. Pettit was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Without objec- tion, the paragraph, as amended, will be considered as adopted. Read paragraph 27. Paragraph 27 was then read. The President here resigned the chair to Mr. Pettit. The CHAIRMAN. Without ‘objec- tion, the paragraph will be considered as adopted. Paragraph 28 was then read by the Secretary. The amendment of the Committee on Rules was then read. The CHAIRMAN. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment pro- posed by the Committee. The question being put, was declared to have been carried. Mr. WOOD. I propose an amendment, to strike out the word “ without,” and add in lieu thereof “ we limit.” The CHAIRMAN. You have heard the amendment offered by the gentleman from Taylor. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the amendment of the Delegate from Taylor, it was declared lost. Mr. W. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to offer an amendment. Amend by inserting the words, “except when the Convention is voting” after the word “order,” in the first line. I desire to say it will then read, “a motion to adjourn will be always in order, except when the Convention is voting.” I believe some such motion will be very important. Sometimes members take opportunity of the roll-call to filibus- ter, and I believe it will be well to insert such an amendment. The question being put upon the adop- tiqn of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Monroe, was declared‘ to have been lost. Wednesday,] MoHENRY—Woon—SMrrn—Lnwrs. [September 17 _ Mr. MCHEN RY. I think that is Mr. McHEN RY. I call for a report of proper. the amendment. The rule as amended by the Committee was then read, and the amendment of the Delegate from Monroe reported. Mr. McHENRY. I have no objection to that, and I don’t think the Committee can have any. Mr. J‘. W. LEWIS. I move to amend the amendment by adding to it “except when the President is in the act of sub- mitting questions to a vote of the Conven- tion,” so as to make it read “ except when the President is in the act of submitting a vote to the Convention, or when the Con- vention is voting.” Mr. SCOTT SMITH. amendment. The question being put upon the amend- ment of the Delegate from Monroe, as amended by the Delegate from Washing- ton, was declared to have been lost by a vote of 38 to 39. - Paragraph 29 was read. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, this paragraph will be considered agreed to, and the Clerk will report the next par- agraph. Paragraph 30 was read. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, this paragraph will be considered agreed to, and the Clerk will report the next par- agraph. Paragraph 31 was then read. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, this paragraph will be considered agreed to, and the Clerk will report the next par- agraph. - Paragraph 32 was then read. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to amend by striking out the word “ not” it the third line. The motion on the amendment being put, was declared to have been lost. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, this paragraph will be considered agreed to, I accept the and the Clerk will report the next para. " graph. ORGANIZATION. ,5 Wednesday,] CARROLL—MCHENBY—SPALDING. [September l'f. Paragraph 33 was then read. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to offer an amendment. After the words “at any time,” insert “within three days.” Under the rule as it now stands, a motion to re- consider a question may be taken up and considered two months after the question has been disposed of by the Convention. The object of the amendment is to limit the motion to reconsider to three days after the question has been passed on by the Convention. Mr. McHENRY. I do not see, if we have done something wrong, that we should not reconsider it at any time before the Convention adjourns. The rule is difierent here from what it would be in a legislative body, where they want to reconsider the passage of an act, because there it has to go to the Governor for signature and appro- val. We want to have our work in shape to reconsider any thing at any time. We don’t think there should be any limit to it in this body. The rule of the gentleman, I think, is a good rule for a legislative body, but here it is different. We should recon- sider at any time upon a day’s notice. The question being put upon the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Henry, it was declared to have been lost. The CHAIRMAN. Without further objection, the paragraph will be considered as having been agreed to. _ Paragraph 34 was then read. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, this paragraph will be considered agreed to, and the Clerk will report the next para- graph. Paragraph 35 was then read. The amendment offered by the Commit- tee on Rules in their report was then read. The question being put upon the amend- ment proposed by the Committee, it was de- clared to have been carried, and the amend- ment adopted. ; ' - ~ Paragraph 36 was then read. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, this paragraph will be considered as L agreed to, and the Clerk will report the next paragraph. Paragraph 37 was then read. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, this paragraph will be considered agreed to, and the Clerk will report the next paragraph. Paragraph 38 was then read. _' , The CHAIRMAN. Agreed to, unless there is objection. ' Paragraph 39 was then read. , The CHAIRMAN. Agreed to, with; out objection. ‘ ‘ Paragraph 40 was then read. - The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the paragraph is agreed to. Paragraph 41 was then read. Mr. SPALDING. The rule we just adopted was modified in another rule, that the President’s name shall be called last, To prevent confusion, we had better add. there that the name of the President shall be called last. I move to reconsider the vote by which paragraph 40 was adopted, in order to amend it in that way. I.‘ The question being put upon the motion to reconsider the vote by which paragraph 40 was adopted, it was declared carried. ‘ ' Mr. SPALDING. I now moveto-add “ except that the name of the President shall be called last.” .- The question being put upon the motion, it was delared carried, and the amendment adopted. I '- The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, paragraph 41, which has just been read, we will consider that agreed to, and the Clerk will read paragraph 42. ' Paragraph 42 read. The CHAIRMAN. objection. Paragraph 43 read. The CHAIRMAN. Agreed to, without objection. ' Paragraph 44 read. The CHAIRMAN. agreed to. Paragraph 45 read. _ Agreed to, without Without objection, 6 ORGANIZATION Wednesday,] The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, agreed to. Paragraph 46 read. The CHAIRMAN. objection. Paragraph 47 read. The CHAIRMAN. agreed to. Paragraph 48 read. The CHAIRMAN. W'ithout objection, paragraph 48 is agreed to. Paragraph 49 read. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair bears no objection, and this paragraph is agreed to. Paragraph 50 read. Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire to offer an amendment. The amendment read, as follows: Amend Rule 50 by adding the words, “The regular adjourning hour shall be 1 o’clock P. M., standard time.” Mr. APPLEGATE. My idea in offer- ing that amendment is this: It is generally conceded that the great bulk of the work of this Convention will be in Committee, and it will embarrass the work of the Committees greatly not to know when they can have their regular meetings If we have a standing adjourning hour, the Committees can adopt hours for their meet- ings; and the fact that they have regular hours to meet will influence the Commit- tees in not carrying the Convention past that time. It seems to me we should have a regular adjourning hour. Unless we have, it will greatly interfere with the work of the body. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I offer an amend- ment to that. The amendment read, as follows: The Convention shall meet daily at 10 o’clock A. M., standard time, and adjourn at 1 o’clock I’. M., standard time, unless for some reason the Convention shall fix some different hour; but after the expiration of two weeks from the appointment of the Committee on Rules, the Convention shall hold two sessions on each day, one from 10 Agreed to, without Without objection, l APPLEGATE—PHELPS. [September 17. o’clock to 1 o’clock P. M., the other from 3 P. M. to 6 P. M. The CHAIRMAN. It is hardly in order at this time. The present rule is first, and then the Chair will recognize the gentleman from Louisville. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentle- man from Pendleton. The question being put upon the amend- ment of the Delegate from Pendleton, it was declared carried. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I now propose mine as a substitute for the last paragraph. The amendment of the Delegate from Louisville was read. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I am fully aware of the fact that the great bulk of the work of the Convention must necessarily be done in Committee. I am further aware of the fact, that whenever any Committee shall report, there will be a free interchange of opinions. That fact has been shown al- ready, that there will be a great many arguments on the propositions presented. I understand that the proceedings of thls Convention are held daily at a cost of nearly $1,000 to the Convention; and I don’t believe it is asking too much of any of us to ask that we give to the business of the Convention and the interest of the people as much time as we are willing to give to our own affairs. My purpose is to give two weeks from the time the Commit- tees get together and formulate their work. It may be two weeks will not be enough. There are some Committees before whom work will be laid at the end of two weeks; but some of the Committees will be ready to report. I think whenever a report is ready to be made, we should take it up and discuss it, and dispose of it. I agree with the statement of the worthy gentleman from Marion, that this is a matter we should be deliberate about, and still, I believe it is a matter we should give our whole time and attention to. If, at the expiration of two weeks, when this rule requiring two sessions shall go into ORGANIZATION. 7 Wednesday,] MILLER—P1114: LPS—MCHENRY. [September 17 . »efl'eot, all Committees shall not be ready to report, is it requiring too much to ask that three hours additional be given by these ‘Committees, so that, alter the expiration of two weeks, you have 10 o’clock to 1 o’clock, three hours, 3 o’clock to 6 o’clock, six hours; and if, at the expiration of that .time, any Committee has not considered all the matter in hand, they can very easily meet every day from 7:30 to 10:30. Now, if we ask any gentleman of this Conven- tion to give nine hours to his own business, he would consent, and I think it only fair 1that we give to the matter in hand as much time as we would give to our own business; and I earnestly hope, after two weeks, we will at last meet to consider the matter in hand. Mr. W. H. MILLER, I move to amend by striking out the word “ six ” and insert “ five.” Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I accept that amendment. Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I do not think that will give the Committees time to do their work, sir. There will be no Committee work done in the evening, ' if the evening session of the Convention is fixed at an hour, or half an hour. Now, ‘in two weeks’ time, if all this work is ready for debate, we are going to get through much sooner than is anticipated by the people of the State or ourselves; .and if we are to have a session of only sixty days, this is hastening the matter too much. The principal work of this Con- vention will be done in Committee. This is a proposition that the Committees have .. got to go to work now, and work very hard for two weeks, and then they are cut ott after that. We can very easily extend ‘the time of the session, if necessary, if there is some interesting debate going on. At the end of two weeks’ time, or any »other time, a majority of this House can 'very readily adjourn from 1 till 3 every ‘day; but to fix the afternoon session now {is a sort of a threat to the Committees that if they are not done with their work, they will have to work away long into the hours of the night, when men do not feel in- clined to attend to business. We are sent here to do this business well, and we may hurry up things a little too fast; and I think, sir, it will have a tendency to extend the length of the whole session rather than hasten it. We are going too fast. It is within our power, if we vote this amend- ment down, to have evening sessions when we want to, and we all contemplate having evening sessions; but to say that we are to commence having evening sessions and no committee work done within two weeks of the beginning of the session, it strikes me that the thing won’t work well. We all contemplate having evening sessions. We all contemplate doing it when we get into the debate, towards the heel of the session or the middle of the session, after the Com- mittees have fully matured their work; but don't let us hurry up the Committees. Let us have them put their work before the Convention, and let us debate it after the Committees have had full consideration of the questions. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I beg pardon for saying one word in answer to the gen- tleman. I do not understand that the effect of this rule would be to hurry the Committees at all. I simply say that at the expiration of two weeks a majority of these 26 Committees will be ready to re- port; then there will be a mass of matter to be considered by the Conventien. Those Committees which have not reported will have abundance of time, because the rule, as now amended, only calls for five out of twenty-four hours. There will be no trouble on the part of the Committees, if they have not finished their work, giving three hours additional if they have not finished at the end of two weeks. Now, the gentleman says that we can at any time have afternoon sessions. When the rules have been adopted, it will require, as I understand it, in order to change them, 8 I ORGANIZATION. Wednesday,] MCHENRY—SPALDING—PHELPS. [September 17 , a two-thirds vote of the House. For that reasonI insist that the Convention adopt the rule o‘fl'ered as a substitute. Mr. McHENRY. I will say that it is pretty clear in my opinion that a majority of thGZCoDVBIItlOH can any day adjourn to meet at three o’clock if they want to. It don’t require two thirds at any time. Cer- tainly the way the Committees fix it, it could be done. I think that the amend- ment ought to be rejected. I don’t think that change ought to be made at all, Mr. SPALDING. Mr. President, in answer to the suggestion that Committees which have not reported would still have an opportunity to report, this difflculty occurs to mezfj That members of those Committees would be in session during the time the Convention was in session, and would not be here at proceedings in which they might be interested. It would be desirable to have the House full, and every gentleman on the Committees would want to be here and participate in vdebate, and the efl'ect of this rule seems to be to just abolish all the Committees and make them entirely useless after two weeks, and we would then proceed in Committee of the Whole altogether. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the substitute offered by the gentle- man from Louisville. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I call for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDENT, The yeas and nays have been called for on thatjproposition. Mr. WASHINGTON. I was called out a moment ago, and did not hear the resolution read; I would like to have it read. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be againlread. ‘ The Reading Clerk then read the substi- tute for Rule No. 50, ofi'ered by Mr. Zack Phelps. Mr. WASHINGTON. I sincerely hope, Mr. Chairman, that thatsubstitute will not be adopted. The rule of reporting by Com~ mittee seems to meet all the requirements of the situation for the time being. It. seems to me that this is a good place to ap- ply the old saying,“ sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” weeks that have been spoken of on this subject shall have passed by, then, it seems- to me, will be the proper time for the con- sideration of this question. We will then. know just what we can do, and what it is proper to do at that time. It seems to me that, just at this time, this is a matter that. is premature, and should be deferred till the expiration of the two weeks. The PRESIDENT. The question is- upon the substitute, and upon that the yeas and nays have been called. Who sec- onded the call for the yeas and nays? Mr. BRONSTON. I seconded it. The President announced the result of the. vote as follows: YEAS¢—1 1. Goebel, William Hogg, S. P. Miller, Will. Phelps, Zack Auxier, A. J. Blackburn, James Bronston, C. J. Durbin, Charles Farmer, H. H. Quicksal], J. E. Funk, J. T. NAYS—SO. Allen, C. T. Jonson, Jep. C. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Amos, D. C. Kennedy, Hanson,- Applegate, Leslie T. Kirwan, E. E. Askew, J 14 Knott, J. Proctor Ayres, W. W. Lassing, L. W. Beckner, W. M. Lewis, J. W. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Mackoy, W. H. Blackwell, Joseph Martin, W. H. Boles, S. H. McDermott, E. J. Bourland, H. R. McElroy, W. J. Brents, J. A. McHenry, H. D. Brown, J. S. Miller, W. H. Brummal, J. M. Montgomery, J. F.. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Buckner, S. B. Moore, Laban T. Bullitt, W. G. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Nunn, T. J. Carroll, John D. O’Hara, R. H. Clardy, John D. Parsons, Robert T, Coke, J. Guthrie Petrie, H. G. Cox. H. Pettit, Thos. S. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, John L. When these two- - ORGANIZATION. ‘a J ONSON—MCDERMOTT. [q eptember 1'7 , Wednesday,] Doris, W. F. Pugh, Sam’l J. Edrington, W. J. Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam. E. Smith, H. H. Field, W. W. Smith, W. Scott Forgy, J. M. Spalding, I. A. Glenn, Dudley A. Straus, F. P. Graham, Samuel Swango, G. B. Hanks, Thos. H. Trusdell, George Harris, Geo. C. . Twyman, I. W. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Hopkins, F. A. Wood, 3. M. Jacobs, R. P. Woolfolk, J. F. James, A. D. Young, B. H. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, paragraph No. 50, as amended, will be considered as adopted. Mr. JONSON. I move to amend by striking out “ten ” and inserting ‘- nine.” The PRESIDENT. In what para- graph. Mr. J ONSON. In paragraph 50, Rule 50. The PRESIDENT. amend paragraph 50 by striking out “ ten” and inserting “ nine.” And the vote being taken thereon, the said amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the paragraph next in order Mr. STRA US. I ask the unanimous con- sent of the House to go back to Rule N o. 48, when I wish to move to amend by al- lowing the privileges of the floor to members of the Convention of 1849. The PRESIDENT; Is there any ob- jection to the amendment‘? The Delegate will please send up his amendment. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment, which is as follows: Insert after the words State at Large, the words, the members of the Convention of 1849. The vote being taken thereon, amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read paragraph 51. ; The Secretary read paragraph 51. It is moved to said , Mr. McDERMOTT. I offer an amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the amendment. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment offered by Mr. McDermott, which is as follows: I Amend the fifty-first section by striking out the word “ two,” in' the first line, and by inserting the word “ ten ;” and also add to said section the following: words: “Any member may, withoutve-x-planation or de- bate, have the Clerk state in the, Journal the fact that he voted in the affirmative or negative on any question; but this right must be exercised immediately after the announcement by the President of the result of the vote.” Mr. MeDER MOTT'. Mr. President, I think that this is a matter of great impor- tance, and I wish to say a few words on it, not only because it will be helpful to us in the proceedings of the Convention, but also because the same question will come up when the Constitution itself is adopted. Under the present Constitution, the yeas and nays may he demanded, in either House or Senate, upon the call of two members; and I think any gentleman who has been in the House during any of the years past has seen how often two men, or perhaps one man and some friend, through courtesy, have been able to worry and bully the House, and keep it in session when no good purpose could be subserved, merely to gratify caprice or offended van; i-ty. Ifeel convinced that there ought to be some change in this respect, and I hope- that my amendment may now change that. system during this Convention, so that we will be ready by experience to say that it is a good rule for the Constitution. We are not to presume, it seems to me, that there are, at any time, only two wise and patriotic men in‘ this House. I think it hardly fair to expect us to say that ninety- eight of us are dull and unpatriotie, and only two wise and patriotic on any ques-' tion before the Convention. I am per‘- fectly willing to protect the minority at. 10 ORGANIZATION. Wednesday,] MCDERMOTT. [September 1'.’ . any time, by giving them the right to have noted, for information, upon the Journal, that they voted in the affirmative or nega- tive, so that the people at any stage may know how every member of the Conven- tion stood. We are not now in any danger of any tyrant or of an intolerant majority, and under the circumstances, there is no likelihood that, at any time, any man’s privileges or convictions will be run over ruthlessly, You will find it invariably happens that whenever any meritorious measure comes up before this body, at least ten men can be found to support it, and if only two men can be found to call the yeas and nays, you can set it down as certain that those two men are seeking to delay ‘the proceedings by taking up our time in filibustering. Now, I say, while filibuster- ing in right in many instances, and should be used to protect a reasonable minor- ity, yet, certainly any man who has 'a reasonable grievance can get at least nine other men to support him. If you are not satisfied with the matter on reasoning, if you want au- thority on it, I have collected here the practice of other legislative and delibera- tive bodies. I find that in the English Parliament whenever, in the judgment of the Speaker, the division is vexatiously insisted upon, the Speaker may call for a rising vote, and if he sees only a few mem- bers rise, he may take a rising vote on the ‘question, and allow them to record their names in the Journal with their protests. In the House of Representatives in Wash- ington one-fifth of the members present have a right to call for the ayes and noes, and in twelve States only two members may demand the ayes and nays. In California, Nevada and Texas, three members of the House are necessary for a call. In Arkansas, Illinois, Maryland and Tennessee, five members are necessary. In Wisconsin, one-sixth of the members are necessary; in Georgia, Maine, Michigan, North Caroli- na, Rhode Island and Virginia, one-fifth are necessary; in Alabama, Mississippi, Connecticut and West Virginia, one-tenth are necessary; in Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota and New York this matter seems to be left to the rules of the House. Some States make a difference between the mo- tion to adjourn and other motions, requir- ing a larger number of members to call the ayes and noes on a motion to adjourn ; and some States, like Illinois, Mississ- ippi, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee, require the ayes and noes on the final passage of every bill, but not on all subsidiary questions or on preliminary motions. In Alabama, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minne- sota, New Hampshire and South Carolina provision is made for entering the protest of members who are not numerous enough to secure a call of the yeas and nays. Their practice is substantially the same as that called for in the amendment I oflfer; and I say now that, if you want to expedite your business, and want to have an honest expression from every member, this amend- ment will allow it; but if you go on as the Legislature has been proceeding, under the old Constitution, you will frequently find one or two members, one making the mo- tion, and the other, out of courtesy, second- ing it, keeping you here, passing resolution after resolution, till your patience will be worn out. For instance, a motion to ad- journ to a time certain and a motion to take a recess ',will have precedence of the the motion to adjourn. Now, unless the Chair should declare that he can not hear any gentleman after the motion to adjourn, I say that two members can keep this House in session for forty-eight hours with- out adjournment. You have come here, as representatives of the people, for dignified action, and it is not reasonable to allow two members to hold you back in that way. Upon any proposition with merit in it, I care not what it is, you can find at least nine men willing to aid you, and you still have the right of enteringfion the Journal how you stand on the proposition under ORGANIZATION. 11 discussion. Wednesday,] MILLER—MCHENRY—ALLEN. [September 17 . There is no danger. Mr. Presi- dent, that we shall ever be ruled roughly 'by a tyrant, or by an unscrupulous major- ity. We need a reasonable opportunity for debate, and for a fair record for our votes; but let us not give encouragement to use- ;less or unworthy parliamentary tactics. Mr. CLADY. I desire to offer an amendment to that amendment, to strike ‘out ten and insert five. And the vote being taken thereon, said amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs upon the amendment ofi‘ered by the gentleman from the Fifth Louisville Dis- trict. Read it again, Mr. Secretary. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment offered by Mr. McDermott. And the vote being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative, and the amendment was rejected. Mr. MCHENRY. I move this amend- ment, sir. ‘It was not agreed to by the Committee, but I think they will agree to it. It is in the fourth line, after the word “Secretary,” to insert the words “ if re- quired by any Delegate.” It is that part of it which comprises the recapitulation of the vote, and the rule makes it impera- tive, and this amendment arranged it so ‘that there shall be a recapitulation on motion of any Delegate. Mr. MACKOY. I would like to have it reported. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment offered by Mr. McHenry, which is as follows: By inserting in the fourth line of sec- tion 51, after the word “Secretary,” the words “if requested by any Delegate.” The PRESIDENT. “If requested by .-any Delegate” is inserted by way of .an amendment. And the question being taken thereon, ''it was decided in the aflirmative, and the amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Are there any fur- ther amendments to that paragraph? The Chair hears no further amendment pro- posed, "and without objection said section will be considered as adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon proceeded to read section 52. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, said paragraph will be considered as adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon read sec- tion 53 of the Rules. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the paragraph just read will be considered as adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon read par- agraph 54. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the paragraph just read will be considered adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon read paragraph 55. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, said paragraph will be considered as adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon read sec- tion 56. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the said paragraph will be considered as adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon proceeded to read section 57. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, said paragraph will be considered as adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon read sec- tion 58. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, said paragraph will be considered as adopted, and, for safety, the Chair will put the question upon the adoption of the report as a whole. And the question being taken thereon, was decided in the aflirmative, and the re- port adopted. Mr. MCHEN RY. The report relates to other matters‘, but right here, sir, I de- sire to make this motion, Mr. Chairman, which I suppose will be agreed to, that the Printer of - the Convention 12 ORGANIZATION. Wednesday,] CLARDY-MCHENRY—MACKOY. [September 17 . print for the use of the Delegates two hundred and fifty copies of the f'ules in pamphlet form, and embody therein a copy of the Constitution, a list of the Delegates, their post-ofltice addresses, and the names of the Committees, and the names of the members of each Committee. We may want more than that. We will want one for our desk and one for our room. It is suggested by the gentlemen around me to make it five hundred. They will be lost, and extra ones will he wanted for other purposes, and as the difference be- tween the cost of two hundred and fifty and five hundred is very little, I change my motion and make it five hundred. The PRESIDENT. Change it, Mr. Secretary. The Secretary had better re- port the amendment again. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the motion of Mr. McHenry, as amended : That the Printer to this Convention print for the use of the Delegates five hundred (500) copies of the Rules in pam- phlet form, and embrace therein the Con- stitution, and a list of the Delegates and districts represented, and their post-office address, and a list of the Committees and the names of the members of each; one hundred and fifty (150) copies of above to be bound in cloth. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move to amend the motion so that it will provide for the binding of 150 copies in cloth. Mr. MCHENRY. As the cost will be very little, sir, I accept that amendment, if you will put it 125. Hr. C. T. ALLEN. I would rise, 811', to ask the gentleman from Ohio what would be the object in having another copy of the Constitution printed? Mr. MCHENRY. It is just a matter of convenience, to have it on your table all the while. It will be printed in a little book, so that you can refer to it any time. All the Delegates, no doubt, have copies of the Constitution, printed in different books, but this will be in a convenient form, so that you can have it under your nose all the time, and it will add nothing, prac- tically, to the cost of it. Mr. HARRIS. I move to amend the resolution by inserting “Counties or Dis- tricts represented by the Delegates,” in ad-» dition to their post-ofiice. Mr. McHENRY. I accept the amend-- ment. The question was put upon the resolution. of Mr. McHenry, with the amendments as accepted, and the same was carried. Mr. APPLEGATE. Ijdesire to offer a. resolution. I do not know that it is in order, but I want to have it read for the information of the House, and referred to the proper Committee. The resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That this Convention shall not- adopt any part of the Constitution, to be made by it, except that a majority of all. the Delegates elected to same vote for it upon a yea and nay vote. Mr. BUCKNER. I desire to offer a. resolution, and to have it referred to the appropriate Committee. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent it can be done. The only thing in or- der now is the resolution offered by the‘ Delegate from Pendleton, which the Sec- retary has just reported. Mr. KNOTT. I move that it be re- ferred to the Committee on Rules. Mr. APPLEGATE. I would like to. have it go to a Committee, and I have no- objection to having it referred in that way. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution wlll be referred to the Com- mittee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. The resolution of- fered by the Delegate from Hart is in order, and the Secretary will report it. The resolution was read as follows : Resolved, That appropriate Committees be directed to consider the propriety of in- sorting the following as sections to the Con- stitution of the State : l. The General Assembly shall never; authorize any lottery, nor shall the sale of lottery tickets be allowed, nor shall any lot- tery, heretofore authorized, be permitted to ORGANIZATION. 13 Wednesday,] BUCKNER—JONSON—MOORE. [September 17. be drawn, or tickets therein to be sold. 2. No corporation shall be created by special laws, nor its charter extended, changed. or amended, except those for charitable, educational, penal, or reforma- tory. purposes, which are to be and remain under the patronage and control of the State; but the General Assembly shall pro- vide, by general laws. for the organization of all corporations hereafter to be created. 3. All existing charters and all grants of special or exclusive privileges under which organization shall not have taken place, and which shall not be in operation at the ‘time of the promulgation of this Constitu- tion, shall thereafter have no validity or effect whatever. I 4. No county, city, town, school district or other municipal corporation, shall be allowed to become indedted in any manner for any purpose, to any amount, including existing indebtedness, in the aggregate ex- needing five per centum on the value of the taxable property therein, to be ascer- tained by the last assessment for the State and county taxes previous to the incurring of such indebtedness. 5. No corporation shall engage in any business other than that expressly author- ized in in its charter, nor shall it take or hold any real estate, except such as may be necessary and proper for its legitimate business. 6. No bill shall be considered in either branch of the General Assembly, unless referred to a Committee, returned there~ ' from, and printed for the use of the mem- bers. 7. Every bill shall be read at length on three different days in each House. All amendments made thereto shall be printed for the use of the members before the final vote is taken on the bill, and no bill shall become a law unless on its final passage the vote be taken by yeas and nays, the names or the persons voting for and against the same be entered on the Journal, and a majority of the members elected to each House be recorded thereon as voting in its favor. Mr. BUCKNER. I ask that‘ it be printed and referred to the appropriate Committee—that on Legislative Depart- ment. _ '. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution: is ordered to be printed and so referred. ~ Mr. JONSON. I wish to move a recon- sideration of Rule 37. The PRESIDENT. There is another resolution before the House, which is in order before any other business, which the Secretary will please report. Resolution offered by the Delegate from Nelson (Mr. Muir) was read, as follows: Resolved, That the Secretary of this Convention procure for its information, so soon as can be done, from the proper de- partment of Government, an official state- ' ment of the aggregate population of this Commonwealth, and of each county there- of separately, and of each city or town therein having a population of five thou- sand or more. The said resolution was, upon a vote, adopted. Mr. JONSON. I move to reconsider the vote by which Rule 37 was adopted. The object of it is this: It requires a two- thirds vote of the Convention to dispense with certain matters before the Conven- tion. We adopted a rule the other day fixing the quorum of this Convention at two-thirds of its members. Under certain circumstances it might occur that it would require a unanimous vote of all the mem- bers present to dispense with the con- sideration of measures coming before the Convention under these conditions. The object of this reconsideration is to have this rule so amended as to read “ two-thirds of the members of this Convention pres- ent;” and it is manifest to my mind that the change ought to be made. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the amendment, it was rejected. Mr. MOORE. I desire to offer ajresoe lution, and I ask that it be read and referred to the Committee on Corpora- , tions.v Mr. HENDRICK. _In order that we may proceed orderly, I believe, under the Rule that we have adopted, the hour, for adjournment has arrived, and I move to extend, it indefinitely, in order. to allow ,- gentlemen time to present , their ,matterse 14 ORGANIZATION. Wednesday] H ENDRICK—MOORE—BRONSTON—BECKNER. [September 17. in The PRESIDENT. Will the gentle- man please refer to the Rule ? Mr. HEN DRICK. The rule adopted is N o. 50, and so amended in order to meet at 10 o’clock, and adjourn at 1 o’clock, and the hour for adjournment having ar- rived, we can do no business unless it is extended, and I, therefore,move that the time be extended indefinitely. The motion was put to the House and carried. The resolution offered by the Delegate from Boyd (Mr. Moore), was read by the Reading Clerk as follows: Resolved by this Convention, That the following clause shall be inserted in any draft of a Constitution made by this body: That no county district, city,town or village shall hereafter give any money or property, or oan its money or credit to orin aid of any individual, association or corporation, or become, directly or indirectly, the owner of stock in, or bonds of, any association or coporation; nor shall any such county, district, city, town or village, be allowed to incur any indebtedness except for county, district, city, town or village purposes. This section shall not prevent such county, district, city, town or village from making such provisions for the aid or support of its poor, or in aid of common schools, as may be authorized by law. Mr. MOORE. | I move that that resolu- tion be printed, and referred to the Com- mittee on Private Corporations. Mr. BRONSTON. I call for a division of that proposition. I do not see any necessity for printing every resolution that is introduced here. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of that part of the resolution calling for the printing of the same. This part of the resolution, being put to the House, was carried. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs upon the balance of the resolution— that it be re'erred to the Committee on Corporations. This part of the resolution, being put to a vote, was carried. . Mr. BECKNE R. resolution, which I desire to be referred to the Committee on Education. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: - Add to what is now Article XI of the present Constitution : Sac. 3. The General Assembly shall have power, and it shall be its duty, to provide by appropriate legislation for an adequate and efficient system of popular; education; and, to this end, may fix the terms and conditions on which the common school fund of the State, now existing or‘ hereafter to be raised, shall be distributed, In distributing the common school fund. no distinction shall be made on account of race or color, but schools for white and colored children shall be kept separate No tax now levied for educational pur poses shall ever be repealed or diminished The PRESIDENT. Without objection the resolution is referredto the Commit» tee on Education. Mr. AUXIER. resolution. The resolution was read by the Clerk, as follows : Resolved, That there be added to the Con- stitution the following clause: All claim- ants of land grants issued by the State of Virginia prior to the year 1792, who have not had the actual and continuous poses- sion of the lands mentioned in said grants, or have not listed and paid the taxes on the same since the year 1820, shall be deemed to have abandoned their claims to- such lands, and the same shall be forfeited to the Commonwealth, unless within three years from the adoption of this Constitu- tion said claimants shall file with the Clerk of the County Court of the county in which the lands are located, a certified copy of the grant, ‘together with an ab- stract of the title, sho wing a complete chain of title by descent or purchased and by paying the taxes thereon for six years- prior to the adoption of this Constitution, and also the taxes accruing after the adop- tion of this Constitution. Mr. AUXIER. I move that the resolu- tion be referred to the Committee on Rev- enue and Taxation. I desire to offer a The PRESIDENT. Without objection,‘ the reference will be made. I desire to offer a- ORGANIZATION. 15 Wed nesday] WASHINGTON—HINES—STRAUS. [September 17 . Mr. WASHINGTON. I desire to offer a resolution, and move that it be referred to the Committee on Elections. The Reading Clerk read the resolution as follows: Resolved, That section 15 of Article VIII, of the present Constitution, be so amended as to read as follows : “ In all elections by the Senate and House of Representatives, jointly or separately, the votes shall be per- sonally and publicly given, viva voce; but in all elections by the people the vote shall be by secret ballot.’ ’ The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be referred as indicated by the Delegate from Campbell. Mr. T. H. HINES. I desire to offer a resolution, to be referred to the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: WHEREAS, The power of taxation grows out of, and is limited by, the necessity to preserve the government, by laying acom- mon burden upon every citizen enjoying its protection of life. liberty and property, and is limited in its nature to objects that are public, as distinguished from those that are personal or private in their character; and whereas, uniformity and equality of taxation is of the essence of the power to tax, and an exemption from taxation in one case is an increase of the burden of taxa- tion upon others not so favored; there- fore, Be it Resolved, That the Legislature shall have no power to exempt any person, corporation or property from taxes that may be levied by general laws upon citi- zens of this State; and in no case shall the Legislature authorize the levy of any tax, except for necessary governmental purposes. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be referred as indicated by the gentleman. Mr. T. H. HINES. I offer a resolution and desire it referred to the Committee on Legislative Department, The Reading Clerk read the resolution as follows. Resolved, That there shall be a Commis- sioner of Agriculture and Immigration, who shall be elected by the people, and who shall hold his office for four years, unless sooner removed by law. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the reference will be made, Mr. STRAUS. I move that we adjourn. I suppose it is in order. , The PRESIDENT. It is in order, but before the motion is put, the Chair will give to the Secretary the list of Standing Committees appointed by the Chair; and before the Secretary reads the Committees the Chair will appoint the Committee authorized by the motion oflered by the Delegate from Lincoln last Friday, I believe, to confer with the Librarian in order to provide suitable rooms for the various Committees of this Convention. The Chair will appoint upon that Com- mittee the following Delegates: Wm. H. Miller, T. H. Hines and J. D. Carroll. The ‘,Secretary will please now report the Standing Committees of the Convention, 1. PREAMBLE AND BILL OF RIGHTS. Robert Rodes, Geo. C. Harris, Chairman. J. M. Brummal, J. W. Muir, C. T. Allen, Thos. S. Pettit, Leslie T. Applegate. 2. ELECTIONS. George Washington, F. P. Straus, Chairman. J. S. Brown, E. J, McDermott, J. H. Moore, William Berkele, John L. Phelps, M. K. Allen, J. W. Holloway. 3. LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT. I. A. Spalding, J. W. Lewis, Chairman. S. P. Hogg, W. J. Hendrick, J. D. Carroll, F. P. Straus, H. Cox, L. W. Lassing, E. J. McDermott. 4. EXECUTIVE OFFICERS FOR THE STATE AT LARGE. S. E. DeHaven, Chairman. James Blackburn, George Trusdell, H. H. Farmer, L. P. V. Williams, W. W. Ayres, W. G, Bullitt, T. J. Elmore, J. W. Muir. 16 ORGANIZATION. ‘ Hanson Kennedy, Wednesday,] 5. EXECUTIVE FOR CoUN'rIEs AND DIs- ' TRICTS. H. H. Smith, D. A. Glenn, W. R. Ramsey, A. D. James, Wm. H. Martin. 6. MILITIA. Samuel E. English, W. W. Lewis, Chairman. J.-S. Hines, J. H. Moore, I. W. Twyman, 7. JUDICIAL DEOARTMENT AND COURT OF APPEALR Thomas H. Hines, Sam’l J. Pugh, Chairman. J. A. Brents, J. C. Beckham, W. J. Hendrick, Henry D. McHenry, William Goebel, Joseph Blackwell, John D. Carroll. 8. CIRCUIT CoURTs. Zack Phelps, Chairman. J. F, Montgomery, J .‘S. Brown, J. M. Wood, Laban T. Moore, John S. May, Chairman. W. M. Beckner, Wm. H. Miller, W. W. Field, D. A. Glenn, R. P. Jacobs, B. F. Bennett, Hanson Kennedy. 9. CoUN'rY CoUR'rs. F. A. Hopkins, R. H. O’Hara, Chairman. H. G. Petrie, J. F. Askew, C. J. Bronston, J. Guthrie Coke, William Miller, G. B. Swango, D. C. Amos. 10. EDUCATION. P. Jacobs, J. S. Hines, Chairman. H. R. Bourland, W. M. Beckner, S. H. Boles, M. K. Allen, T. J. Nunn, J ep. C. Jonson, W. Scott Smith. 11. REvIsIoN. B. T. Birkhead, Rob’t T. Parsons, Chairman. J. T. Funk, S. E. DeHaven, Robert Rodes, Samuel Graham, J. F. Montzomery, Sam. E. English. '12. CoRPoRA'rIoNs. S. H. Boles, .William Mackoy, STANDING CoMMITTEEs. [September 17 . Chairman. J. W. Lassing, J. D. Clardy, 'Thos. H. Hanks, J. Proctor Knott, Emery Whitaker, W. J. McElroy, P. P. Johnston. 18. MUNICIPALITIES. Bennett H. Young, J. F. Askew, Chairman. H. H. Smith, William Makcoy, Thos. S. Pettit, J. W. Holloway, J. A. Brents, J. G. Forrester, J. F. West, Morris A. Sachs; George Washington. 14. REVENUE AND TAXATION. P. P. Johnston, W. F. Doris, Chairman. James Blackburn, D. C. Amos, G. B. Swango, G. D. Chambers, George Trusdell, J. D. Clardy, Joseph Blackwell. 15. CRIMES, PUNISHMENTS AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. C. J. Bronston, J. E. Quicksall, Chairman. A. J. Auxier, Leslie T. Applegate, W. R. Ramsey, H. Cox, H. R. Bourland, J. C. Beckham, Charles Durbin. 16. PRINTING AND ACCoUNTs. T. J. Elmore, E. E. Kirwan, Chairman. J. M. Forgy, R. H. O’Hara, J. E. Quicksall, Samuel Graham, William Berkele. 17, ENROLLMENTS. W. W. Ayres, J. T. Funk, Chairman. J. H. West, J. M. Brummal, Charles Durbin. 18 GENERAL PROVISIONS. William Goebel, J. F. Woolfolk, Chairman. John L. Phelps, W. G. Bullitt, W. H. Martin, T. J. Nunn, Sam’l J. Pugh. _ 19. DIvIsIoN, TITLES AND ARRANGE- MEN'rs. C. T. Allen, J. F. Woolfolk, Chairman. J. W. Lewis, . J. Guthrie ‘Coke,’ _ J. M. Wood. ORGANIZATION. ~ 17 Wednesday,] STANDING COMMITTEES. [September 17 . 20. CHARITY AND CHARITABLE INSTITU- TIONs. L. P. V. Williams, Chairman. Rob’t T. Parsons, W. J. Edrington, E. E. Kirwan, Nathan Buchanan, J. M. Forgy. 21. SCHEDULE. Thos. H. Hanks, H. D. McHenry, H. G. Petrie, Chairman. Geo. C. Harris, W. W. Field, W. J. Edrington, J ep. C. Jonson, W. W. Lewis. I. W. Twyman, W. Scott Smith. 22. RULES. H. D. McHenry, W. J. McElroy, Chairman. Robert Rodes, Curtis F. Burnam, W. H. Miller, J. Proctor Knott, I. A. Spalding, Bennett H. Young. William Goebel, Laban T. Moore, J. F. Montgomery, Thomas H. Hines, A. J. Auxier. 23. RAILROADS AND COMMERCE. Emery Whitaker, W. H. Miller, Chairman. H. G. Petrie, S. H. Boles, Thos. H. Hanks, J. Guthrie Coke, M. R. Allen, J. F. Askew, W. H. Martin. 24. LOCATION OF CAPITAL. W. W. Ayres, George Trusdell, Jep. C. Jonson, J. [4‘. Askew, J. Guthrie Coke, R. P. Jacobs, J. F. Woolfolk M. A. Sachs, Sam’l J. Pugh, W. M. Beckner, J. S. May. CHAIRMAN OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON LEG- IsLATIvE DEPARTMENT. S. B. Buckner. CHAIRMAN OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE EXECUTIVE. Curtis F. Burnam. CHAIRMAN OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY. J. Proctor Knott. The question on adjourning was then put and. carried, and the Convention ad- journed. Qunveniinn guard‘. —KENTU 6 KY— CONSTITUTIONAL GONVENTICDN- Vol. 1. FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 18, 1890. Thursday] McH EN RY— PETTIT—BLACKBURN. [September 18. The Convention met pursuant to ad- journment and was called to order by President Clay. The proceedings were opened with pray- er by the Rev. Mr. Blaney. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the Journal of yesterday’s proceed- ings. ‘The Reading Clerk read the Journal of yesterday, which was approved. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order this morning is petitions. Are there any petitions‘? If not, then the next thing in order will be reports from the Standing Committees, and then from Special Com- mittees. Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. President, I am instructed by the Committee on Rules to ‘offer the following resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resolution. The Reading Clerk read Mr. McHenry’s resolution, which is as follows: Resolved, That an additional Standing Committee be, and the same is hereby, di- rected to be appointed by the President, to be known as the Committee on Railroads and Commerce. Said Committee shall consist of nine members. The PRESIDENT. Gentlemen, the question is upon the adoption of the reso- lution. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, this res- olution would change the rules that have already been made, will it not be required to lay over one day? The PRESIDENT. No, sir. not. I think And the vote being taken on the said resolution, it was adopted. Mr. BLACKBURN. Before our rules are printed, I would ask leave to call the attention of the Convention to Rule 12, and also to Rules 37 and 38. In Rule 12, you will observe in the section relating to the order of business, no provision is made for leaves in offering resolutions or making motions until after the Committees have been called. Now, after awhile, it occurs to me, a committee might get the floor and occupy it for several days, and a Delegate having’a matter which he wanted referred to the next committee, would be excluded from getting the motion or resolution be- fore the House till the Committee which had the floor then had finished its report, and then the matter would have to be re- committed to the proper Committee, thus making great delay. I offer an amendment which will allow us each day to offer our motions and resolutions, which will go to the Committees, without debate. and, I think, will save a good deal of time. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will re- port the amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Blackburn, which is as fol— lows: Amend Rule 12 by inserting after the first word petitions, in the second line, the words “and leaves,” and also inserting after the second word in second line “petitions,” the words “and leaves.” Mr. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, the section would then read, “As soon as the Journal is read the President shall call for petitions and leaves; petitions and leaves No. 8 2 RESOLUTIONS. Thursday,] MCHENRY—BLACKBURN—PETTIT. [September 18 . having been presented and disposed of, re- ports of Committees, etc.” The PRESIDENT. The first thing in in order is the amendment to the Rules offered by the Delegate from Woodford. Mr. MCHENRY. I suppose that is de- batable. The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir. Mr. MCHEN RY. I don’t understand what the gentleman means by “leaves.” (To Mr. Blackburn.) Do you mean to provide for offering resolutions and motions‘? Mr. BLACKBURN. No sir. It means to have the business referred to the Com- mittees, so that they can get at them. Mr. MCHENRY. I don’t understand that there are any “leaves” that this House can grant except leaves of absence. Mr. BLACKBURN. It is not to pro- vide for leaves of absence, but for leaves simply to have introduced and referred any business the Delegates may have. It is cus- tomary in legislative bodies. Mr. MCHENRY. You mean leave to offer resolutions and have them referred? Mr. BLACKBURN. Yes, sir. Mr. MCHENRY. We have a rule which prohibits debates upon a resolution when it is first introduced; after it is refer- red and reported it comes before us for consideration and debate. Mr. BLACKBURN. This is, without debate, to be referred to some Committee. Mr. MCHENRY. Do you so express it in your amendment‘? Mr. BLACKBURN. Yes, sir. clude the word “leaves” there. Mr. MCHENRY. “Leave” ordinarily applies in legislative bodies, to leave to in- troduce a bill, and the leave is referred to a Committee, and the Committee can then introduce the bill. We don’t want that in this body. Why not say, just “motion '2” Mr. BLACKBURN. I suggest that if those two words were transposed it would be the same thing. Mr. MCHENRY. I think it better to put the words “resolutions and motions”— I in- Mr. PETTIT. 1 rise to a point of order. The PRESIDENT. Please state the point. Mr. PETTIT. Under Rule 46, which we have adopted, it says, “every motion to alter, change or add to the Rules of the Convention shall lie one day upon the- table.” The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks the. point is well taken. The amendment offered by the gentleman from Woodford will lie- one day upon the table before it will be in order. The first thing in order is the res-- olutions on the table. - The Reading Clerk then read the resolu- tion offered by Mr. Straus, which is as fol- lows: Resolved, That the Constitution which may be framed by this Convention shall contain the following provision to-wit: Railroads and other transpm'tation com— panies shall not grant free passes or sell tickets at a discount to Judges of the Courts, Legislators, or other public oflicers of the State. Any office-holder violating this provision shall forfeit his office. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be referred to the Com- mittee on General Provisions. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Mr. President, I have a resolution to offer. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will try to recognize gentleman in order, but I think it will be much better to dispose of the resolutions which have been sent up, before other gentlemen sent up their reso- lutions, and the Secretary will please read the resolution first sent up. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Hopkins, which is as fol- lows : WHEREAS, Great inconvenience and con- fusion has resulted to the people of the State from the way our statutory laws have been attempted to be revised and amended; be it, therefore, Resolved, That the Committee on Legis- lative‘ Department be, and are hereby, re- quested to inquire into and report to this Convention, the propriety of engrafting into the new Constitution a clause that no act shall ever be revised or amended by RESOLUTION S. . 3 Thursday,] HOPKINS—HANKS—FABM EB—AUxIER. [September 18 . mere reference to its title or by adding to or striking words or clauses; but that the act revised or section amended shall be set forth and published at full length. The PRESIDENT. What reference does the gentleman wish‘? Mr. HOPKINS. The Committee on Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT. Without objection the resolution is referred. Mr. HAN KS. I desire to offer a resolu- tion. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will rec- ognize the Delegate from Anderson next. Mr. FARMER. I would ask for infor- mation. If one has several resolutions can he offer them all 'at once, or will they be considered one at a time? The PRESIDENT. There can only be one in order at a time; but the Chair will recollect that gentlemen wish to introduce resolutions, and will recognize them in their proper turn. The Secretary will re- port the resolution offered by the Delegate from Anderson. The Reading Clerk read the resolution Offered by Mr. Hanks, as follows: Resolved, That taxation shall be for the maintainance of the governments, State, county and municipal; that for the State a tax shall be levied upon the property thereof, uniformly, sufficient to pay the ex- penses of the several departments of the government economically administered. The PRESIDENT. What reference does the gentleman wish? Mr. HANKS. There are a number of resolutions there. The PRESIDENT. To what Commit- tee do you want the resolutions referred? ' Mr. HANKS. Well, sir, you are the judge of that, whatever the Chair thinks best. The PRESIDENT. It will facilitate the business of the Convention if gentle- men will indicate upon the back of resolu- tions sent up the reference they desire. The Chair will finally decide in case of any doubt, but it will much facilitate the pro- ceedings of the Convention for the gentle- men to so indicate. The Reading Clerk read four other reso- lutions offered by Mr. Hanks, which are as follows: Resolved. That taxation by counties shall be for the purpose of defraying expenses of the county, economically administered; and shall at no time, in the aggregate, exceed five cents on the 100 dollars’ worth of tax- able property above the necessary expenses of any county; and for all municipal gov- ernments and taxable districts, a like limi- tation shall prevail. Resolved, That there shall be no class legislation; that all property shall be taxed in the same ratio within the limits of the State, except such as is exempt from taxa- tion by the Constitution and laws of the United States. Resolved, That all corporations of a like character shall be a like bound, and the rights of the people a like protected, under all charters granted either by the courts or the Legislature. Resolvled, That all local and private legislation shall be taken from the Legisla- ture and delegated to the courts; that the Legislature first convening after the adop- tion of this Constitution shall enact such laws as are necessary to or rry into effect the foregoing provision thereof. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will re.- fer the first resolution to the Legislative Committee, and the other four to the Com- mittee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I have a resolution to offer. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will recognize the gentleman from Nicholas in turn, but the delegate from Pike is now recognized. The Clerk will report his resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Auxier, which is as follows: Resolved, 1. That there be inserted in the Constitution the following sections: Concerning ('ounfy Courts—There shall be established in each county a County Court. 2. The jurisdiction of said court shall be the same as that of the present Circuit Court, having original jurisdiction of all 4 RESOLUTIONS. Thursday,] AUXIER— DEHAVEN—ALLEN. [September 18 . law and equity causes, and all prosecutions for the violation of all criminal and penal laws. 3. The right to appeal to the Court of Appealsshall remain as it now exists from the Circuit Court, until it is altered by law; and the right to alter and modify said right is hereby vested in the General Assembly. 4. A County Judge shall be elected by the qualified voters of each county for the term of six years. 5. No person shall be eligible for said oflice unless he has been a practicing attor- ney for eight years preceding his election, or who has been a Judge of a Circuit Court, whose service as Judge, coupled with the time he has ' so practiced, shall not have been eight years. He shall be examined by two of the Judges of the Court of Ap- peals, touching his qualifications, and pro- cure from them a certificate, before he shall be voted for. He shall be a resident of the county, unless as hereinafter provided for. 6. If it occur that there be no one in the county eligible under the fifth section, the Governor shall appoint a Judge from some other county. 7. Said Judge shall be commissioned by the Governor. 8. The County Judge shall reside at the seat of justice, and shall hold four terms of court each year, and each term may con- tinue three months; and the court shall be deemed open at all times, and may adjourn from time to time, as business may require. 9. He shall be paid such compensation by the State and county, as may be provid- ed for by law, and shall practice law dur- in g his term of office. 10. The General Assembly shall provide for filling of vacancies in said ofiice, and for‘ the election of a special judge in his absence, or where it is improper for him to preside. 11. Concerning the County Aftorney— There shall be elected in each county a County Attorney, whose duty it shall be to prosecute all offenders against the ‘law in his county. He shall be a practicing at- torney for four years before he shall be voted for, and shall be elected for the term and in the manner provided for the elec- ‘ tion of the County Judge. He shall be en- titled to such compensation as the General Assembly may provide. 12. There shall be established the ofiice of County Court Clerk, whose duty it shall be to keep a true and correct record of the proceedings of said court. His election shall be at the same time and manner pro- vided for the election of the County Judge; but before he shall be eligible, he shall be examined by, and procure from, a County Judge, a certificate of his qualifications. Mr. DEHAVEN. I desire to offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will recognize the gentleman from Oldham in turn, but before recognizing any Delegate, the Chair will make reference of the reso- lution now pending, which the Chair, without objection, will refer to the Com- mittee on County Courts. The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from Cald- well. ‘ Mr. C. T. ALLEN. The resolution is on the table. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resoliiition offered by the gentleman from Caldwell. The Reading Clerk then read the reso- lution offered by Mr, Allen, which is as follows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention: 1. That the management of the penitentiaries and control of the convict labor of the State should be re- moved, as far as possible, from the politics of the State. 2. That the said management of the pen- itentiaries and control of the convict labor of the State should be placed in the hands of three persons, to be styled “Peniten- tiary Commissioners,” appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice of the Senate, one for two, one for four, and one for six years; and these Commissioners shall appoint all ofiicers, guards, etc., need- ed in and for said penitentiaries, and shall, in addition, discharge such other duties as may be prescribed by law. 3. That it is best that the State should never, at any time, part with its right and privilege of feeding, clothing, furnishing medical aid, guarding and punishing the convicts of the State. 4. That the convicts of the State shall never be worked outside the walls of the penitentiaries for any purpose whatever. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I ask that the res- olution be referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure. RESOLUTION S. 5 Thursday,] FARMER—DEHAVEN. [September 18 . The question being taken thereon, said resolution was so referred. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from Henderson. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Farmer, which is as follows: Resolved. That that part of Article 11, Section 27, of the present Constitution that reads: “No person while he continues to exercise the functions of a Clergyman, Priest or Teacher, of any religious persua- sion, society or sect,” form no part of the present Constitution. Mr. FARMER. I move that it be re- ferred to the Committee on Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be referred to the Com- mittee on Legislative Department. The Delegate from Oldham is recognized next. Mr. DEHAVEN. I have some resolu- tions to offer. The Reading Clerk read five resolutions offered by Mr. DeHaven, which are as fol- lows: Resolved. l. That the Committee on the Legislative Department be directed to inquire into the expediency of so amending the second section of the second article of the present Constitution as to make the term of service of the members of the House of Representatives four years in- stead of two. And amend the third sec- tion of the same article by striking out the word “second” and inserting the word “fourth.” And amend the tenth section of the same article by striking out the word “four” and inserting the word “eigpt.” And amend the twelfth section of the same article by striking out the word “two” and inserting the word “four.” And ‘strike out “four” in the sixth line of said section and insert “ eight.” And strike out of the last line of said section “ two” and insert “four.” Amend the thirteenth sec- tion 'of the same article by striking out “ one hundred” and inserting “ sixty.” And by striking out “thirty-eight” and insert “twenty-eight.” And in the four- teenth section, same article, strike out “ thirty-eight ” and insert “ twenty-eight.” And to amend the thirty-third section of the same article so as to make its provis- ions (as far as practicable) apply to cities, towns, counties and districts, and providing that the General Assembly shall have no power to pass laws authorizing cities, towns, counties or district to subscribe stock in any association or corporation, or to issue bonds, or to incur any liability in aid thereof; nor shall any act be passed by the General Assembly to authorize any county or district to levy taxes for other than county purposes, and then not to exceed cents on each one hundred dollars of taxable property, Reso/ven', 2. That the Committee on the Executive Department be directed to in- quire into the expediency of amending the second section of the second article of the present Constitution, by striking out the word “four” and inserting “six;” and to amend the tenth section of the same article by inserting after the word “ reprieve,” in the second line, these words, “and after judgment;” and to amend the twenty-fifth section of the same article so as to make the Treasurer’s term of oifice four years in- stead of two, and then ineligible for a sec- ond term. Res‘ lven', 3. That the Committee on Cir- cuit Courts be directed to inquire into the expediency of abolishing all Equity, Criinal and Common Pleas Courts, and so amending the twenty-fourth section of the fourth article of the present Constitution, as to give the General Assembly power to create such additional Circuit Court dis- tricts as may be necessary, not exceeding in number. Resolved, 4. That the Committee on Coun- ty Courts be directed to inquire into the expediency of amending the thirty-fourth section of the same article, so as to have but one Justice of the Peace in each dis- trict instead of two, or abolish the otfice of Justice of the Peace and vest their jurisdic- tion in the County Court, requiring the Judge thereof, by appropriate legislation, to hold court in each district four times each year, with appeals to the Circuit Court; or if the office of Justice of the Peace be not abolished, then to amend_the thirty- seventh section of the same articleso as not to require the Justice of the Peace to sit at the Court of Claims and assist in making the county levy and making appropria- tions; but provide that this shall be done by the Commissioners to be appointed or elected as may be deemed best. Resolved, 5. That the Committee on County Courts be directed to inquire into the expediency of amending ‘the fourth section of the fifth article of the present 6 RESOLUTIONS. Thursday,] STRAUs—BRoNsToN—MACKoY—ALLEN. [September 18 . Constitution, so as to make the term of the Sheriff ’s ofiice four years instead of two, and then ineligible for re-election. If said Committee or Committees be in favor of these amendments, or any of them, then they are instructed to report such as they favor, with such provisions as will best carry them into effect. Mr. STRAUS. In view of the import- ance of those resolutions, I move that they be printed. Mr. BRONSTON. I second the motion. Mr. MACKOY. As an amendment to that, I suggest to the gentleman from Bul- litt that he provide in his motion that all of these propositions looking to any change in the Constitution be printed. Mr. STRAUS. Well, I accept that. The PRESIDENT. It is moved and seconded that all these resolutions which declare any change in the Constitution ad- visable, be printed. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I will say to the gentleman that the report from the Print- ing Committee which was submitted yes- terday, and whichis now lying upon our tables, is yet to be acted upon; and if the suggestions of that Printing Committee are adopted, all of these resolutions—in fact, everything that is said and done, from the hour when we meet until the minute of our close, will appear in print the next morning. There is no use in printing the proceedings of this Convention of one day, and in addition to that these resolutions and propositions. Then you will have two printings of the same matter, and as soon as we can get an opportunity, we desire to call up for action this report. Mr. HENDRICK. I suppose it will not be objected to by the gentleman from Bul- litt if I offer as a substitute for his motion the report of the Committee on Printing. The PRESIDENT. I don’t think that is properly a substitute. Mr. HENDRICK. I have the right to offer it as an origpial resolution, which I now do. The PRESIDENT. The Chair prom- ised to recognize in turn all the Delegates who had resolution to offer. The Delegates from Christian and Madison, and several other Delegates, have resolutions to offer, and under that promise the Chair would feel disposed, in fair play and justice, to recognize them in the order in which they arose. Mr. HENDRICK. In that order I should have come next. I rose half an hour ago. (Laughter.) The PRESIDENT. The only motion before the Convention is the motion made by the Delegate from Bullitt, that all reso- lutions relating to changes in the Constitu- tion be printed. Now any substitute for that is in order, but a substitute having reference to an entirely different matter is not in order. Mr. HENDRICK. I offer an original resolution as a substitute to the motion. The PRESIDENT. An original reso- lution can not be offered as a substitute. Mr. HENDRICK. I offer it as an amendment. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the amendment, and then the Chair will decide upon it. The Delegate is recog- nized, and can send up his resolution and have it read for information, and then the Chair will decide whether it is a proper substitute for the motion of the gentleman from Bullitt. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to make a motion. The PRESIDENT. No motion is in order unless the gentleman is entitled to the floor. port the resolution. The Reading Clerk then partly read the resolution offered by Mr. Hendrick, which was the report of the Committee appoint- ed to confer with the Printer, etc., during the reading of which the President said: “The Secretary will please suspend the reading. The resolution has been read sufi‘iciently for the Chair to make up his mind as to his ruling on the point of or- The Secretary will please rel RESOLUTION S. 7 Thursday,] ArrLEoATE—HENnnIcK—DEHAvEN. [September 18. der. The resolution is not in order as a substitute for the motion made by the gen- tleman from Bullitt. If the Convention wishes to adopt the resolution proposed by the gentleman from Fleming, as a matter of course it can vote down the motion ‘offered by the Delegate from Bullitt. question will be upon the motion made by the Delegate from Bullitt.” Mr. APPLEGATE. Mr. President, I move to postpone the consideration of this matter till we act on the report of the Committee on Printing. The PRESIDENT. That is not now before the Convention; what is now before us is the motion made by the gentleman from Bullitt that all resolutions relating to changes in the Constitution be printed. Mr. APPLEGATE. I move that the matter be postponed indefinitely, because we have a report from the Committee on Printing that is to be considered to-day, and if that is adopted it will provide for ‘the printing of all these resolutions. The PRESIDENT. The Chair sug- gests that the quickest way to dispose of ‘the matter is to vote down the motion of the gentleman from Bullitt, if the Conven- tion so wishes. So the question is upon the motion made by the gentleman from Bul- litt. The Delegate from Fleming is now recognized to offer the resolution. Mr. HENDRICK. I offer it, Mr. Chair- man, but out of respect to the Committee I would now prefer that it be presented as a report. i The PRESIDENT. The Chair will suspend proceedings for a moment while he refers to the resolutions, and makes the proper references, offered by the gentleman :from Oldham. What disposition does the gentleman indicate? )Ir. DEHAVEN. The Committees are indicated on the backs of the resolutions. The PRESIDENT. The resolutions will be referred as indicated on the back; without objection, such reference indicated by the gentleman ‘from Oldham will be _ The . made. The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from Fleming to offer the res- olution which has been partly read by the Secretary. The Secretary will continue the reporting of the resolution. Mr. HENDRICK. While they are recognized in that form, I'would prefer that it be called up as the report of the Committee on Printing. The PRESIDENT. That fact is ap- parent to the Convention. " Mr. KENNEDY. I desire to offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will call up the resolution ofifered by the gentleman from Nicholas in its proper turn, it is not now in order. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I was not in my seat when the Committees were called for, and I have a report of interest to the whole Convention, which I ask unanimous con- sent to present. A DELEGATE. I object. The PRESIDENT. There being ob- jection, it is not in order. The Secretary _ will report the report offered by the gentle- man from Fleming. Mr. BECKHAM. If it is in order now, I would like to offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT. It is not in Order. Till that resolution is disposed of nothing else is in order. The Reading Clerk thereupon continued to read the resolution offered by Mr. Hendrick, the whole of which is as follows: Resolved, 1. That the proceedings of this Convention should be printed daily. 2. That the Official Reporter to this Con- vention be directed to take down in short- hand the proceedings of this Convention in the order in which said proceedings are had, and that he be directed to arrange the work of his associates in such a manner as to furnish copy to the Printer to this Con- vention as rapidly as possible. 3. That the Printer to this Convention be directed to lay upon the desk of each member of this convention, at ten o’clock each day, the printed proceedings of the preceding day; but said Printer shall print 8 RESLOUTION S. Thursday,] PETTIT—SMITH—ALLEN. [September 18 . only 125 copies before correction by the Convention and members. 4. That LOG) copies of said proceed- ings be printed and bound in law calf, on good paper, using type not smaller than niinion; and that, in making up the forms for said printing, the Printer shall follow the form, style, etc., to be found in the Debates of the Massachusetts Conven- tion of 1853. 5. That said 1,000 bound volumes be used in the following way and manner, viz: One copy to each Circuit Clerk’s office in the State. One to each County Clerk’s oflice. One to each County J udge’s oifiee. One to each member and officer of this Convention. One to each public ofiicer at the capital of the State. Fifty copies for the State Library. Fifty copies for exchange with other States and Territories. And the balance of said 1,000 bound volumes may be sold by the Librarian to any one wishing to pur- chase same, at a price to be fixed by the Printer and Librarian, and the proceeds thereof conveyed into the Treasury by the Librarian. » 6. That, in addition, said Printer shall print 3,000 copies of the proceedings of each day, being cut and stitched together, for distribution among the people of the ‘State by the members of this Convention, in such manner as the Convention may di- rect. 7. That the Printer to this Convention shall receive for his work the same com- pensation as now allowed by law for doing similar work, and a fair and reasonable in- crease on same for all work he may do at night. 8. That the Secretary and Reporter of this Convention be directed to prepare for publication the proceedings of last week, and that they do so as soon as possible; and when done they furnish same to the Printer. 9. That the Oflicial Reporter be, and he is, authorized to appoint a page, who shall be under his control; and said page shall receive the same compensation as other pages employed by this Convention. Mr. PETTIT. I have an amendment to offer, to come in after the word “night,” in the fourth line of the seventh paragraph, which is in these words, “not exceeding the sum stipulated by the Typographical Union of Louisville for similar night work.” I do that for this reason: The para-- graph says that the Printer to this Conven- tion shall receive for his work the same compensation as now allowed by law for doing similar work, and a fair and reason-- able increase on same for all work he may do at night. It is apparent that what is a fair and reasonable compensation at the close of this session to the Printer may not be a fair and reasonable compensation for work done now. I have simply stipulated that it shall not exceed the price paid and allowed for night work by the Typo- graphical Union of the city of Louisville. The question being put, it was declared to have been carried. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to offer an amendment, to provide that one bound volume be sent to each superintendent of schools. Amendment read as follows: Amend by inserting “ one to each County Superintend- ent of Schools office.” Mr. ALLEN. I desire to say to the Convention, as they can see from the printing of the report, that we have pro- vided for three copies of bound proceedings to go to each county. That will take three times 119, making 357. If you add 119 more for the Superintendent of Schools, then some gentleman will propose to add 119 more for the County Attorneys, where are we going to draw the line? The Coni- mittee selected where libraries are kept, Circuit Clerk, County Judges and County Clerks, where the people generally can go and get these bound volumes to read. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to say that there is no office in the State of Kentucky that will appreciate the pro- ceedings of this Convention more than the Superintendent’s oflice, and I believe that oflice ought to be furnished with one if ‘ the other offices are. Mr. SPALDING. There is this objec- tion to sending copies to the Superintend- ents of Schools. They have no ofiice in which three important oflices- R ESOLUTION S. 9 Thursday,] SMITH—MILLER—BULLITT—AL'IEN. [September 18 . to deposit these bound volumes. When the Superintendent went out of oflice he would have no place to leave the copy, and he would carry it with him. The other officers have offices, and if the book is given to the Superintendent, the Superin- tendent would consider it his private prop- erty and carry it ofi' with him. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I desire, in an- swer to that, to say that the Superintend- ent of Schools in Monroe county has as fine an ofiice as any officer in Monroe county. Mr. SPALDING.. The law don’t pro- vide for such offices. ' Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would suggest that the office of Superintendent of Schools is not an office established by the Constitu- tion, and it is not yet decided that it will be. I know there is a strong feeling among the Delegates to discontinue- that office, and I, therefore, think we ought to vote it down. ' Mr. BULLITT. The Committee in dis- tributing these books thought it unwise to donate a copy to anybody except the members of the Convention. The giving to the School Superintendent would be a donation to an individual and not an ap- propriation to the ofiice. We thought it was advisable to lodge a copy in the County Clerk’s ofiice, in the Circuit Clerk’s ofiice, and in the office of County J udge, for the use of the people at large, not par- ticularly for the use of ofiicers, but to lodge it in those places where there are libraries that belong to the State; and if we give to the Superintendent of Schools it would be a donation, and where will the liberality of this Convention stop? If we begin by giving it to the Superintendent, ought we not to give it to J udges—ought we not give it to different officers who now preside in the oflices of the State, and to the clergy- man, and where will our liberality stop? \Ve thought we had better lodge copies of these books where they can be used by the people at large—put it in the places where r they can go and look at it. I hope the amendment of the gentleman will be de- feated. The question being put to a vote, was declared to have been lost. Mr. BOLES. I wish to offer an amend- ment: Amend section 6 by striking out in section 6, in line first “three thousand,” and insert “one thousand.” Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I desire to say to the Convention that these figures three thousand were put in there in order to en- able the members to distribute the printed proceedings of this Convention among their constituents. There is a strong de- sire on the part of a large number of people of all classes to read as much as they can of the proceedings of this Convention; and we know of no better way of distributing that information among the people than distributing daily whatever is said upon the floor of the Convention. Three thou- sand copies can be used for that purpose. After the type is set and the proof is read, three thousand, or, i if you‘ please, five thou- sand additional copies, cost but little more, and that little consists in the prime cost of the paper, which the State will furnish; and you will see at a moment’s glance that three thousand additional copies for distri-' bution among our constituents will cost but a few hundred dollars more than one thou- sand. I would rather see those figures raised to four thousand than to see it cut down one hundred. The question being put to a vote, the amendment was declared to have been lost. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the original resolution as amended, the same was declared to have been adopted. Mr. CLARDY. I ofi'er resolutions. I move that they be referred to the Commit— tees indicated there on the margin. That the following shall be embodied in the new Constitution: 1. All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are found- ed on their authority, and are instituted for their equal protection and benefit. N 0» 1t REsoLUTICNs. Thursday,] CLARDY. [September 18 . special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted by the Legislature which may not be altered, revoked or repealed by the same body. . Referred to Committee on Bill of Rights. 2. All laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation throughout the State; and in all cases where a general law can be made applicable, no special law shall be enacted. lcferred to Committee on General Pro- visions. 3. Corporations may be formed under general laws, but shall not be created. by special act. All laws now in force in this State concerning corporations, and all laws that may hereafter be passed granting cor- porate privileges, may be altered from time to time or repealed. Referred to Committee on Corporations. 4. Rules from corporations shall be se- cured by such individual liability of the corporators and other means as may be pre- scribed by law. Same reference. 5. No corporation shall issue stock or bonds except for money paid, labor done or property actually received, and all fictitious increase of stock or indebtedness shall be void. The stock and bonded indebtedness of corporations shall not be increased ex- cept in pursuance of general law, nor with- out the consent of the persons holding the larger amount in value of the stock, at a meeting called for that purpose, giving sixty days’ public notice, as may be pro- vided by law. Same reference. 6. All railroads and other transportas tion companies are declared to be common carriers, and subject to legislative control. Every railroad company shall have the right with its road to intersect, connect with, or cross any other railroad; and shall receive and transport each the other’s pas- sengers, tonnage and cars without delay or discrimination. ' Referred to Committee on Railroads and ‘Commerce. 7. No railroad or other transportation “company shall grant free papers or passes or tickets at a discount, to any person hold- ing any oflice of honor, trust or profit in this Commonwealth; and the acceptance of any such pass or ticket by a member of the Legislature, or any public officer other .— than Railroad Commissioners, shall work a forfeiture of his ofiice. Same reference. 8. No railroad or other common carrier shall combine or make any contract with any other common carrier, by which com- bination or contract the earnings of the one doing the carrying are to be shared by the one not doing the carrying. Same reference. 9. No discrimination in charges or facil- ities for transportation shall be made by any railroad or other transportation com- pany between places or persons. or in -the facilities for the transportation of the same classes of freight or passengers within this State, or coming from or going to another State. Persons and property transported over any railroad, or by any other trans- portation company or individual, shall be delivered at any station or landing, at charges not exceeding the charges for the transportation of persons and property of the same class in the same direction to any more distant station or landing. Excur- sion and commutation tickets may be is- sued at special rates. Same reference. 10. The State shall be divided into three districts as nearly equal in population as practicable, in each of which one Railroad Commissioner shall be elected by the qual- _ ified electors thereof at the regular guber- natorial elections, whose salary shall be fixed by law, and whose term of ofiice shall be four years, commencing on the day of -_— next succeeding their election. Said Commissioners shall be qualified elect- ors of the State and of the district from which they are elected, and shall not be in- terested in any railroad corporation or oth- er transportation company as stockholders, creditors, agent, attorney or employe; and the act of a majority of said Commission- ers shall be deemed the act of said Com- mission. Said Commissioners shall have the power, and it shall be their duty, to es— tablish rates of charges for the transporta- tion of passengers and freight by railroad or other transportation companies, and publish the same from time to time, with such changes as they may make, to examine the books, records and papers of all rail- road and other transportation companies, and for this purpose they shall have power to issue subpoenas and all other necessary process, to hear and determine complaints against railroad and other transportation companies, to send for persons and papers, RESOLUTION S. 1 l Thursday,] KFNNEDY. [September 18 . to administer oaths, take testimony, and punish for contempt of their orders and processes in the same manner and to the same extent as courts of record; and en- force their decisions and correct abuses through the medium of the courts. In all controversies, civil or criminal, the rates of fare and freights established by said Commission shall be deemed conclu- sively just and reasonable, and in any ac- tion against such corporation or company fix-damages sustained by charging exces- sive rates, the plaintiff, in addition to the actual damage, may, in the discretion of the judge or jury, recover exemplary dam- ages. Said Commission shall report to the Governor annually their proceedings, and such other facts as may be deemed impor- tant. Nothing in this section shall prevent individuals from maintaining actions against ‘any of such corporations. The Legisla- tature may in addition to any penalties prescribed by action of this Convention, en- force this article by forfeiture of charter or otherwise, and may confer such further powers on the Commissioners as shall be necessary to enable them to perform the duties enjoined on them in this and the foregoing section. The Legislature shall pass all laws necessary for the enforcement of these provisions. Same reference. The PRESIDENT. Reference will be made of the resolutions offered by the Del- egate from Christian as indicated on them. The Delegate from Nicholas is now recog- nized. Mr. KENNEDY. resolutions : I offer the following Amendments to the Constitution. Resolved, That any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in the Senate or House of Repre- sentatives; and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the members elected to each of the two Houses, such proposed amendment or amendments, together with the yeas and nays of each House thereon, shall be entered in full on their respective Journals, and said amendment or amend- ments shall be submitted to the electors of this State for adoption or rejection at the next general election thereafter, in such manner as the General Assembly may pro- vide: Provided, however, That the Secre- tary of this State shall cause said amend- ment or amendments to be published week- ly in some newspaper, if such there be, within each county in the State, for four consecutive weeks next preceding the gen- eral election then next ensuing. If a ma- jority of the electors voting at said election shall vote for the proposed amendment or amendments, the same shall become a part of this Constitution. N o amendment or amendments shall be submitted oftener than once in four years; and when two or more amendments shall be submitted, they shall be voted upon separately. R'solved, That whenever two-thirds of the members of each House of the General Assembly shall, by a vote entered upon the Journals thereof, concur that a Convention is necessary to revise, alter, or amend the Constitution, the question shall be submit- ted to the electors at the next general elec- tion. If a majority votin at the election vote for a Convention, t e General As- sembly shall, at the next session, provide for a Convention, to consist of as many ‘members as there shall be in the House of Representatives and no more, to be elected in the same manner, at the same places, and in the same districts. The General Assembly shall, in the act calling the Convention, designate the day, hour and place of ‘its meeting, fix the pay of its members and ‘provide for the pay- ment of same, together with the expenses necessarily incurred by the Convention in the performance of its duties. Before pro- ceeding to act, the members shall take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Kentucky, and to faithfully dis- charge their duties as members of the Con- vention. The qualification of members shall be the same as that of members of the General Assembly, and vacancies occurring shall be filled ,in the manner provided for filling vacancies in the General Assembly. Said Convention shall meet within three months after such election, and prepare such revision, alteration or amendments to the Constitution as shall be deemed neces- sary, which shall be submitted to the elect- ors for their ratification or rejection at an election appointed by the Convention for that purpose, not less than two nor more than four months after the adjournment thereof; and unless so submitted and ap- proved by a majority of the electors voting at the election, no such revision, alterations or amendments shall take effect. The Convention, when assembled, shall 12 RESOLUTIONS. Thursday,] BURNAM—BOLEs—BUCKNER. [September 18 . judge of the election of its members, and decide contested elections; and the General Assembly shall, in calling a Convention, provide for taking testimony in such cases, and for issuing a writ of election in case of a tie. Resolwn’, That the Constitution shall not be altered, amended or changed in any way except as provided in this article. Resolution referred to Committee on Re- vision. NEIV COUNTIES. Resolved, That no new county shall be established which shall reduce any county to less than three hundred square miles, or to less than fifteen thousandc inhaitants; nor shall any county be formed of less area or containing a less population; nor shall any line thereof pass within ten miles of the county seat of any county proposed to be divided. Referred to Committee on Revision. Resolve/1', That it is the sense of this Convention that our present system of Circuit Courts‘ be retained, and that all legislative courts of similar jurisdibtion be prohibited, except as herein suggested, and that there shall be a sufficient number of districts added and a sufficient number of Judges elected, and the terms of court shall be held with such frequency as that all the business may be disposed of without delay; and said Judges shall be elected for a term of eight years, and shall be ineligible for the succeeding term. In all counties having a population of one hundred thousand or more, there may be established by law a separate chancery and criminal court in addition thereto, the Judges of said courts to be elected for a term of eight years. and to be ineligible for the succeeding term. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. BURNAM. I offer a resolution. ‘Resolution read as follows: Resolved. That the C(nnmittee on the Executive Department be instructed to in- vestigate the questions as to whether the Governor of this Commonwealth shall be permitted by the Constitution to pardon crimes before conviction of parties charged with same, and upon the propriety of the establishment of a Board of Pardons, who shall, in conjunction with the Governor, be consulted and made report upon the grant- ing or withholding of pardons and re- prleves. Resolution referred to Committee on Executive Department. Mr. BOLES. I offer a resolution. Resolution read, as follows: WHEREAS, Grave doubts exist as to the power of the General Assembly, under the present Constitution of the State, to pro- vide for changes of venue on motion of the Commonwealth in criminal prosecutions; therefore, Hes'tvea' by this Convention, That the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure constitute an inquiry as to this power under our present Consti- tution, and if no such power be found to exist, that they prepare a provision creat- ing such power, to be vested in the Legis- lative Department of the State, enabling that Department to provide for such changes of venue in counties where fair trials can not be had on account of any improper public sentiment therein. The PRESIDENT. W’ithout objection, the reference will be made as indicated to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. Mr. BECKNER. I offer a resolution. The resolution read, as follows: VVHEREAs, It is of prime importance to the health and comfort of this Convention that the place in which its sessions are held should be properly ventilated and cared for; and whereas, Todd Hall has had an experience of eight years as Janitor of the House of Representatives, which has demonstrated his faithfulness and efficiency ; therefore, be it Resolved, That said Hall be, and he is hereby, appointed Janitor of this Conven- tion, and charged with the responsibility of having the Hall in which we sit suitably warmed, cleaned and kept in order, and its draughts regulated as far as may be practi» cable. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the resolution, it was declared to have been adopted by a vote of 47 to 28. Mr. FUNK. I offer a resolution. The resolution read, as follows : Amend section 18 of article 2, so that it will read thus: “The numbers of Repre- sentatives shall be sixty, and the number of Senators twenty.” Amend section 24 of article 2 so as to read thus: “The members of the General As- RESOLUTIONS. . l 3 'Thursday,] MCHENRY—WASHINGTON—PHELPS. [September 18 . sembly shall receive from the public Treas- ury the sum of $200 in full for their attend- ance, and ten cents per mile for the neces- sary travel in going to and returning from the sessions of their respective Houses: Provided, That a pro rat/1. reduction shall be made from said amount for every day of any session during which any member is absent.” Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. MCHENRY. I move this resolu- tion, and ask that it be printed and referred to the Committee on Executive Officers of the State at Large. The resolution reads, as follows: RPsolvwd, That the Governor shall nomi- note, and by and with the advice and con- sent of the Senate, appoint a Treasurer of the State, who shall be commissioned dur- ing the term for which the Governor was elected, and who shall hold his office during the pleasure of the Governor. The said Treasurer shall execute such bond, perform such duties, and receive such compensation as shall be prescribed by law. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the reference will be made. The motion was to print and refer to the Committee on Executive Officers of the State at Large. If there is no objection, such will be the order of the Convention. Mr. WASHINGTON. I offer a resolu- tion. The resolution read, as follows : Resolved. 1. That the General Assembly shall pass no special act conferring or re- lating to corporate powers, but shall enact general laws for the formation of cor- porations, such laws to be subject to altera- tion from time to time, but not so as to disturb or interfere with rights which may have become vested. 2. The General Assembly shall pass no act of a local nature; but, by general laws, shall vest such powers in courts of record, with respect to private and local affairs, as may be deemed expedient. 3. The General Assembly shall not au- thorize any county, city, town or precinct, by vote of its citizens or otherwise, to be- come a stockholder in any company, cor- poration, or association whatever; or to raise money for, or loan its credit to, or in aid of, any such company, corporation or association. Resolved, 1. That section eight of arti- cle thirteen of the present Constitution be so amended as to read as follows: The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate; but in all civil actions a verdict agreed upon by three-fourths of the jurv shall be valid and binding in law. u 2. That section fourteen of article thir- teen of the present Constitution be so amended as to read follows: No man shall. for the same offense, be twice put in' jeopardy of life, liberty or property; nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of himself or his representatives, or without just compensation previously made therefor in money, or secured by de- posit of money; such compensation to be fixed by a jury, without deduction for bene- fits to any property of the owner. 3. Judges shall not charge juries with respect to matters of fact; but may state the testimony and'declarc the law. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I ofl‘er some resolutions. The resolutions read, as follows: Amend section 32 of article ‘.2 of the Constitution so that it will read thus: “The General Assembly shall have no power to grant divorces, to change the names of in- dividuals, or direct the sales of property belonging to infants, or other persons 1a- boring under legal disabilities, by special legislation; but, by general laws, shall con- fer such powers on the Courts of justice: Provided, however, That no power shall be given to grant absolute divorces for any cause except on the ground of adultery or for lewd, lascivious conduct. Referred to Legislative Department. Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that it be made the duty of the General Assembly of this Commonwealth to so legislate as to create and maintain in this State a system of compulsory educa- tion. Referred to Committee on Education. Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the Legislature be here- after prohibited from creating in this Com- mowealth any additional counties to those now in existence. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. 'Resolved, That it is the sense of this 14 RESOLUTION S. Thursday,] J ONSON—MACKOY. [September 18 . Convention that the Constitution shall be so amended that hereafter all elections held in this State, both municipal and State elections, shall be held on one and the same day, so that there shall at no time be more than one election held in this State during any one year. And said election day shall be a public holiday. Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. JON SON. I offer a resolution. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, 1. That whenever two-thirds of the members elected to each branch of the General Assembly shall think it necessary to alter or amend this Constititution, they shall recommend to the electors at the next election of members of the General Assem- bly to vote for or against a Convention, and if it shall appear that a majority of all the electors of the State voting for Repre- sentatives have voted for a Convention, the General Assembly shall, at their next ses- sion, call a Convention, to consist of as many members as the House of Representatives at the time of making said call. to be cho- sen in the same manner, at the same place, and by the same electors, in the same dis- tricts that chose the members of the House of Representatives, and which Convention shall meet within three months after the said election, for the purpose of revising, altering, or amending this Constitution. 2. Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either branch of the General Assembly; and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the members-elect in each of the two Houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be referred to the next regular session of the General Assembly, and shall be published for at least three months previous to the time of holding the next election for members of the House of Representatives; and if, at the next regu- lar session of the General Assembly after said election, a majority of all the mem- bers-elect in each branch of the General Assembly shall agree to said amendment or amendments, then it shall be their duty to submit the same to the people at the next general election for their adoption or rejection, in such manner as may be pre- scribed by law; and if a majority of all qhe electors voting at such election for members of the House of Representatives shall vote for such amendment or amend- ments, the same shall become a part of the Constitution; but the General Assembly shall not have the power to propose an amendment or amendments to more than onearticle of the Constitution at the same session. ' Resolved, That section 27, article 2, of the Constitution, be amended by striking there- from the following words, viz: “ While he continues 'to exercise the functions of a clergyman, priest or teacher of any relig- ious persuasion, society, sect nor ;” also, Resolved, That section 6, article 3, of the Constitution, be amended by striking there- from the following words, viz: “Or min- ister of any religious society.” Referred to Committee on Revision. Mr. MACKOY. I have three resolu- tions which I ask to have read and referred to the Committees indicated on the back thereof. Resolved. 1. That section 14 of the Bill of Rights of the present Constitution should hereafter read as follows, viz: “ No person shall for the same offense be twice put in jeopardy of his life or limb; nor shall any man’s property be taken, ap- plied to, or damages for public use without the consent of his representatives, and with- out just ' compensation being previously made to him.” Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved, ‘2. That the following words should be added to section 17 of the Bill of Rights as it now stands, viz: “ Nor shall any punishments be inflicted except such as are provided by statute.” So that said section shall hereafter read: “ That excessive bail shall not be required nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel pun- ishments inflicted, nor shall any punish- ments be inflicted except such as are pro- vided by statute.” Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved, That it is expedient to incor- porate in the Constitution of Kentucky provisions to the effect, 1. That the rights of a wife in and to her property, real and personal, as well that belonging to her at marriage, or that which she may hereafter become entitled to in any Way, together with her power to control and dispose thereof, shall be the same, in all respects, as that of a husband in, to and over property, real and personal, belonging to him. 2. That the interest of a husband in the estate of his deceased wife shall not be dif- ferent in amount or kind from the interest RESOLUTION S. 15 Thursday,] Amen—Cox. [September 18 . of a wife in the estate of her deceased hus- band. Referred to the Committee on Legisla- tive Department. Resolved, That it is expedient to provide in the Constitution that the General As- sembly shall, by general law, provide for the election or appointment, in each county, of Boards of Commissioners, who shall have such power of local government and taxa- tion within their respective counties as may be prescribed by law. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the reference will be made. Mr. AMOS. I have a resolution to offer. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con- vention that the following section be insert- -ed in the Constitution, to wit: A mort- gage, deed of trust, contract or other obligation, by which a debt is secured, shall, for the purposes of assessment and taxation, be deemed and treated as an interest in the property affected thereby. Except as to railroads and other quasi public corpora- tions in case of debts so secured, the value of the property affected by such mortgage, deed of trust, contract or obligation, less the value of such security, shall be assessed and taxed to the owner of the property, and the value of such security shall be assessed and taxed to the owner thereof in the county, city or district in which the property afi'cet- ed thereby is situated. The taxes so levied shall be a lien upon the property and secur- ity, and may be paid by either party to such security; if paid by the owner of the security, the tax so levied upon the prop- erty thereby shall become a part of the debt so secured; if the owner of the prop- erty shall pay the tax so levied on such security, it shall constitute a payment thereon, and, to the extent of such payment, a full discharge thereof: Provided, That if any such security or indebtedness shall be paid by any such debtor or debtors, after assessment and before the tax levy, the amount of such levy may likewise be re- tained by such debtor or debtors, and shall be computed according to the tax levy for the preceding year. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Madison; have you a resolution? Mr. HARRIS. I have a motion to make pursuant to notice given yesterday. The PRESIDENT. That will be in or- der when the orders of the day shall have been reached. The Chair will try to recognize gentlemen in their turn, and will recognize the Delegate from Carroll. Mr. COX. I offer a resolution. The resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on the Judicial Department and Court of Appeals be requested to inquire into and report on the following proposed charges in the Con- stitution: 1. The Court of Appeals shall consist of a Presiding Judge and six Associate Judges, to be elected by the qualified voters of the whole State, which election shall be regu- lated by law. 2. The Presiding Judge shall hold his oflice for twelve years, unless removed from that office by death, resignment or im- peachment, and the Associate Judges shall serve as follows: One shall serve two years, one shall serve four years, one six years, one eight years, one ten years, and one twelve years from the date of said election. The Judges at the first term after their election shall determine by lot the length of time which each of said Associate Judges shall serve, and at the expiration of the term of each of the Judges, the Judges elected at each succeeding election shall hold said oflEice for and during the term 'of twelve years. 3. If any of the said Judges are removed from said oflice by death, resignation or im- peachment, the Governor shall issue a writ of election to elect another Judge to fill such vacancy, to serve until the expiration of the term for which the Judge was elect- ed who was removed from said office. 4. The General Assembly shall, at its first session after the adoption of this Con- stitution, lay ofi’ the State into six districts, as nearly equal in population as possible; and no two of said Associate Judges shall, when elected, reside in the same district; and if any of said Associate Judges changes their place of residence from the district in which they were residing at the time of their election, such removal shall operate and be treated as a resignation of said office. 5. Said Court shall, from time to time, make rules for the proceedings therein ; but in those rules they shall provide that the presiding Judge shall divide the Associate 1 6 RESOLUTIONS. Thursday,] BURNAM—BULLITT. [September 18 . Judges into three classes, of two Judges in each class; and all cases shall be submitted to, and be heard by, two of those Associate Judges in the same class, and finally sub- mitted to the Presiding Judge sitting with the class to which the case had been sub- mitted; and if a disagreement occurs there- by, then by the whole Court. If a peti- tion for rehearing is filed, it shall be heard by another class from that to which it had been first referred. 6. The rules adopted by said Court shall not be in violation of the Constitution of the United States, nor of the Constitution of the State of Kentucky. The Judges of the Court of Appeals shall receive for their services a salary, which shall be fixed by law, which shall not be increased nor di- minished during the term for which they were elected. Referred to Committee on Judicial De- partment and Court of Appeals. The READING CLERK. The same Delegate has offered the following resolu- tion, and asks that it be referred to the Committee 011 Education. The resolution reads as follows: Resolver], That the Committee on Edu- cation be requested to consider and report on the following proposed amendment to the Constitution: “No part of the interest on the fund set apart by the present Con- stitution, and no part of the fund annually raised by taxation for school purposes, shall be applied to any other purpose, than the sup- port and maintenance of common schools throughout the State. Reference made as asked. The PRESIDENT. WVithout objection, such reference will be made. The hour of 12 o’clock having arrived, The PRESIDENT. The orders of the day are now in order. The Secretary will please report what is in the orders of the day. READING CLERK. The first thing in the orders of the day is the following resolution offered by the Delegate from the county of Madison, and the amendment proposed thereto by the Delegate from the county of Union. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: It is hereby resolved as the sense of this Convention as follows: That the word “ white,” in the first line of the eighth sec— tion of the second article of the present Constitution, entitled “Concerning the Legislative Department;” that the whole of article tenth, entitled “ Concerning Slaves,” and that the third section of the thirteenth article, entitled “Bill of Rights,” shall be struck out, and compose no part of the Constitution proposed to be submitted by this body to the people for ratification, said provisions being in conflict with the Constitution of the United States, the su- preme law of the land. The amendment thereto was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Amend resolution by striking out that part of section of the Bill of Rights reading “the right of property is higher than any Constitutional sanction,” be, and it is, stricken out. The PRESIDENT. The question is first‘ upon the amendment. Mr. BURNAM. I have no objection to the amendment, and am willing to accept it. Mr. BULLITT. If I am in order, I desire to offer this as a substitute. The substitute was read by the Reading Clerk as follows: ARTICLE —. The great fundamental principle of American Governments is, that the peo- ple are sovereign and the governments are their agents, and those who administer the governments the servants of the sov- ereign people. So that the authority to amend the Constitution of the United States by the action of two-thirds of both houses of Congress, to be approved by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the States (both being but agents), must be construed as authorizing only such amendments as are within the scope of the powers dele— gated to the United States by the Conven- tion of 1787 as declared in the Constitution of that date, such Conventions being the only mode recognized by that Constitution for changing the character of the govern- ment so as to enlarge the powers thereof at the expense of the reserved rights of the States, or the reserved rights of the sov- ereign people of the States. Therefore, it is insisted by this Conven- tion that, so far as the language of the four- teenth and fifteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States appears RESOLUTIONS. 17 Thursday,] BRONSTON—BURNAM—SPALDING. [September 18 . to transfer the sovereign power of this country, or any part thereof, from the white races to any dark race or races of people, or appears to transfer the right to interfere with elections in the States for State officers, or to, in anywise, control State affairs beyond the authority of Con- gress to control the States as fixed by the Convention of 1787 and declared in the Constitution of that date, should be con- strued and held to be unauthorized and inoperative. It is, however, voluntarily ordained by theState of Kentucky: 1. That neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly con- victed, shall exist anywhere within this State; and persons so held to servitude shall be required to work only under the supervision of an officer of the State, or an officer of some municipal subdivision of the State Government. 2. All persons of the African race, who were brought into any State or Territory of the United States against their will, and such of their descendants as may have been born in any State or Territory of the United States, residing in this State, are hereby invested with, and shall have, the right to vote in all elections, both State and Federal, under the same restrictions, and upon the same conditions provided for the voting of white persons; and they are vested with equal rights to sit on the juries, give testimony in the courts or elsewhere, plead and be impleaded, and have equal rights before the courts with the white in- habitants of the State; and are also invest- ed with equal rights to buy, own, sell and convey any real, personal or mixed estate, and transact any legitimate business they please; and to contract marriages among themselves, and enjoy all rights belonging to, or arising out of, the laws relating thereto, andtransmit their property by de- scent; but are not permitted to intermarry with any of the white races within this State. They shall have schools of equal quality and equipment to send their chil- dren to with the schools provided for the use of the children of the white inhabi- tants of the State; but the white and col- ored children shall not be sent to- the same schools. They shall be eligible to be ap- pointed to any office, from which they may be removed at will, without oflice found, at any time Congress shall attempt to pass any law for their separate benefit, as in- habitants of the States, under color or _ claim of right to do so, by virtue of said fourteenth or fifteenth amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Mr. BRONSTON. I move to refer the resolution and the substitute to the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Madison is recognized. The Chair would state that according to strict parliamentary usage, a motion to commit is not debatable, and the Chair will allow only a very lim- ited debate. Mr. BRONSTON. I rise to a point of order, and’that is, that not only parliamen- tary usage, but the rules which we have adopted, provide that a motion to commit is not debatable. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will sus- tain the point of order if any gentleman makes it. Mr. BRONSTON. I made the point of order, and insist upon it. Mr. BURNAM. I would like the gentleman to withdraw the motion for a short time. Mr. BRONSTON. I made the motion after deliberate reflection, and I shall in- sist upon it. I do not think that this ques- tion ought to be discussed before this body. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman from Lexington insists upon his motion to com- mit, and the motion to commit is not de- batable. - Mr. SPALDING. I rise to a question of privilege. The amendment offered by me to the resolution offered by the Dele- gate from Madison was, either through my inadvertence, or through some mis- take or another, wrongly worded. I would like to correct my amendment. The PRESIDENT. There is no objec- tion, and the gentleman can do so. The question is upon referring the resolution and amendment to the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights. 7 The question was put to the House, and the resolution and amendment were so re- ferred. 18 I RESOLUTIONS. Thursdayg] HARRIS—MACKOY. [September 18. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the next thing in order. I be- lieve the next thing in order is the motion to reconsider, notice of which was given yesterday by the Delegate from Simpson, and which the Secretary will please re- port. “ READING CLERK. On yesterday the Delegate from Simpson county gave no— tice that he would on to-day move to re- consider the vote by which the resolution to appoint a Committee on Location of the Capital was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Simpson is now recognized to make said motion. Mr. HARRIS. Pursuant to that notice, I wish to make the motion now to recon- sider the vote adopting the resolution call- ing for a Committee on the Location of the Capital. I stated yesterday that I made it with a view of withdrawing the resolution, because I think there may be some antagonisms engendered about the matter. It is the only local question the Convention will have before it, and I de- sire to withdraw it for awhile and defer it until a later stage of our proceedings. Mr. MACKOY. Before the question is put, I would like to say a few words upon the subject of reconsidering the vote by which a resolution was adopted calling for the appointment of a Committee on the Location of the Capital. If I understand the ground of the gentleman’s motion, it is that it may engender antagonisms in this body, and that the question is one purely of local importance. Now, in the first place, I can not see how it is possible that in a body of this kind, met together for the purpose of considering questions of interest to the entire State of Kentucky, the ques- tion of the location of the Capital can en- gender antagonisms between Delegates upon this floor. If I should choose to urge the claims of the city that I represent as a suitable place for the Capital of Kentucky, and if the Committee on Capital should not entertain the claims that I make, I know that neither myself, my colleague, nor the gentleman from Kenton county, or the members from that part of the State, would feel offended in any way whatever. If the Delegates from Louisville should urge the claims 'of Louisville before that Committee, and if that Committee should report adversely to the claims of Louisville, I presume that the members from Louis- ville would entertain the same kindly feel- ings towards the gentlemen constituting that Committee, and towards those in this Convention who might be opposed to mak- ing the seat of government at Louisville, as they do to-day. In like manner, if the .Committee should refuse to consider the claims made by the ancient Capital of Ken- tucky, the town of Danville, where so many State conventions were held, I have no doubt that the honorable Delegate who rep- resents the county of Boyle in this Con- vention would not feel hurt for one moment that the claims of Danville, the early Capital of Kentucky, were not re- cognized. In like manner, if the claims of ‘ Lexington to be the Capital of the State of Kentucky should not be received favorably by this Committee, I take it for granted that the member from Lexington and the member from Fayette county would not entertain any harsh feelings towards a sin- gle member of this Committee who report- ed adversely to the selection of Lexington as a proper site for the Capital of Kentucky But, Mr. President, the gentleman has said that this is purely a local measure. I do not regard it as such. Forty years ago the Constitutional Convention of Kentucky gave to the Legislature, by a two-thirds vote, the right to change the location of the Capital of Kentucky. Every Legislature that has met since that time has had to con- tend with that question. Many a young man has gone to the Legislature of Ken- tucky resolved in his mind to change the Capital, or to fix its location, in order that p the State of Kentucky might do that which RESOLUTIONS. 19 Thursday,] MACKOY. [September 18 . it should have done long since—that is, erect a State-house which would comport with the dignity, the wealth and the intel- ligence of the State of Kentucky; and yet to-day, because the Legislature of Ken- tucky has been unwilling to fix the site of the Capital of Kentucky, we are con- demned to retain and to use the buildings that we now meet in. I say that it is a matter of vital impor- tance to the State of Kentucky that we should have buildings that would repre- sent in some fitting way the might, the wealth and the dignity of the State of Ken- tucky. It would have a beneficial effect not only upon persons abroad and upon visitors, but also upon the Legislature it- self. The men who come here to make laws, if they were housed comfortably; if they were put in a hall that was well ven- tilated, and so arranged that it would be conducive to health, would feel themselves more respectable, and would conduct them- selves and conduct legislation in a manner superior to that in which it has ever been conducted. As a local illustration—I do not know whether the honorable gentlemen from Campbell are present; one of them is, but the other, I believe, is not—in the town of Newport, which is represented by the gentleman who temporarily presided with so much dignity over this Convention, they had from an early day a court-house that was a disgrace almost to civilization. The court was held in a little room heated by a common stove, and the result upon the temper and the conduct of the lawyers was such that it was a matter of daily occur- rence, during the session of the courts, to have a fight between the lawyers in that court-room. Some eight or ten years ago gentlemen having a regard for the dignity of the bar and for the character of the pro- fession, caused the enactment of a law through which Newport and Campbell county have obtained a court-house that s handsome and creditable, and the effect has been beneficial upon the habits and l manners of the bar. They conduct them- selves, I must say, at the present time like gentlemen (laughter and applause); and I take it that if we were to erect 2. Capitol building that would excel this as the pres- ent court-house in the town of Newport excels the old ,court-house, which they had there from the time of the foundation of the county until a period eight or ten years ago, the change incident to a new Capitol building would be immediately manifested in the character and conduct of every person who is a member of the Leg- islature of the State of Kentucky. . But, Mr. President, it is important that this matter should be considered now, in order that we may have the advantage of its discussion by the people. It is nota matter that has been discussed yet. Other questions have been discussed in the public print. The views of Delegates have been asked for, but this question of the location of the Capital is one that has been avoided, or not entertained, or not discussed in any manner whatever. I say, in order that this Convention may discharge the ‘duty for which it has been ealled here, it is impor- tant that this Committee should remain; that this Committee should be appointed by the Chair; that it should be composed of the best and the fairest-minded men in this Convention, if there is any difference between the Delegates of this Convention, in order that the merits of Danville, of - Winchester, of Lexington, of Frankfort, of Georgetown, of Louisville, and of the other cities in this State may be discussed by the public press with reference to the location of the Capital of the State of Ken- tucky. I am averse to contracting a pub- lic debt. I am averse to the contraction of debts by- counties or municipalities; but so far as the erection of a Capitol building for the State of Kentucky is concerned, one that would be an ornament to the State of Kentucky and a monument to the virtue, intelligence and the greatness of its people, I would be willing to incur a debt large 20 * RESOLUTION s. Thursday,] enough to build a Capitol that would in some manner testify to the intelligence of the people of this State; and I trust the gentleman will not press that motion, and that the Chair will not hesitate to appoint the Committee provided for by that Rule. Mr. YOUNG. I think that the gentle- man from the county of Kenton does not thoroughly understand the object of the mover of this resolution to reconsider. As I understand it, it is this: It is not likely that the President of this Convention can appoint any Committee whose minds will altogether be unbiased on this subject. Is it not fairer to let this body, as a whole, consider that question, and let the question of the removal of the Capital come up be- fore the Committee of the Whole? No report can be made that will not affect the opinion of the members on this subject. I believe that it would be very difficult for the President of this body to appoint a Committee from the members of this Con- vention who would not in some way be biased in opinion upon the proper location of the Capital of this State. I agree with the gentleman from Kenton, that this ques- tion should be settled, and settled for all time to come. -The present public build- ings at Frankfort, representing the State of Kentucky, are simply a disgrace to a great State; and I would be glad, so far as I am concerned, if some morning they would all be burnt down. If the Capital is to be in Frankfort, let us erect a building worthy of this Commonwealth. If it is to go somewhere else, let that question be deter- mined, once for all, either by the Conven- tion or by submission of the question to the people of this State. It seems to me that if this question comes up as a new question before this whole Convention, sit- ting as a Committee of the Whole, it will be fairer and more just to all these cities who shall desire to place their claim for the location of the Capital before this Conven- tion; and, as I understand, that is one of the objects of the mover of this resolution, YOUNG—MILLER—APPEGATE. [September 18 , that this question may come up before this Convention without any bias by a report of the Committee, and be discussed by this Convention, then and there, and forever settled. With that view, I shall vote for the resolution to reconsider. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The Committee on Rules had this matter under considera- tion. They thought with the gentleman from Louisville that it was not proper to have a Committee to consider this question; but as it was a single proposition, it would be best for it to be considered by the whole Convention in Committee of the Whole, and for that reason the proposition to appoint a Committee to consider this question was re- jected by the Committee on Rules; and the gentleman from Simpson, not being advised about that matter, introduced his resolution to have the report of the Committee on Rules amended in that particular, and after being advised and understanding the rea— sons advanced by the Committee on Rules upon this subject, he agreed to withdraw his proposition, and he quite agreed with the Committee on Rules that it was best to con- sider this proposition in Committee of the Whole. Mr. APPLEGATE. I have one or two objections to reconsidering this question, and they are these: Before this Conven- tion can determine upon the location of a Capital of the State of Kentucky, it seems to me there are several facts we ought to know and to know accurately. One is as to the condition of the title to all the prop- erty owned in the city of Frankfort upon which the State buildings are situated; and another one is, as to Whether or not there is any other town in the State of Kentucky that we could get to locate our Capital at that would not quarantine against us after the exhibitions made here Winter after Winter; and I think there ought to be a Committee to ascertain those facts and re- port .them to the Convention ; and for that reason, and for that reason alone, I am op- posed to considering it in Committee of the RESOLUTION S. 21 1 Thursday,] MACKOY—MCDERMOTT—HENDRICK. [September 18, Whole before the Special Committee has considered it. Mr. MACKOY. In answer to the ob- jection made by the Delegate from Louis- ville that the Committee appointed by the Chair would be influenced by prejudice, it seems to me that could be obviated by selecting the Committee, one from each Congressional or Constitutional district in the State. You could in that way secure a Committee that would be taken from differ- ent parts of the State, and I am quite sure the President of this body would appoint a Committee that would consider the matter faithfully, and bring before it all the facts which the Delegate from Pendleton has so well said are necessary to be considered by this Convention before it can make up its mind as to what it shall do. . Mr. MCDERMOTT. I ask that the mo- tion be reported. The Secretary reported the motion. The motion was put to the House, and a division being called for, was carried. The PRESIDENT. The question now is on the adoption of the report of the Committee on Rules, providing for the ap- pointment of a Committee on the Location of the Capital. Mr. HENDRICK. I understood the Delegate from Simpson on yesterday to in- dicate that he would ask leave to withdraw that resolution. Mr. HARRIS. Yes, I suppose it would take unanimous consent to withdraw the resolution. The PRESIDENT. It is already adopt- ed, and the gentleman can not withdraw it except by unanimous consent and suspen- sion of the rules. Is there any objection to the withdrawing of the amendment? Mr. MACKOY. I object. The PRESIDENT. Then the question recurs on the adoption of the amendment of the gentleman from Simpson to the re- port of the Committee on Rules. Mr. SWANGO. I have an amendment to offer. Amendment was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the Capital of the State remain at Frankfort. The PRESIDENT. The Chair considers that out of order. It does not relate to the same matter. The Chair does not con- sider it in order at this stage. The first amendment relates to the formation of the Committee to consider the matter, and your amendment refers to the subject-mat- ter itself. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to offer an amendment to the motion to this effect. The PRESIDENT. That amendment being reconsidered, is now before the Con- vention, and, as a matter of course, is liable to amendment, commitment, or any other disposition that the House may deem proper. Mr. W. H. MILLER. My amendment is to this effect: that if this Committee is formed, that it shall consist of eleven mem- bers, one to be selected from each Congres- sional District, and that it be formed by lot drawn from these respective districts. Mr. APPLEGATE. I have a resolution to the same effect, which I will ask to have read for information. The resolution was read by the Reading I Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That a Committee of eleven, one from each Congressional District, to be drawn by lot, to compose the Committee on Location of the Capital. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I accept that in lieu of my amendment. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Lincoln gives way, and the amendment offered by the Delegate from Pendleton is now pending. The question is upon the amendment offered by the Delegate from Pendleton. Mr. BRONSTON. I move to commit the resolution, with the amendments, to the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. That is in order. Mr. MAOKOY. I move that the mat- 22 RESOLUTIONS. . Thursday,] MAcKoY—MILLER—BRBNTs. [September 18 . ter be referred, instead of to the Committee on Rules, to a Special Committee, composed of one member from each Congressional District, who shall ‘report to this House hereafter, and that they shall be selected by lot. ' The PRESIDENT. That motion is in order as a substitute for the motion of the gentleman from Lexington. The question was put upon the adoption of the substitute, and the same was carried. THE PRESIDENT. The resolution and amendments are so referred. The motion of the gentleman is a little indefinite as to the manner in which the Committee shall be chosen. Mr. MACKOY. I moved that all those pending motions be referred to a Special Committee of one from each Congressional District, that special Committee to be se- lected by lot. I suppose the Stenographer has it so. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will immediately proceed to execute the order pursuant to the motion. The Clerk then proceeded to draw the names as directed by the motion. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate chosen from the First District is Mr. Ayers. The time for adjournment having ar- rived, Mr. Maekoy moved that the session be extended so as to allow the drawing of Committee to be completed. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The Committee to select rooms for Committees is ready to report. A number of gentlemen, some Chairmen of Committees, have asked me where their rooms are, and while the Com- mittee is vbeing drawn, I would like to make report. ’ The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection? The Chair hears none, and the Committee can report. ' Mr. BRENTS. I represent one county in the Third and one in the Eleventh. ' The PRESIDENT. Where do. you live ? Mr. BRENTS. In the Eleventh. The PRESIDENT. You are in the Eleventh. The report of Committee on Rooms was read, as follows: To the Honorable President of the Conven- tion: Your Committee to obtain suitable rooms for the use of the Standing Committees would respectfully report that they have made the following arrangements: 1. Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights to meet in office of Commissioner of Mines. 2. Committee on Elections to meet in room adjoining court-room of Court of Ap- peals. 3. Committee on Legislative Department to meet in Railroad Commissioners’ oflice. 4. .Committee on Executive Officers for the State at Large to meet in Agricultural oflice. 5. Committee on Executive Officers for Counties and Districts to meet at room in Kiernan building. 6. Committee on Militia to meet in Adju- tant General’s oflice. ' 7. Committee on Judicial Department and Court of Appeals to meet in the court- room of the Court of Appeals. 8. Committee on Circuit Courts to meet in Senate Chamber. 9. Committee on County Courts to meet in Senate Chamber. Committee on Education to meet in room at Kiernan building. 11. Committee on Revision to meet in court-room of Court of Appeals. 12. Committee on Corporations to meet in room at Kiernan building. 13. Committee on Municipalities to meet in room at Kiernan building. 14. Committee on Revenue and Taxa- tion to meet in Auditor’s private office. 15. Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure to meet in room at Kiernan building. 16. Committee on Printing and Ac- counts to meet in Senate cloak-room. RESOLUTIONS. 23 Thursday,] HENDRICK—MILLER—SPALDING. [September 18 . 17. Committee on Enrollment to meet in Senate cloak-room. 18. Committee on General Provisions to meet in ‘room at Kiernan building. 19. Committee on Division, Title and Arrangement to meet in room at Kiernan building. 20. Committee on Charity and Charita- ble Institutions to meet in room at Kiernan building. 21. Committee on Schedule to meet in room at Kiernan building. 22. Joint Committee on Legislative De- partment to meet in Executive offices. 23,. Joint Committee on Executive De- partment to meet in court-room of Court of Appeals. 1 24. Joint Committee on Judiciary De- partment to meet in Senate Chamber. 25. Committee on Rules to meet at Rail- road Commissioner’s ofiiee. Five furnished rooms, lights and fuel in- cluded, have been obtained from Mrs. Kier- nan at $75 per month for the five, Mrs. Kiernan to keep them in order. All of which is respectfully reported. The PRESIDENT. The Committeeman from the Second District is Jep. C. J on- son. The question is now on the report of the Committee. Mr. HENDRICK. I move its adoption. The motion was seconded, and, on a vote, the report was declared adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Committee- man drawn from the Third District is J. Guthrie Coke. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I am directed by the Committee to recommend that the places of meeting of the various Commit- tees be printed in the pamphlet ordered printed on yesterday. The PRESIDENT. you make? What motion do Mr. MILLER. It is simply a recom- mendation. Mr. HENDRICK. I make the motion in accordance with the recommendation. The motion was seconded and carried, upon a vote. Mr. SPALDING. In the motion of the Delegate from Fleming, 1 would ask that there be inserted the statement that the Committee on Legislative Department will meet in the Railroad Commissioners’ ofiice. The PRESIDENT. That will be done. The Committeeman from the Fourth Dis- trict is J. L. Woolfolk, and from the Fifth District, Morris A. Sachs. Leaves of absence was granted to Dele- gates from Laurel and Carter. The PRESIDENT. The Committee- man from the Sixth District is Geo. Trus- dell, and from the Seventh, J. F. Askew. Leave of absence was granted to Dele- gate from Wayne county. The PRESIDENT. The Committee- man from the Eighth District is C. F. Bur- nam. Mr. BURNAM. I sincerely trust there will be another Committeeman drawn. It is a position I do not desire to fill, and it will be a personal favor if the House will excuse me. The PRESIDENT. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and the Secretary will draw another name from the District. The Committeeman from the Ninth District is Sam’l J. Pugh; from the Tenth, W. M. Beckner; from the Eighth, R. P. Jacobs, and from the Eleventh, J. S. May. That complete the Committee. The Secretary will now report the whole Committee. Which was done. ' The PRESIDENT. The resolution of- fered by the Delegate from Simpson will be referred to that Committee. The Convention thereupon adjourned. c9 amrenfiun guard. —— K E T U C K Y -— GONSLLLLLL' U ‘.L'IQNAL CCDNVEN'I'ION - FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 19, 1890. [No. 9 Vol. 1 .] Eriday,] MACKOY—BECKHAM. [September 19 . At 10 o’clock A. M. the Convention was called to order by the Secretary, who said: Gentlemen of the Convention, I was directed by the President on yesterday to designate M". McHenry to preside in his absence. Mr. McHenry thereupon took the Chair, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bagby. The Jouinal of yesterday’s proceedings was read. Mr. MACKOY. I want to call atten- tion to an error in the Journal to-day, in regard to the nature of the Committee ap- pointed with reference to the location of the Capital. The motion was first made to refer the motion of the Delegate from Simpson to the Committee on Rules, and to refer the motion to select the Committee by lot. Those motions came together. That motion was amended, and it was moved then that the motion to appoint a Committee on Permanent Location of the Capital, and the motion to refer it to the Committee on Rules, should be referred to a select Committee .to report. The Com- mittee drawn yesterday was not a Com- mittee on the Location of the Capital, but was simply a Committee to whom was referred those various motions; and, as read by the Clerk, it provides that the Committee drawn by lot sh \uld be the Committee on Location of the Capital. The CLERK. That is the way I have ‘it, and the way I understood it. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Read that ‘portion of the Journal again. The Clerk read over that portion of the Journal. Mr. MACKOY. At this point I made a motion to amend Mr. Bronston’s motion to refer. My motion was to refer the whole question. The original motion of Mr. Harris, for the appointment of 8. Com- mittee on Location of Capital, and the motion of Mr. Applegate, providing for the mode in which that Committee should be se‘ected. Mr. Bronston moved that that be referred to the Committee on Rules, whereupon I moved to amend by referring the whole matter, Mr. Harris’ motion, to appoint a Committee, Mr. Applegate’s amendment, and Mr. Bronston’s motion, to aselect Committee, to be chosen by let, one from each Congressional District. -'-'The PRESIDENT pro tem. That is my recollection. but not having been in the Chair at the time, my opinion will not govern, and it will be left to the Conven- tion whether the minutes shall be amend- ed as indicated by the gentleman from Campbell. Mr. BECKHAM. Will a motion in regard to this matter be in order? The PRESIDENT pro tem. Only to correct the J ournal. ’ Mr. BECKHAM. I think it was gen- erally understood by the Convention on yesterday that the process we went through on yesterday was for the purpose of se- lecting a Committe 0'] the Location of the Capital. I so understood it, and I know several other gentlemen understood it that way. As the shortest way out of the mat- ter, I move that the question of the Loca- tion of the Capital be referred to the Committee selected by lot on yesterday. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair 2 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] APPLEGATE—BUCKNER—MILLER. [September 19 ._ does not think that motion is in order. The House has to determine what is the fact. The gentleman from Kenton moves to correct the Journal of what was done yes- terday, and to that 1 don’t think your motion can come as an amendment. It can come after the Journal is corrected. The only question is, what did the House do yesterday on that subject. I suggest to the gentleman, had he not better put his correction in writing. Mr, APPLEGATE. I know that the statement of the gentleman from Kenton is correct. I made a motion to select the Committee by lot, and the gentleman from Fayette moved to refer it to the Com- mittee on Rules, and the gentleman from Kenton moved to amend by referring the whole question to a Committee to be chosen by lot. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The ques- now 1s, shall the Journal be corrected as indicated by the gentleman from Kenton. The question being put, it was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT pro tem. When motions and resolutions are called for, I take it the motion indicated by the gentle- man from Shelby will be in order. It is within the power of the House to give different direction to its Committee if it wants to. Mr. BUCKNER. I ask unanimous consent of the Convention to offer a reso- lution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Read- ing Clerk will now read the correction as he has it; which was done. Mr. BUCKNER. I ask unanimous consent of the Convention to offer a reso- lution, having simply a reference to the correction of a date, which will expedite the work of the Auditor called for under the resolution of this House. The point is this: The resolution of the Convention called for information for the five years preceding September 1, 1890. That breaks in upon the fiscal year, which ends 30th of June or 1st of July; and the reso-’ lution is simply to correct that, so that he will be asked to furnish information accord-- ing to the fiscal year. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I ask indulgence‘ to further correct the Journal. The PRESIDENT pro tem. That is in. order. The Chair has not announced that the Journal is approved yet. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The minutes of' yesterday show leave of absence granted to the Delegate from Wayne, who was in. his seat then, and is now, and does not de- sire leave of absence. Leave was granted to the Delegate from Harlan county (Mr.- Forrester). The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without- objection, the Clerk will make that correc-- tion. The minutes will be considered as approved, and the resolution offered by the gentleman from Hart will be read by the: Reading Clerk. The Reading Clerk read the resolution ,. as follows: Amend resolution requesting the Auditor to furnish this Convention with certain information, by striking therefrom the- words “September 1, 1890,” wherever they occur, and inserting in lieu thereof the words “July 1, 1890.” The question being put, the resolution was declared to have been adopted. Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Is it a res-- olution ‘? Mr. HENDRICK. Yes, sir. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Petitions- are first in order. Mr. NUNN. I have the 1101191‘ to offer- a petition from the Farmers’ Mutual Ben-- efit Association and the Farmers’ Labor Union, of Livingston county, and it affords me pleasure to place before this body the suggestions of such an honorable organi- zation. It has reference to Commonwealth Attorneys, General Assembly, attorneys»- at'law, duties and power of the Governor, RESOLUTIONS. 3 Friday,] HENDRICK—JOFSON. [Septem ber 19 , jury trials, railroads, trusts and combina- tions, free passes on railroad and the secret ballot system. The petition is not very long, and, I ask to have it read, and referred to the Committees indicated. Petition read, as follows: We, the Farmers’ Mutual Benefit Asso- ciation and the Farmers’ Labor Union, of Livingston county, Kentucky, in conven- tion assembled, feeling as-ured that the Delegates to the Constitutional Convention are desirous to do the will of the people, so far as in their power lie, and to do what will be of benefit to the greatest number, and Will give any suggestions that is made to them a thorough consideration, there- fore suggest some points for your consider- ation. 1st. We desire that the oflice of Common- wealth‘s Attorney be abolished, and the County Attorney attend to the business of the ofiice. 2d. Article 2d and section 24th confire the General Assembly to sixty days, and regulate all local legislation, and submit it' to the County Court, and that upon the conditions that all property belonging to a company, of any order whatever, be taxed. 3d. That the Clerk of each House call the roll each day at the hour for opening, and every member of either House that does not answer at roll-cal], let his pay be stopped for that day, and he be fined in a sum not less than five dollars, unless he offers a good and lawful excuse; and that all money accruing by said fines and for- feitures to be placed in the school fund proper. 4th. That all the ofiicers of the State be elected by the people on the same day, and that their term of ofi‘ice be four years next preceding the expiration. of their term of oflice. 5th. That the yeas and nays on all ques- tions that come before the General Assem- bly be recorded on the House docket,'with the names of the members voting. 6th. That no sttorney-at-law, who is or has been in the employ of any corporation for six months prior to his election, shall be eligible to eflice. 7th. The Governor shall require infor- mation in writing from the ofiicers of the Executive Department monthly, upon mat- tors relating to their respective oflices. 8th. The Governor shall not have the power to remit fines, or grant reprieves and pardons, without he be petitioned by the jury or court finding the same. 9th; That in trials by jury, three-fourths concurring, shall find a verdict, except in case of capital punishment. 10th. That we adopt the secret ballot in vofing. 11th. That no taxes be voted for any railroad, or any corporation, unless by a three-fourths majority vote; and in no case shall a second subsidy be voted. 12th. That there be no trusts or combi- rations in State for the purpose if con- trolling or manipulating the price of any thing for speculative purposes. 13th. That if any Representative accept a free pass from a railroad corporation. he shall be impeached and broke of his oflice, up m proof of same. Done by order of Livingston County Union. J AS. R. SUMMERS, See. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Resolu- tions are now in order. There were two resolutions ofiered yesterday. Mr. HENDRICK. I think, ifthe Chair will recognize me, we will expedite busi- ness. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Send up the resolution- Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to make a motion. The PRESIDENT pro tem. We will hear it. Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to move that the roll of the Convention be'called, and as the name of each Delegate is called, if he has any resolution, let it be presented at once. I am sure there are a large num- ber of Delegates on the floor who wish to present their views in this way ; and I think it would be perfectly fair and just to call the roll, and let each Delegatev pre- sent his I‘BTOlIltlOD. Mr. J 0N SON. I offer a substitute. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Let the substitute be read. Substitute read, as follows : WHEREAS, Many of the Delegates to this Convention have resolutions-prepared, which they are ‘eagerly'anxious to submit, and in order to facilitate business and at‘- 4 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] MBELROY—BRONSTON—HENDRICK. [September 19 . ford every Delegate an equal opportunity; therefore Resolved, That, upon the arrival of the 4 hour for calling for resolutions, the roll of counties shall be called; and, upon calling of the counties, each Delegate may intro- duce two (2%)resolutions; and that the call of counties e continued until each Dele- gate shall have an opportunity to offer resolutions. Mr. MCELROY. I have a resolution which I desire to submit by way of an amendment. -The PRESIDENT pro tem. Read the amendment offered by the Delegate from Allen. Amendment read, as follows: Resolved, That a call of the counties shall be made on Mondays, Wednesdays and Frida ya, and when a county is called, the member or members representing said county may report any resolution they may desire; and if the call is not completed in one day, the call shall be completed on the next day; the city of Louisville to be called by districts. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The ques- tion is on the adoption of the amendment to the amendment. Mr. BRONSTON. The substitute as offered by the Delegate from McLean, I am satisfied, upon reflection, will occur to _ him as unfair at this time. Without any rule governing the presentation of rcsolu- tions, a number of Delegates on this floor have had opportunity to present, possibly, all the resolutions they desire. Under the resolution ofl‘ered by the Delegate from McLean, those who have been a little more modest or a little less fortunate in asking and receiving recognition from the Chair, are limited to two resolutions. Possibly no more time would be consumed in present-.. ing all the resolutions than in presenting two, because, under another rule, those res- olutions are to be referred without debate- The other objection to the substitute is this: Under a rule of this House, the call is made in a different way from what it is in a legislative body, for the rules provide that the call of the House shall be made in alphabetical order the names of the Dele- gates, and not by counties. That is the regular rule of the House, and it seems to me we ought not depart from it. So far as I am individually concerned, it makes no difierence whether you call by questions or by the ordinary way; but I think there should be uniformity, and, as we have adopted the rule, we ought to adhere to it. Mr. MCELROY. The substitute that I ofiered does not limit the Delegates. That meets the objection of the gentleman who has just spoken. If they adopt my sub- stitute, they have azright to report as many resolutions as they have. Mr. PETTIT. I presume the Conven- tion will understand the necessity of fol- lowing the order of business that has been adopted already. It is well known to those who have been in parliamentary bodies that the nearer you proceed according to your established rules the more business can be transacted, and the better the business that is transacted is performed. I simply rise, as I did on yesterday, to call the attention of the President and the House to the order of rules laid down, and which we have just been proceeding to carry out, and make the point of order that every thing connected with the change of these rules is, at this time, out of order, under Rule 46: “Every motion to alter, change or add to the standing rules of the Con- vention, shall lie one day on the table.” Mr. HENDRICK. Will you permit me a suggestion? - Mr. PETTIT. Yes, sir, Mr. HENDRICK. My motion is to change no rule whatever, but simply, under the order for resolutions, to call the names of Delegates in alphabetical order. Each of the other motions is out of order, for the reason that they propose to change the standing rules. Mr. PETTIT. I simply want to say, I notice the distinction made by the gen- tleman, but I, believe even that ought to be voted down. RESOLUTIONS. 5 Friday,] BRENTS—HENDRICK—JON SON. [September 19 . Mr. BRENTS. Many members have oflered and have had read resolutions, and I believe nearly every Delegate (n this floor has one or more resolutions to off: r. ‘Now, the resolution offered by the Dele- gate from Fleming is to give all the Dele- gates an equal chance, an equal opportunity to present their resolutions. The amend- ment postpones the opportunity to present resolutions until next Wednesday, and is therefore objectionable. I think we should proceed in the same manner to-day as heretofore, and give to those who have not yet offered resolutions, a chance to do so. I think the roll should be called in alphabet- ical order instead of by counties. I had a resolution prepared to that effect, but I suppose the resolution of the Delegate from Fleming will meet the desire of the Convention. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Clerk will read the resolution of the Delegate from Fleming. Mr. HENDRICK. Ihave not reduced it to Writing. My motion was that the name of each Delegate be called in alpha- betical order, and, when called, he may offer any resolution he has to offer. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Does that apply to to-day only '? Mr. HENDRICK. Only to-day. I rise to a point of order. I insist that both of the amendments ofl’ered are out of order, under the rule indicated by the gentleman from Daveiss. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair sustains that point. Mr. JONSON. I believe we have had no appeal from the decision of the Presi- dent so far. I think I will inaugurate that system, and ask an appeal from the President’s ruling sustaining the Delegate from Daveiss in his point of order. Mr. HENDRICK. 1 rise to a point of order. The PRESIDENT pro tem. State your point. Mr. HENDRICK. One member has no right to appeal. He must have his appeal in writing, and sustained by one other Delegate. MrrJONSON. I decline to put it in writing. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Then the appeal is not before the House. The ques- tion is on the motion of tie Delegate from Fleming. The motion being put, it was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT pro tem. That be- ing the order for to-day, the Clerk will proceed to carry out the order. But there are two resolutions still on 'the table to be acted upon. Mr. J ONSON. Before you enter on that, I wish to give notice that I will, on to-morrow, move to change that rule. Mr. Pettit’s resolutions were then read, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Exec- utive ()flicers for the State at Large be required to prepare and report amend- ments to article 3 of the present Constitu- tion, as follows: 1. That the Governor shall have power to disapprove of any item or items of any bill making appropriations of money, embracing distinct items; and the part or parts of the bill approved shall be law; and the item or items disapproved shall be void, unless enacted in the following man- ner: If the Legislature be in session, he shall transmit to the House in which the bill originated a copy of the item or items thereof disapproved, together with his ob- jections thereon, and the items objected to shall be separately considered, and each item shall then take the same course as is prescribed for the passage of bills over the Executive veto. 2. An amendment to section 10, abridg- ing the powers of the Government in the remission of fines and forfeitures; and 3. Depriving that official of all power to grant pardons for offenses against the Commonwealth before conviction by the Courts. Resolved, That the Committee on Cir- cuit Courts be requested to report such changes in the judicial system as dispenses with unanimity, and requiring only two- thirds of a jury to render verdicts in civil 6 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] BECKHAM—HENDRICK—ALLEN. [September 19 . cases; also report on the feasibility of ap- ‘ plying the same principle in criminal _ proceedings. Resolved, That the same Committ°e report a change in the number of mem- bers in the Grand Jury from 16 to 7, and constituting 4 members thereof a sufl‘i- cient number to present an indictment for any violation of the statutes. The PRESIDENT. The first resolution will be referred to the Committee on Ex- ecutive Ofiicers for the State at Large, and the second to the Committee on Circuit Courts. ‘ The Clerk then proceeded to call the roll, and as the Delegates names were called, those having resolutions to offer, did so, as follows: Mr. BECKHAM. I new renew the mo- tion I made a few moments ago, that the question on the Location of the Capital be referred to the Committee selected on yes- terday by lot. Mr. JOHNSTON. I have a substitute. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Is it the pleasure of the House to consider that? Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a point of order. Nothing is in order untilth‘s order is executed. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair thought ‘that, by unanimous consent, we might consider this motion. Mr. BECKHAM. I did not know the motion of the gentleman was to change the standing rules. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair has called for motions and resolutions, and then the House direct how motions and resolutions should be offered; and we were starting to carry out that order, and the Cl-rk, I think, now is calling the roll, and gentlemen can ofi'er any resolution whatever; and when the gentleman’s name is called, he can offer the resolution indicated by him. I will state to the gen- tlemen, at the instance of the Clerk, that it will facilitate his business much, if, when Delegates ofler resolutions going to differ- ent Committees, they put them on difier- ent pieces of paper. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. I offer a resolu- tion. The resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the Constitution be so amended as to establish three Magisterial Districts for the city of Louisville, in lieu of the City Court of said city, which shall be abolished, together with all officers connected therewith; said Magisterial Dis- tricts so established to have crlminal juris- diction, and civil jurisdiction to the extent of three hundred dollars. The Justices or Judges so provided for to have the qualifi- cations obtained by at least eight years’ experience as a practitioner of law. Referred to Executive and Ministerial Affairs for Counties and Districts. Mr. ASKEW. I offer a resolution. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the salaries and fees of all oflicers of the State, counties, towns and cities, be fixed by statute law ; and that no such oflicer, for work done as such oflicer, or under color of his office, shall receive any other or greater compensation by cus- tom or judicial decision. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. ‘ Mr. AUXIER. I offer a resolution. The resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That there be incorporated in the new Constitution the following sec- tion : Punishments for crimes and misde- meanors shall be uniform throughout the State. And no local law shall be passed inflict- ing a different penalty for any crime or misdemeanor otherthan that prescribed by the general laws; and all such punish- ments now in force shall be made to con- form to. the .generats laws. Referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. Mr. BECKHAM. I desire to offer sime resolutions. Resolutions read, as follows: As the sense of this Convention, it is RESOLUTION S. Friday,] BECKNER—BENNETT— BIRKHEAD. [September 19 , Resolved, That the renewing Shall be .article —- of the Constitution: 1. That the power to tax corporations and corporate property shall not be sur- rendered or suspended by any act of the ‘General Assembly, or by any contract or grant to which the State shall be a party. 2. All existing charters or grants of special or exclusive privileges, under which a bona fide organization shall not have taken place and business been commenced in good ‘ ‘faith, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall therea‘ter be void and of no effect. 3. The General Assembly shall not alter -or amend the charter of any corporation now existing, or pass any general or sp acial law for the benefit of such corporation, except upon the condition that such corpo- ration shall thereafter hold its charter and franchises subject t) the provisions of this 'Constitution. 4. The State, in the exercise of the right of eminent domain, shall have and retain the same power to take the property and franchises of incorporated companies for public use, as it has and retains as to the property of individuals; and the exercise of the police powers of the State shall never be abridged or so construed as to permit corporations to conduct their business in .such manner as to infringe the equal rights of individuals. 5. No foreign corporations shall do any business in this State without having one or more known places of business, and an :authorized agent or agents in the same ‘upon whom process may be executed. 6. The General Assembly shall have the .power to alter, revoke or amend any char- t'er of incorporation now existing, and 'revokable at the adoption of this Consti- tution, or any that may be hereafter cre- ated; in such manner, however, that no injustice shall be done to the corporation. Referred to the Committee on Corpora- tions. Resolved, That the following be added to ‘section 36 of article 2d of the Constitution, ‘viz: The General Assembly shall not authorize any county, city, town, township or incorporated district to become a stock- holders in any company, association or cor- poration, or to obtain or appropriate money for, or to loan its credit to, any corpora- tion, association, institution or individual. Referred to Committee on Corporations. Mr. BECKN ER. I offer some resolu- tions. Reso‘utions read, as follows: The rolling-stock and all other movable property belonging to any railroad company or corporation in this State shall be consid- ered personal property, and shall be liable to execution and sale in the same manner as the personal property of individuals; and the General Assembly shall pass no law exempting any such property from execution and sale. Referred to the Committee on Railroads and Commerce. ' ‘ Add after the word “ worship,” in the third section of the Bill of Rights, these words, viz.: “Or to send his child or chil- dren to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed.” Re’erred to Committee on Education. Mr. BENNETT. I desire to offer a resolution. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Reve- nue and Taxation be instructed to inquire into, and report upon, the propriety of mgratting into the Constitution to be made by this Convention a clause requiring the General Assembly to provide for raising a part of the revenues for the support of Government, both State, county a: d mu- nicipal, by the taxation of annual incomes over and above the sum of one thousand dollars. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that no alien, or firm of aliens. shall be capable of acquiring title to, or taking or holding. any lands or real estate in the State of Kentuiky by devise, pur- chase, or otherwise: Provided, Any alien, or firm of aliens, who own lands or real estate in the State of Kentucky at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall have five years in which to sell such lands or real estate to bona fide residents of theUnited States; or they may hold such lands or real estate for five years after the adoption and rat fication of this Constitu- tion; and at the expiration of said term of five years, if they have not become citi- I offer a resolution. RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] BLACKBURN—BLACKWELL—BOURLAND— BRENTS. [September 19 , zens of the United States, under the natu- ralization laws thereof, then such lands or real estate shall revert and escheat to the State of Kentucky. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. BLACKBURN. I ofler a resolu- tion. Resolution read, as follows: WHEREAS, Protection is the basis and property the only proper subject of taxation ; and whereas, all taxation should be uni- form and equal; therefore, Resolved, That no double assessment for taxation shall be made; nor shall any person in this State be required to list or pay taxes on actual subsisting debts. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. BLACKWELL. I ofier a resolu- tion. Resolution read as follows: Resolved, That sections 1 and 2 of article 1 of the present Constitution be stricken out, and in lieu thereof the following be inserted as section 1 of article 1 of the proposed new Constitution, the powers of the government of this State are divid- ed into three distinct departments: the Legislative, the Executive and Judicial, and no person or collection of persons charged with the exercise of powers pro- perly belonging to one of these depart- ments, shall exercise any powers properly belonging to either of the others, except as in this Constitution expressly directed or permitted. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That among the provisions re- lating to the Legislative Department of the proposed new Constitution, there shall be contained the following provisions: The enacting clause of every law shall be as follows: Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Kentucky. No law sh~ll be passed except by bill, and no bill shall be so altered or amended on its passage through either House as to change its original purpose. No law shall be revised or amended, or the provisions thereof extended by a refer- ence to its title only, nor by providing that designated words be inserted, or des- ignated words he stricken out, and others inserted in li'u thereof: but so much of any law as is revised, amended or ex’ ended shall be re—enacted and published at length. No bill, except general appropriation bills and bills for the modification and gen-a eral revision of the laws, shall be passed containing more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title. But- if any subject is embraced in any act which is not expressed in its title, such act shall be void only as to so much thereof as shall not be so expressed. Same reference. Mr. BOURLAND. 1 offer a resolution.. Resolution read, as follows : Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the Constitution shall con- tain the following section: N 0 county, magisterial district, city or town shall ever become subscriber to the capital stock of any railroad or other private corporation, or make donations to, or loan its credit in aid of any such corporation, in such a manner as shall require a tax to be levied. on the property of the people in such county, magist rial district, city or town. Referred to Committee on Corporations Mr. BRENTS. I offer some resolutions. Resolutions read, as follows : WHEREAS, “All men are created equal,” and “are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; among these are‘ life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights governments are- instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” And whereas, the Government of the United States is founded on these “self- evident truths,” with powers delegated to- the National Government, powers reserved to the States respectively, and powers re- served to the people which have never been delegated; and is a Government of the people, for the people. and by the people. And whereas, by reason of the progress made in the last forty years, and the changed condition of affairs, the pres- ent Constitution of Kentucky should be amended so as to better secure the rights and liberties of the people; therefore, be it Resolved, 1. That in amending the Con- stitution, it is not necessary to restrict or limit the rights of the people, but rather enlarge them, as now declared in the Con- stitution. RESOLUTION S. 9 Friday,] BROJS STON. [September 19. Resolved, 2. That the evils existing un- der the Constitution are these: 1. By local and private legislation, the people’s money has been squandered and wasted, and powers conferred on corpora- tions, municipalities, counties, districts and individuals which have proven to be op- pressive. and destructive of the rights of the people. 2. The delays in the Courts render liti- gation BXPGIhlVB and uncertain, and result in many criminals escaping punishment. 3. While the mass of the people are honest, and favor honest and fair elec- tions, under our present system of holding elections a corrupt element, bribers and bribe-takers, have an opportunity to do their work, and are thereby endangering the rights and liberties of the people. Upon the purity of elections depend the perpetuation of the Republic. 4. Under the present system. munici- palties. counties and districts have, by authority from the Legislature, created use- less ard unnecessary debts, also debts be- yond the ability of the people to pay. 5. Under the present system, oflice-hold- ers are not held to a sufficient responsibil- ity for a faithful performance of their duties. Therefore, resolved, 3, That the Com- >mittee on the Legislative Department pre- pare and report suitable sections to the Constitution to prohibit local and private legislation, to secure honest and fair elec- tions, where every voter can freely and untrammeled cast his vote and have it counted, and to punish all corruptions and undue influence in elections; to prohibit municipalities, counties and districts from creating debts which, in the aggregate, exceed five per cent. of the wealth of the jurisdiction; to bring corporations, which are the creatures of government, under a just and reasonable control of the State; and to provide a plan to hold officeholders, who are the serva' ts of the people, to a strict accountability. This, with a better judlcial system, will complete the most important work of this Convention. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That the Committee on Exec- utive and Ministerial Oflicers for Counties ‘and Districts be instructed to inquire into and report, by appropriate sections or otherwise, upon the following proposi- tions, viz: ' 1. That the ofiice of Jailer ought to be abolished, and that .the Sherifi in each county act as J ailer of the county. 2. That there ought to be created the oflice of Treasurer in each 0 unty, whose duty shall be to collect within the county all taxes, both State and county; also to settle with and receive from all ofiicers within the county public funds, fines, for- feitures, etc., in their hands. 3. That the office of Assessor of Tax be abolished, and that there ought to be but one Justice of the Peace in each election pre- cinct, and that said Justice be the Assessor of Tax in the precinct in which he resides. Referred to the Committee on Executive and Ministerial Oflicers for Counties and Districts. Ml‘. BRONSTON. I ask that this res-- olution be read. Resolution read, as follows: WHEREAS, The right of property has, since the formation of our government, been held ‘-inviolate,” and “before and higher than any constitutional sanction ; ” and whereas, by a series of legislative en- actments,unwise and unjust discriminat one have been made as against female citizans of the Commonwealth as to holding, en- joymg and disposing of property ; now, be it Resolveed, That it is the sense of this Convention that all legislative enactments- now existent; which fail to secure equal rights of holding, enjoying and disposing; of property, to the male and female citi- zen of the Commonwealth, shall be de- clared void, and such enactments shall be hereifter prohibited by the organic law of' the Commonwealth. Referred to Committee on Legislative- Department. The same Delegate offered the following: Resolvd, That the Secretary 0.‘ State be, and is hereby, directed to transmit to this- Convention a copy of all contracts made with present and past lessees of convicts; and that the Auditor of Public Accounts be, and is hereby. directed to make out and transmit to this Convention an itemized statem-nt of account, showing how much- money has been expended by the State of Kentucky on convicts during the past six years, including costs of guards and militia furnished for protection of lessees in the use of convicts; and also the amount paid by lessees to the State for the hire of con- victs. 10 RESOLUTIONS. Friday] BUCKNER—BRONSTON—BULLITT. [September 19 . Mr. BRONSTON. I ask that that res- olution be acted upon at this time. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Clerk will read it again for the information of the House. The resolution the gentleman asks to be acted upon now. I The Reading Clerk re-read said resolu- tion. _ The PRESIDENT pro tem. The ques- tion is upon the adoption of the resolution just read. Mr. BUCKNER. Mr. President, I would suggest to the gentleman that, in order to get the information more speedily, the Auditor, instead of the Secretary of State, will more probably be able to fur- nish it. M r. BRONSTON. I presumed that the Secretary holds the contracts of the lessees. Mr. BUCKNER. Yes; he has the contracts. The PRESIDENT pro tem. How would it do, gentlemen, to insert both Auditor and Secretary of State? The Clerk says that both are inserted in the resolution. Mr. BRONSTON. I meant to direct the Secretary of State to furnish the con- tracts and the Auditor to furnish the ac- count of moneys received and expended. The question being taken on the adop- tion of the resolution, it was adopted. The reading Clerk then read the follow- ing resolutions, offered by Mr. Bronston. WHEREAS, The acquirement and dispos- -al of money and property by lottery and wager tends to encourage habits of dissi- pation and idleness, is subversive of public morals, and deleterious to that high degree of citizenship which the Commonwealth demands; and whereas, a mistaken legis- lative courtesy, extended to localities, has permitted unwise enactments, giving li- cense to such vicious practices; now, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that all such enactments now existant, as well as any hereafter made, shall be declared void by the provisions of the organic law of this Commonwealth’. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That the executive power of commutation of sentence should be clearly defined, and the power of pardon should be restricted to judgment of conviction. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That all armed forces for the suppression of crime and apprehension of criminals shall be prohibited, unless under control of civil oflicers of this Common~ wealth. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved, That all municipalities of this Commonwealth should be governed, in fiscal and police affairs. by a common and uniform law, and that the right to impose taxes for municipal purp-ses should be limited, so that the indebtednesss should never exceed seven per cent. of the asessed valuation of property; and their right to impose taxes lor railroads shall he s) re- stricted as never to allow an indebtednessIfor such purposes exceeding two per cent. on the asse sed value of property. Referred to the Committee on Munici- palities. Mr. BULLITT. Mr. President, there is an amendment to the report perfecting the original report in regard to having the proceeiings printed. I would move to introduce it now. It is prepared by the Committee itself. It was overlooked, and we think it ought to be adopted, The PRESIDENT pro tern. Is it a re- port from the Committee? Mr. BULLITT. Yes‘, sir; a report. The PRESIDENT pro tem. It is not strictly in order now, but, without objec- tion, it can‘ be considered. Read it for the information of the House. The Reading Clerk read the resolution or report offered by Mr. Bullitt, which is as follows : Resolved, That the Printer to this Con- vention be, and he is hereby, directed to lay upon the desk of each member of this Convention, at 10 o'clock, A. M., 25 copies of the printed proceedings of the day fol- RESOLUTION-S. 11 Friday,] BRONSTON—BULLITT—BURNAM. [September 19. lowing the printing of same, wrapped in a one or two-cent wrapper, as may be required by the postal laws, for distribu- "tion among the people of this State, as the members of this Convention may see fit, or as he may be directed by the members respectively. Resolved, That the Librarian be directed ‘to send, when completed, a bound copy of the proceedings of this Convention to 1. The Congressional Library of Wash~ ington, D. C. 2. The Library of the Senate of the United States. 3. The Conference Room, 'Court of the United States. 4. The Congressional Law Library, Washington, D. C. Mr. BRONSTC N. In order to prevent confusion, and inasmuch as we have a Com- mittee on Printing which has undertaken to formulate a report, I move that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Printing. The PRESIDENT pro tem. It is a ‘report from the Committee on Printing. Mr. BRON STON. I don’t understand it that way. The PRESIDENT pro tem. It is not a report of the Committee on Printing, but from a Special Committee which had that subject under consideration. Mr. BRONSTON. I understood that that Special Committee had performed its duties and was now defunct. The PRESIDENT pro tem. I think the scope of the res)lution gives them a right to offer it. I think the Committee is not defunct, and that they have not per- formed their duty in full. The question being taken on the adop- tion of the resolution, the same was adopted. Mr. BULLITT offered the following resolution : Resolved, That there shall be added to the first section of the Bill of Rights the following; And no charter or amendment thereto, or amendment to any charter now existing, shall be granted except upon con- dition that they shall be subject to be alter- ei, amended or repealed at will, and be and remain under the control of. the police Supreme powers of this State; and no authority shall be given in any such charter or amendment to mortgage the franchises therein or the business thereby authorized, and every mortgage thereof shall only apply to the property of the corporation at its fair valuation with a reasonable profit, when used as the charter authorized, and all bonds secured by mortgage above the value of the property as aforesaid shall be uncollectable. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. BU RNAM offered the following res- olution : Resolved, That the Committee on Exec- utive Department for the State at Large be instructed to report what number of Nota- ries Public shall be commissioned by the Governor of this Commonwealth for the counties respectively, the length of time they shall be appointed for, and for what reasons their commissions may be revoked, and to report such amendment to the Constitution they deem necessary as to such officers. Referred to the Committee on Executive Department for State at Large. Mr. CARROLL offered the following resolutions : A Board of Railroad Commissioners, consisting of three members, selected from different parts of the State, shall be nomi- nated by the Governor, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, ap- pointed. They shall hold their ofiice for two years, and until their successors are appointed, confirmed and qualified; receive such compensation and be invested with such powers as the General Assembly may from time to time deem proper. Referred to Committee on Railroads. Resolved, The ancient mode of trial by jury shall remain inviolate, except that in all civil actions, and in criminal cases pot amounting to felony, three-fourths in num- ber of the jury may render a verdict; and such verdict shall have the same force and effect as if all the jury concurred therein; and, except that in all trials in courts inferior to the Circuit Court and courts of similar jurisdiction, the jury shall consist of eight persons, three-fourths in number of whom may render a verdict. A grand jury shall consist of twelve persons, and 12 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] CARRoLL—CLARDY. [September 19 . the concurrence of nine shall be necessary to find a true bill. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved. That the Constitution to be adopted, shall contain the following new clause: 1. Taxation for State, county, municipal, and all other purposes, shall be unilorm upon both real and personal property in the territory in which it is imposed, and no special privileg¢s, exemptions or immuni- ties shall be allowed or granted to any corporation or person, or class of corpora- tions or persons; nor shall any property or class of property whatever be taxed at a less rate for State, county, municipal or other purposes than any other property’, real or personal, is taxed in the territory in which the tax is imposed: Provided, That the General Assembly may, by gen- eral laws, exempt from taxation public property used exclusively for public pur- poses, actual places of religious worship, plat es of burial not used or held for private or corporate profit,and institutions of purel y public charity; and all laws exempting from taxation, in whole or in part, other than the property above enumerated, shall be void. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either branch of the General Asseu bly, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each House, such proposed amendment or amend- ments shall be entered on their Journals, with the yeas and nays taken thereon; and the Secretary of State shall cause the same to be published for three months before the next general GlrCtlOIl for members of the General Assembly, in two newspapers in each county in which such pa pers shall be published; and if, in the General Assem- bly next thereafr er chosen, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each House, by a yea and nay vote entered upon their Journals, the Secretary of State shall cause the same again to be published, in the manner aforesaid, for three months next before the election at which they shall be voted upon; and such proposed amendment or amendments shall be sub- mitted to the qualified voters of the State .at the first general election which is not held within three months next after the amendment or amendments are agreed to by both Houses of the General Assembly; and if such amendment or amendments shall be approved by a majority of those voting thereon, such amendment or amend- ments so approved shall become a part of' the Constitution When two or more amendments shall be submitted, they shall be voted upon separately. Referred to Committee on Revision and Amendment. Resolved, That before any provision of the proposed new Constitution, adopted by a Standing Committee, is acted upon by the Convention or Committee of the Whole, 125 copies thereof, shall be printed by order of the Committee and distributed among the mtmbersof the Convention Mr. CARROLL. I ask that this reso- lution lie over one day, as required by the rules. Mr. CLARDY offered the following: Resolved, That a clause should be in- serted in the new Constitution carefully guarding and restricting local taxation. The following is suggested, viz.: The Leg- islature shall have no authority to author- ize cities, towns, villages, or other local communitiesjto levy taxes upon themselves, for any purpose whatever, except in pur- suance to general law for taxation in the whole State. But a general law may be enacted, authorizing cities, towns, districts, villages and other local communities to tax themselves for local purposes, under the‘ following restrictions, viz.: No such local tax shall be for a greater amount for any one purpose than two and one-half per_ cent. of the assessed value of the prop- erty of the city, town, district, village, or other local community proposing the tax; nor for all purposes, in- cluding present indebtedness, for more‘ than five per cent. The proposition to tax, shall be advertised in the county or city papers, and if none published in the county, then in the two papers, having the largest circulation in the county, for at least thirty days before the vote is to be taken, and stating distinctly the purpose for which the tax is to be applied. Outside of cities and towns, the vote shall be taken by voting precincts, and those precincts giv- ing a major ty for the tax, shall be lia -le only for a pro rata of the tax, according to the value of the property in the voting precinct. Those giving a majority against RESOLUTIONS. 13 ' Friday,] COKE—Cox. [September 19 . the tax shall not be liable for any part of the tax. No one shall vote upon a propo- sition for local taxation unless he shall have aid his poll-tax for the year previ us, and shall be otherwise qualified to vote for Representatives. The vote shall be taken, and the result determined, and the tax col- lected as may be prescribed by law. Referred to Committee on Revenue and ‘Taxation. Mr. COKE offered the following: Resolved, That all property, real, per- sonal and mixed, of whatever kind or 'descrip' ion, including money, bonds, stocks and choses in action, whether belonging to individuals, associations, companies or cor- porations, shall be taxed alike, and shall bear its just and equal share or proportion of taxation. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Resolved, That the Legislature shall have no power to pass any local or private bill, but. that all matters of such a character shall be done by some local Court, under a general law pass d by the Legisla‘ure for that purpose. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That no school, unless under the control of the State, shall receive any of the common school money. Referred to Committee on Education. Resolved, 1. That the Legislature shall grant no special charters or franchises, but all railroads shall be organized under a general law passed by the Legislature for that purpose; all banks under another general law passed for that purpose; all insurance companies under another gen- eral law passed for that purpose, and all other corporations under another general law passed for that purpose. . 2. N 0 city, town, county, or any portion or subdivision of either, shall be permitted to give or loan its credit or aid to any in- dividual, association, company or corpora- tion, or to take stock in or to be interested in any way in the same. 3. All trusts, pools and other combi- nations which tend to depreciate the value of agricultural or other products below their natural and ,real value, or which tend to ‘enhance the cost of any article above its natural and re \1 value, and all combinations detrimental to the interest and welfare of the State, are pro- hibited, and the Legislature shall pass such laws as will prevent the same. 4. Transportation of freight and pas- sengers by railroads, steamboats, and all other common carriers, shall be so regu- lated as to prevent unjust discrimination. 5. The Legislature shall, by appropri- ate legislation, confer upon some court or courts of this Commonwealth the power to declare for’eited the charters of all cor- porations which violate the provisions of the same. 6. No railroad, steamboat or other com- mon carrier, under heavy penalty, to be fixed by the Legislature, shall give a free pass or passes, or shall sell at reduced rates, any tickets for transportation to any State, city, town or county officer, member of the Legislature or judge, and any State, city, town or county oflicer, member of the Legislature or judge. who shall accept or use. a free pass or passes, or shall receive or use tickets or transportation at reduced rates, shall forfeit his oflice. Referred to Committee on Corporations. Mr. COX offered the following resolu- tion: Resolved, That the Committee on County Courts be requested to consider the follow- ing proposed amendments to the Consti- tution: 1. There shall be established county now, or which may hereafter be, erected within this Commonwealth, a County Court, to consist of a Judge, and when said Judge is presiding in the Court of Claims, the Justices of the Peace shall be as ociated with him; which Court shall manage the financial affairs of the ‘county. 2. Said Judge shall hold a Court in each month in the year, in which Court he shall have jurisdiction in all matters pertaining to the settlement of decedents’ estates; ap- poi 'lt and qualify executors, administrators and guardians; and all things pertaining to the internal improvements in the county, and the appointment of surveyors of roads, and jurisdiction in all other matters per- taining to the county and State now fixed by law. 3. Said Judge shall hold a court every three months, in which he shall have jurisdiction to try all actions for the recovery of money or property, where the a mount involved does not exceed eight hundred dollars, except cases in which the title to land is involved He shall also have jurisdiction in equity in each ‘ 14 RESOLUTIONS. Fnrday] COX—TWYMAN. [September 19 . cases in the settlement of insolvent estates, and he shall have jurisdiction to try all misdemeanors and petty larceny cases upon indictments found in the Circuit Courts. 4. The Judge of the County 0- urt shall receive for his services a salary to be fixed annually by the Justices of the Peace when sitting in the Court of Claims. 5. All fines and forfeitures recovered and collected shall be paid into the county treasury in tech county. 6. The County Judge shall be elected for a term of six years, and shall be ineli- gible to hold said office during any part of the succeeding term. 7. The County Judge shall have been a resident and citizen of the County in which he is elected more than one year next be- fore the date of his election, and shall have been a practicing attorney more than four years before the date of his election to said ofiice. 8. All other duties made to devolve on the Judge of the County Court shall be regulated by law. 9. At the election at which a County Judge is elected, which shall be at the first general election held after this Constitution is adopted, and every six years thereafter, a County Attorney shall be elected, who shall hold said ofiice for six years, except in cases of resignati- n, death, or removal from said oflice. Said County Attorney shall be, at the time of his election, a resi- dent citizen of the county in which he is elected, and more than twentyone years of age, and shall have been a practicing at- torney more than two years next preceding the date of his election. 10. The County Attorney shall discharge all the duties pertaining to said oflice now fixed by law, and shall prosecute in all petit larceny and misdemeanor cases tried in the Quarterly Cou't; and for his serv- ices he shall receive such fees and salary as the Court of (‘laims shall allow him. 11. At each election for County Judges, there shall be elected, in the Magisterial Districts in each county in this Common- wealth, a Justice of the Peace, who shall he a conservator of the peace, and shall be clothed and have all the rights, powers and privileges now secured by law and this Constitution; and, in addition thereto, he shall hold four Courts every year, at a time fixed by the County Court; said Courts shall be held within his district, and in them he shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all actions for the recovery of money or property where the amount in controversy does not exceed one hundred dollars, ex- cept where the title to land is involved; and shall be the Assessor of property for- taxation in his district, for which he shall receive such compensation as may be fixed by law. Referred to Committee on County Courts. Mr. TWYMAN. Mr. President, it is now evident that the roll will not likely be gotten through with tc-day, and as it is impossible for me to be here for the next day or so, I would like to introduce some resolutions. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Or- ders of the Day will be called up at 12 o’clock, and the reading of the resolutions will be discontinued. Mr. TWYMAN. I would ask the unan- imous leave of the Convention that I be permitted to send up a couple of small resolutions. It will be impossible for me to be here for several days, and I will probably be absent when my name is called. The PRESIDENT pro item. The Chair hears no objection to the request of the gentleman. He will send up his resolu- tions. Resolutions read, as follows: Resolved, That no discrimination in charges or facilities for transportation be made between transportation companies and individuals, or in favor of either, by abatement, drawbacks or otherwise, and no railroad company or lessee, manager or employe thereof, shall make any prefer‘ ence in furnishing cars or mt tive power, Referred to Committee on Railroads and Commerce. Resolved, That no railroad or other cor- poration, or the lessee, purchaser or mana- agers of any railroad or corpcration,shall consolidate the stock, property or franchise of such corporation with, or lease or pur-. chase the works or franchise of, or in any- way control any other railroad corporation owning or having under its control a para'lel or competing line; nor shall any officer of such railroad or corporation act as officer of any other railroad or corporation own-. ing or having the control of a parallel or- competing line; and the question whether- RESOLUTIONS. 15 Friday,] DURBIN-——EDRINGTON. [September 19 , said railroads are parallel or competing lines shall, when demanded by a party complainant, be decided by a jury, as in other civil issues. Referred to Committee on Corporations. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The orders of the day are now reached; but I am ad- vised by the Clerk that there is nothing in the Orders of the Day. and I suppose the Convention will proceed with the call for resolutions as we are now. _ Mr. DURBIN offered the following resolutions: Resolved, That in the Legislature and Senate the roll shall be called at the usual hour, and that members failing to answer to their names shall draw no per diem for that day unless absent on State business. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That any State or county offi- cial who accepts a free pass or ticket from any individual or corporation shall forfeit his ofl‘ice. Referred to Committee on Corporations. Resolved, That all State and county ofli- cials be elected for a term of four years, and that they all be elected on the same day; ar (1 that Senators, Legislators. Judges and Ju-tices of the Peace be at least thirty years of age, and not eligible to the same oflice only two terms. Referred to Committee (It Elections. Resolved, That the Superior Court _'be abolished, and that the Court of Appeals take charge of the business of the present Superior Court; and that the Circuit Court be abolished, and the County Court have jurisdiction of the business of the Circuit Court. Referred to Comrrittee on Judicial De- partment. Resolved, That secti n 15, article 8, be so amended as to read: All State and county officials shall be elected by secret ballot. Referred to Committee on Elections. Resolved, That in the first section of the Bill of Rights the. words, “but in consider- tion of public service,” shall be stricken out; also, in twelth section, the words " and civil” be‘ added after the word “criminal.” Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. EDRINGTON introduced the fol- lowing resolutions: Resolved That the Committee on Cor- porations consider the following: All ex- isting charters or grants of special or exclusive privileges, under which a bona fide organization shall not have taken place and business been cammenced'in good faith at the adoption of this Consti- tution, shall thereafter have no validity. No corporation, after the adoption of this Constitution, shall be created by spe- cial laws, nor ‘shall any existing charters be extended, changed or amended by spe- cial laws, except those for charitab‘e, penal or reformatory purposes, which are under the patronage and control of the State. The General Assembly shall not remit the forfeiture of the charter of any corpo- ration now existing, or alter or amend such forfeited charter, or pass any other general or special laws for the benefit of such corporations. The exercise of the powers and right of eminent domain shall never be so con- strued or abridged as to prevent the taking by the General Assembly of the property and franchises of incorporated companies already organized, or that may be here- after organized, and subjecting them to the public use, the same as that of individuals. The right of trial by jury shall ,be held inviolate in all tria's of claims for compen- sation, when, in the exercise of said right of eminent domain, any incorporated com- pany shall be int~rested either for or against the exercise of said: right. The exercise of the police power of the State never abridged, or so construed as to permit corporations to conduct their busi- ness in such manner as to infringe the equal rights of individuals or the general well-being of the State. In all elections for directors or managers of .any incorporated company, each share- holder shall have the right to cast as many votes in the aggregate as shall equal the number of shares so held by him or her in said company, multiplied by the number of directors or managers to be elected at such election; and each share-holder may cast the whole number of votes, either in person or by proxy, for one candidate. or distribute such votes among two or more 16 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] EDRINGTON. [September 19. ,_i candidates; and such directors or managers shall not be elected in any other manner. - No corporation shall engage in business other than that expressly authorized in its charter, or the law under which it may have been or hereafter may be organized; nor shall it hold any real estate for any period longer than six years, except such as may be necessary and proper for carry- ing on its legitima'e business. No corporation shall issue stock or bonds except for money paid, labor done or prop- erty actually received, and all fictitious increase of stock or indebtedness shall be void. The stock and bonded indebtedness of corporations shall not be increased, except in pursuance of general law; nor without the consent of the persons holding the ; larg er amount in value of the stock first obtained at a meeting called for the pur- pose, first giving sixty days’ public notice, , as may be provided by law. ‘Dues from private corporations shall be secured by such means as may be pre- scribed by law; but in no case shall any stockholder be individually liable in any amount over or above the amount 0‘ stock owned by him or her. All railroad corporations in this State, or doing business therein, shall be subject to taxation for State, county, school, mu- nicipal and other purposes, on the real and personal property owned or used by them, and on their gross earnings, their net earn- ings, their franchises and their capital stock. The property, real and persona], of the State, counties and other municipal corpo- rations, and cemeteries, shall be exempt from taxation. Lots in incorporated cities or towns, or within one mile of the limits of any such city or town, to the extent of one acre, and lots one mile or more distant from such cities or towns, to the extent of five acres, with the buildings thereon, may be exempted from taxation, when the same are used exclusively for religious worship, for schools, or for purposes purely charita- ble; also, such prr-perty, real or personal, as may be used exclusively for agricultural or horticultural societies: Provided, That such exemptions shall be only by general law. All laws exempting property from taxa- tion other than the property above enumer- ated shall be void. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. No corporation shall issue preferred stock without the consent of all the stock- holders. The term “corporation,” as used in this article, shall be construed to include all joint stock companies or associations hav- ing any powers or privileges not possessed by individuals or partnerships. Referred to the Committee on Corpora- tions. Resolved, That the Committee on Revis- ion consider the following on future re- vision: That when two-thirds of the members elected to each House of the General As- semhly shall agree upon an amendment or amendments to this Constitution, the same shall be submitted to the qualified voters at the next general election. Each amend- ment shall be voted on separately. If, upon the returns made to the Score- tary of State, a majority of the votes cast shall have been cast for such amendment or amendments then the Governor shall issue a proclamation, setting forth the fact; and therea‘ter the same shall be a part of the Constitution. Referred to Committee on Revision of the Constitution. Resolved, That the Committee on Elec- tio'ns consider the following : Amend article 8, sections 3 and 4, Gen- eral Provisions: That any person or per- sons, offering to or paying to a voter money, goods, liquors, or any consideration whatever, for his vote, shall, upon convic- tion thereof, forever thereafter be debarred from voting or holding oflice in this Com. monwealth; and the voter so receiving such money, goods, liquors, or any consid- eration whatever, shall, upon conviction thereof, be lorever disfranchised. And that there shall not be given, loaned or sold any spirituous, vinous or malt liquors on the day of any election in this Com- monwealth, under the penalty of distrau- chisement. All voting, except in the General Assem- bly, shall be by ballot. The General As- sembly shall pass laws to enforce these sections. * Referred to Committee on Elections. RESOLUTIONS. 17 v—7 Friday,] EDRINGTON. [September 19. Resolved, That the white and colored schools shall be kept separate, and that the per capita shall be the same for each. Article 11, concerning Education, shall not be changed, except to provide that such sums as may be raised by taxatioa or otherwise for the A. and M. College, shall not be considered a part of common school fund. ' Referred to the Committee on Educa- tion. Resolved, That the Committee on Legis- lative Department consider the following: That the credit of this Commonwealth, or of any county or district, or any part thereof, shall never be given or loaned in aid of any person, association or corpora- tion. That lotteries, trusts, dealing in futures or combinations, for the purpose of obstruct- ing trade, shall be prohibited by legisla- tive enactment. That local or private legislation shall'be prohibited; but all matters of that kind shall be provided for by general laws. That a session of the Legislature shall not exceed sixty days, unless extended by a vote of two-thirds of each House of the General Assembly. During such extension the per diem of members shall not exceed two dollars. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That {the Committee on Cor- porations be requested to report as follows: It shall not be lawful in this State for any railway company to charge for freight or passengers a greater amount for the transportation of the same for a less dis- tance than the amount charged for any greater distance, and suitable laws shall be passed by the General Assembly to enforce this provision; but excursion and commu- tation tickets may be issued at special rates. Any railroad, corporation or association, organized for the purpose, shall have the right to construct and operate a railroad between any points within this State. and - to connect at the State line with railroads of other States. Every railroad company shall have the right with its road to inter- sect, connect with, or cross any other rail- road, and shall receive and transport each the other’s passengers, tonnage and cars, loaded or empty, without delay or discrim- ination. Railways heretofore constructed, or that may hereafter be constructed in this State, are hereby declared public highways, and railroad companies common carriers. The General Assembly shall pass laws to cor- rect abuses and prevent unjust discrimina- tions and extortion in the rates of freight and passenger trafiics on the different rail- roads in this State; and shall, from time to time, pass laws establishing reasonable maximum rates of charges for the trans- portation of passengers and freight on said railroads, and enforce all such laws by adequate penalties. Every railroad or other corporation or ganized or doing business in this State under the laws or authority thereof, shall have and maintain apublic or place in this State for the transaction of its business, where transfers of stock shall be made; and where shall be kept, for public inspec- tion, books, in which shall be recorded the amount of capital stock subscribed, the names of the owners of the stock, the amounts owned by them respectively, the amount of stock paid, and by whom, the transfer of said stock, with the date of transfer, the amount of its assets and lia- bilities, and the names and places of resi- dence of its ofiicers. The directors of every railroad company shall hold one meeting annually in this State, public notice of which shall be given thirty days previously; .and shall report annually, under oath, to the State Auditor, or some oificer designated by law, all of their acts and doings, which report shall include such matters relating to railroads as may be prescribed by law. The General Assembly shall pass laws enforcing, by suitable penalties, the pro- visions of this section. The rolling stock and all other movable property belonging to any railroad com- pany or corporation in this State, shall be considered personal property, and shall be liable to execution and sale in the same manner as the personal property of indi- viduals, and the General Assembly shall pass no law exempting any such property from execution and sale. N o railroad or other corporation, or the lessees, purchasers or managers of any railroad corporation, shall consolidate the stock, property or franchises of such cor- poration with, or lease or purchase the works, franchises of, or in any way control 18 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] SMITH—HENDRICK. [September 19 , any railroad corporation owning or hav- ing under its control a parallel or com- peting line, nor shall any oflicer of such railroad corporation act as an ofiicer of any other railroad corporation owning or having the control of a parallel or com- peting line. The question whether rail- roads are parallel or competing lines shall, when demanded, be decided by a jury, as in other civil issues. If any railroad company, organized un- der the laws of this State, shall consolidate, by sale or otherwise, with any railroad company organized under the laws of any other State or of the United States, the same shall not thereby become a foreign corporation; but the courts of this State shall retain jurisdiction in all matters which may arise, as if said consolidation had not taken place. In no case shall any consolidation take place except upon public notice of at least sixty days to all stockholders, in such manner as may be ' provided by law. The General Assembly shall pass no law for the benefit of a railroad or other corpo- rations, or any individual or association in- dividuals, retrospective in its operation, or which imposes on the people of any county, or municipal subdivision of the State, a new liability in respect to transactions or considerations already passed. No law shall be passed by the General Assembly granting the right to construct and operate a street railroad within any city, town, village, or on any public high- way, without first acquiring the consent of the local authorities having control of the street or highway pro osed to be occupied ‘ by such street railroa , and the franchises so granted shall not ‘be transferred without similar assent first obtained. N o railroad corporation in existence at the time of the adoption of this Constitu- tion shall have the benefit of any future legislation, except on condition of complete acceptance of all the provisions of this Constitution applicable to railroads. No president, director, officer, agent or employe of any railroad company shall be interested, directly or indirectly, in fur- nishing material or supplies to such com- pany, or in the business of transportation as a common carrier of freight or passen- gers over the works owned, leased, con- trolled, or worked by such company. ' No discriminations in charges or facili- ties in transportation shall be made between transportation companies and individuals, or in favor of either, by abatement, draw- back or otherwise; and no railroad com- pany, or any lessee, manager or employe thereof, shall make any preference in fur- nishing cars or motive power. No railroad or other transportation com- pany shall grant free passes or tickets, or passes or tickets at a discount, to members of the General Assembly, or members of the Board of Equalization, or any State or county or municipal officers; and the ac- ceptance of such pass or ticket by a mem- ber of the General Assembly, or any such officer, shall be a forfeiture of his office. Referred to Committee on Corporations That the Governor shall be eligible to re-election. That all State oflicers shall be elected for the term of four years. That the State Treasurer and Sherifl's shall not be eligible to a succeeding term. That there shall be but one Magistrate in each district, who shall have exclusive jurisdiction of all sums less than five hun- dred dollars, and that they have exclusive jurisdiction as to penal offenses, with right of appeal. Referred to Committee on Executive Oificers. . ‘Mr. H. H. SMITH. Mr. Presidentflas many members of the Convention will not have an opportunity to offer resolutions, and as I am certain that they will not get to my name to-day, I would like, there- fore, to give notice that on Monday I will move to reconsider the vote by which the rule was adopted, and to amend section 12, line 4, in relation to the order of business. I would like to have my resolution read for information. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Send it up and the Clerk will read the resolution. Y The resolution was not sent up, and was not reported. I t The PRESIDENT pro tem. That #111 be in order to-morrow. The gentleman gives notice that he will introduce it to- morrow. ' ‘ Mr.‘ HEN DRICK. I move to postpone the Orders of the Day ‘until the order un- der consideration has been executed. RESOLUTION S. 19 Friday,] EDRINGTON—ELMORE. [September 19 . The PRESIDENT pro tem. There is nothing in the Orders of the Day. The Chair stated that a minute ago, and we are going on with the execution of the call for resolutions. f Mr. EDRINGTON then offered the following other resolutions: Resolved, That the Committee on Reve- nue and Taxation consider the following: The taxing power may be exercised by the General Assembly for State purposes, and by counties and other municipal cor- porations by authority granted to them by the General Assembly for county and other corporate purposes. The power to tax corporations and corpo- rate property shall not be surrendered or suspended by act of the General Assem- bly. Taxes may be levied and collected for public purposes only. They shall be uni- form. upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the author- ity levying the tax; and all taxes shall be levied and collected by general laws. All property subject to taxation, shall be taxed in proportion to its value. That any ofiicer of this Commonwealth voluntarily absenting himself from the duties of his oflice shall have his salary reduced in proportion to his absence. That no officer of this Commonwealth shall be attorney for any corporation, or shall receive a free pass or gift from any person or corporation. - Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. ELMORE offered the following resolutions : Resolved, That section 33, article 2, be so amended as to read: The credit of this Commonwealth shall never be given or loaned in aid of any person, association, municipality or corporation, nor shall the General Assembly have power to authorize any county, city, town or voting district to give or loan its credit to any individual, corporation, municipality, or subscribe for or take stock in any railroad or other cor- poration. Referred to [Committee on Legislative Department. ' -Resolved, That article 8, section 16, Gen- ; eral Provisions, be so amended as to read: That in all elections by the people, except by persons in a representative capacity, the vote shall be by secret ballot. Resolved, That biennial sessions of the General Assembly be abolished, and quad- rennial sessions be adopted in lieu thereof. Resolved, 1. That the specific mode of amending the Constitution, by submitting to the voters of the State one clause at a time, is the correct and best mode. 2. That in lieu of the mode pointed out in the present Constitution for calling a Convention, the following should be adopted: Whenever two-thirds of both Houses of the Legislature concur in any proposed :amendment to the Constitution, said amendment shall be entered at large on the Journals, and such proposed amend- ments shall be submitted to the people at the next general election; and if it shall appear that a majority of all the qualified voters of this Commonwealth have voted in favor of the proposed amendment, the same shall be adopted at the next session of the Legislature as part of the Constitu- tion. 3. Should more than one amendment be proposed at one time, each amendment shall be distinctly stated, so that the votes may be taken on each proposed amendment separately, Referred to Committee on Revision of the Constitution. Mr. WOOD. Mr. President, it seems, sir, that it will be an endless job for the Secretary to read all the resolutions that will be proposed by the various members of this Convention, and it don’t seem to entertain a large number. If it is in order, sir, I move to dispense with the reading of the resolutions. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The mo- tion of the gentleman is, that resolutions shall not be read at the Clerk’s desk, but that the substance be stated by the gentle- man ofl‘ering them? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. The PRESIDENT pro tem. And that they then be referred to the proper Com mitteesfl Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. ELMORE. Before you put that question, I have one or two resolutions 2O RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] WOOD—MACKOY—JOHNSTON. [September 19 . here that I would like to have read. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The gen- tleman from Graves had the floor on his resolutions, andI will not entertain your motion until the Clerk reads these two. The Reading Clerk read the remaining resolutions ofi‘ered by Mr. Elmore: Resolved, That the Assessor’s oflice, which is a constitutional one, be abol- ished, and the assessment of property be done by the Magistrates of this Common- wealth. Referred to Committee on Revision of the Constitution. Resolved, That: whereas, the deep inter- est generally taken in local and private legislation tends to withdraw the members of the General Assembly from duly con- sidering the merits of general laws when proposed, and sometimes creates trading in the making of general laws to secure the passage of some local measure, therefore, the Committee on Corporations is request- ed to examine into and report on some sys- tem for transferring all local and private acts to some other source of competent jurisdiction. Referred to Committee on Corporations. Mr. WOOD. Now, Mr. President, I renew my motion. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Delegates can state the substance of their resolutions when their names are called, and they will be referred to the proper Committee with- out reading. Mr. MACKOY. Mr. President, it may seem a little tedious to sit here and listen to the reading of all these resolutions, but each member of this Convention has a different idea from the others as to what is proper to be incorporated in the Constitu- tion, and it is a means of information that each one has as to what are the views en- tertained by the other Delegates, and what might come before the several Committees, on which the Convention might be di- vided. I thin k, therefore, that these resolu- tions ought to be read, so that the members of the Convention may keep the run of the business, not only before the Commit- tees of which they are members, but before the other Committees. It seems to me that these resolutions should be read in full for the purpose of informing us fully as to the views entertained_by the Con- vention. We shall then adhere to the rule that has been adopted that no resolu- tion shall be discussed until it is reported back to the Convention by the Committee. In the old Convention a rule similar to that was stricken out. I think that rule a wise one, and I have no objection to it; but it is important to know what matters come before the Convention, in order that we may know what to do if the report of the Committee does not agree with the views of the Delegates and in order that the Delegates may be prepared to submit their views in opposition to the reports that the Committees make. Mr. JOHNSTON. I merely wanted to make a point of order. I think the mo- tion made by'the gentleman is covered by Rule 35, that any Delegate in the Conven- tion may have a paper read before it goes before the Convention. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Will the gentleman read the rule ‘I Mr. JOHNSTON. (Reading). “ When a paper is first presented to the Convention, it shall be a matter of right in any Dele- gate to have it read before the Convention shall vote upon it. If the paper has been once read, or the reading dispensed with, and the reading be again required and ob- jected to, it shall be determined by a vote of one-third of the Convention.” I think that is sufiicient, sir. The PRESIDENT pro tem. I think the point of order is well taken. There is no rule providing for the submission of pa- pers without reading. Mr. H. E. SMITH. If it is in order now, I would like to make a single remark. That is, that the notice I gave to introduce a resolution on Monday to amend the rules, seems to meet this case, from the fact that it debars any member who is not reached by the roll- call for one particular RESOLUTIONS. 21 Friday,] WOOD—ENGLISH—FARMER. [September 19, day, and from the fact that these various resolutions have to be printed, all of them going in on one day; and the resolutions offered on the whole roll-call, or by all the members, will give the Printer so much work that he can not get it out; and, by dividing the roll of members in sections according to the alphabet, it will give him a chance to print all of the resolutions and give the House each day a chance to hear the reading of the resolutions. I do not suppose there are members here who want to introduce resolutions every day. Then, by division in the alphabetical list, there will be no necessity for dispensing with the reading of the resolutions. I object to the consideration of any business except the regular order. Mr. WOOD. The rule referred to by the gentleman from Fayette says: “When a paper is first presented to the Conven- tion, it shall be matter of right in any Delegate to have it read before the Con- vention shall vote upon it.” Now, then, I don’t think my motion takes that right from any Delegate. If he desires to have his resolution read, I don’t think any Del- egate on this floor will object to it; but unless he expressly desires it, just let it be referred without reading. I don’t think the point of order is well taken. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair decides that a Delegate offering a resolu- tion, or any other Delegate, has a right to have a resolution read; so the Chair de- cides that the point is well taken, because it has assumed that every gentleman offer- ;ing a resolution desires it read. I think there will be no difliculty about it, because if any gentleman offers a resolution and says. he don’t want it read, it will be re- ferred without reading. Mr. WOOD. This Rule of Order here, No. 35, does not apply when a resolution is being introduced, but before it is voted upon. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair will submit it to the House. And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative. The PRESIDENT pro tem, The Clerk will procced in the regular way. If a gentleman does not ‘want his resolution read, just say so, and it won’t be read. Mr, ENGLISH offered the following : Resolved, That the Committee on Crimes and Criminal Procedure take into consid: eration: That the death penalty inflicted upon criminals shall be executed inside of one of the Penitentiaries of the State, nearest to the county where said criminal or criminals were tried and convicted. Referred to Committee on Crimes, Pun- ishments and Criminal Procedure. Mr. FARMER offered the following resolutions: ' Resolved, That no new county shall be formed in this Commonwealth with a smaller area than four hundred square miles, and two or more counties may be consolidated into one county, and a part of one county may be attached to another county with the consent of a majority of the voters of said counties or county. Referred to Committee on General Pro- vision. Resolved. That section 3, article 13, in the Bill of Rights, form no part of the Constitution. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved, That article 4, section 34, of the present Constitution be amended by inserting in line 2, after the word size, the following words: containing as nearly as -may be an equal number of voters. Referred to Committee on Judiciary. Resolved. That Bill of Rights, article 13, section 8, be amended by adding: the Leg- islature may provide by law that a three- fourths verdict may decide in civil cases, and the word “vicinage” be omitted. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved, That the Bill of Rights, article 13, section 1, be amended by adding: and no person shall be required to serve an ap- prenticeship or procure a diploma, or a certificate of proficiency .in order to engage in or practice any trade or profession in 22 RESOLUTIONS. ,__—_ Friday,] FORGY—FUNKdGLENN—GRAHAM. [September 19 , this Commonwealth. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved, That article 13, section 14, be amended by adding in line 3, after the word “taken ” the word “ or injured.” Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. FORGY offered the following reso- lutions: ' Resolved, That this Convention declare all navigable streams in this Common- wealth, and all railroads heretofore built or hereafter to be built, public highways, and all those who operate them, public carriers; and that the charges for trans- portation of passengers and freight be reg- ulated by law. Resolved, That whenever time and expe- rience shall indicate any change or amend- ment to the Constitution of Kentucky, now in progress of being made, such change shall be manipulated by the Legislature of the State, and submitted to the voters of the State at the next regular election there- after; and if a majority of the vote shall be cast in favor of such change or amend- ment, said Legislature shall, at its next regular term, declare such change or amendment to be a part of said Constitu- tion, and enact the necessary laws to carry out and enforce the same. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Mr. FUNK offered the following resolu- tion: - Amend section 29 of article 2 of the Con- stitution by striking therefrom the follow- words: ‘* Unless in cases of urgency four- fifths of the House where the bill shall be depending, may deem it expedient to dis- pense with this rule.” Referred to Committee on Revision. Mr. GLENN offered the following reso- lution: Resolved That the Committee on Elec- tions be directed to inquire into the expe- diency of so amending the present Con- stitution as to give the Legislature power ,to provide for holding elections, by voting either viva voce or by ballot, as they may ,deem best. - ' Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. GOEBEL offered the following: Resolved, That the last clause of section 14 of article 13, of the present Constitution be amended so as to read as follows: Nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of his representatives, and without just compensation previously paid to him in money, without deduction on any account, and no special tax or assessment shall [be levied or collected for reimbursement of any payment made for property taken for public use. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved, That the following provisio n be incorporated in the Constitution to be framed by this Convention: No legislative enactment shall be held, or deemed to be, a contract, nor other than a law, subject at all times to amendment and repeal. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Mr. GRAHAM oflered the following resolution: Resolved, That it be the sense of this Convention that, after the adoption of the new or amended Constitution, the General Assembly shall consist of fifty members in the lower House and twenty-eight in the Senate. - Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. HEN DRICK offered the following resolution: Resolved, That in all elections held un- der the Constitution to be adopted by this Convention, that the knowingly receiving or obtaining, directly or indirectly, of any vote by fraud, or directly or indirectly by the use of money or other valuable thing, shall vitiate the poll as to the candidate re- ceiving such vote 01‘ votes, and that 'the candidate receiving the next highest num- ber of votes, not having influenced, direct- ly or indirectly, any vote for such candi- date, by money orv other valuable thing, shall be declared entitled to the office for which such election is held. Resolved, 1. That the judicial power of this Commonwealth, both as to matters of law and equity, shall be vested in one su- preme court, to be styled “ The Court of Appeals,” the courts established by this Constitution, and such courts inferior to RESOLUTION S. 23 Friday,] HINES—JACOBS—HOPKINS. [September 19 . the Supreme Court, as the General Assem- bly may, from time to time, erect and es- tablish. 2. The Judges of the Court of Appeals shall, after the adoption of this Constitu- tion, hold their ofiices for a period of eighteen years from and after their elec- tions, and until their successors shall be duly qualified, subject to the conditions hereinafter prescribed. , 3. The Court of Appeals shall consist of five Judges, any three of whom may con- stitute a Court tor the transaction of busi- ness. No Judge of the Court of Appeals shall be eligible to any oflice under this Constitution for a period of three years succeeding the expiration of his term of oflice. 4. The Judges of the Circuit Court shall be elected for a period of twelve years, by circuits, and for that purpose the State _of Kentucky shall be divided into five 01r- cuits, each circuit to be composed of as many districts as are necessary for the transaction of the business of that circuit; and the Judges elected in every circuit shall hold the courts in rotation. Judges of the Circuit Courts shall be ineligible to re-election or appointment for a period of three years succeeding the expiration of their term of office. Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. J. S. HIN ES oflered the following resolution : Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that a section should be adopted and inserted in the Constitution prohibiting any county, _city, town, dis- trict, precinct or municipality from creating a debt, for any purpose, greater than five per cent. of the wealth of the jurlsdiction, and that when a debt exists or is created equal to said per cent., then, no furtherdebts for any purpose shall be created until the wealth of that jurisdiction has increased; and that at no time shall the whole debt of said county, city, town, district, pre- cinct or municipality be greater than five per cent. of the wealth of the jurisdiction. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. JACOBS offered the following reso- lution. Resolved, That in addition to the oath required by article 8 of the present Con- stitution, members of the General Assem- bly and all oflicers, before they enter upon w the execution of their respective oifices, shall take the following oath or atfirmation : I do solemnly swear (or afiirm, as the case may be) that I have not paid or contrib- uted, or promised to pay or contribute, directly or indirectly, any money or other thing of value to procure my nomination as a candidate for, or my election or ap- pointment to, my ofiice, except for neces- sary and proper expenses expressly authorized by law; and that I have not knowingly violated any election law of this Commonwealth, or procured it to be done by others in my behalf; and that I will not knowingly receive, directly or indirectly, any money or other thing of value, for performance or non-performance of any act or duty pertaining to my oflice pther than the compensation provided by aw. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Mr. HOPKINS offered the following: Resolved, That in all criminal prosecu- tions hereafter begun, the Commonwealth shall have the same right for change of venue that is allowed the defendant. Referred to Committee on Crimes, Pun- ishments and Criminal Procedure. Resolved, That the Committee on Elec- tions be requested to report to this Con- vention the expediency of fixing the time for holding of all State, District and County elections upon the first Tuesday in ;October, instead of the first Monday in August, as now existing; and that said elections be conducted by a secret ballot system, similar to that known as the Aus- tralian Ballot System. Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I move to extend the session to 1:30 o’clock. The PRESIDENT (having just taken the chair). There is one rule fixing adjourn- ment at 1 o’clock. It will require a two- thirds vote to extend it. The vote was taken on the motion, and declared to have been lost. ' Mr. J ONSUN offered the following res- olution: : ' Resolved, That the General Assembly shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following-enumerated cases; that is to say, for—- 24 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] J OHNSTON—K IRWIN. [September 19, Granting divorces. Changing the names of or persons or places. Laying out, opening, altering and work- ing roads or highways. Locating or changing county-seats, Regulating county and township affairs. Regulating the practice in courts of justice. Regulating the jurisdiction and duties of Justices of the Peace, Police Magistrates and Constables. Providing for changes of venue in civil and criminal cases. Incorporating cities, towns or vlilages, or changing or amending the charter of any town, city or village. Summoning and empaneling grand or petit juries. Providing for the management of com- mon schools. Regulating the rate of interest on money. The opening and conducting of any election, or designating the place of vot- in . a(‘The sale or mortgage of any real estate belonging to minors or others under disa- bility. ' The protection of game or fish. Chartering or licensing ferries or toll- bridges. Remitting fines, penalties or forfeitures. Creating, increasing or decreasing fees, percentage, or allowances of public oflicers during the term for which they are elected or appointed. Changing the law of descent. Granting to any corporation or individ- ual the right to lay down railroad tracks, or amending existing charters for such purposes. Granting to any corporation, association or individual, any special or exclusive privilege, immunity or franchise what- ever. In all all other cases where a general law can be made applicable, no special or local law shall be enacted. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. JOHNSTON offered the following resolution: Resolved, That Committee of one from each Congressional district, to which was referred the various resolutions refer- ring to Capital location, shall be the per- manent Committee on State Capital; and it shall be their duty to collect information as to the various sites suggested for a per- manent location, the inducements offered by each, and such other facts as, in their judgment, will aid the Convention in com- ing to a wise conclusion, and report the same, without any expressions of opinion in favor of or against any proposed loca- tions. . Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to suspend the Rules and put that resolution to a vote on its passage. The Committee appointed yesterday merely reports on the advisabil- ity of forming a Committee. This makes it a permanent Committee. Ithink that is a most excellent Committee. Mr. BURN AM. I would like to inquire of the Delegate from Fayette (Mr. J ohn- ston), why it is he proposes to restrict the powers of the Committee from making recommendations? If they have the ques- tion up and ascertain by thorough investi-- gation, all the facts as to where the Capital should be taken to, if removed at all, or why it should remain in the town of Frankfort, it seems to me a Committee chosen as [that was, should have the right to report the facts on one side or the other, why the location should remain here or be removed. I am, therefore, in favor of striking out so much of the resolution as has been offered as restricts the Committee from making a recommendation. I make a motion to that effect. The PRESIDENT. Before putting the motion, the Chair will announce that he has appointed the Committee on Railroads and Commerce, which the Secretary will ' report. ‘The Reading Clerk reported the Com- mittee, as follows: Emery Whitaker, Chairman; S. H. Boles, J. Guthrie Coke, J. F. Askew, w. H. Miller, H. e. Petrie,- Thos. H. Hanks, M. K. Allen, W. H. Martin. The PRESIDENT. The hour for ad? journment having arrived, the Convention is adjourned till tomorrow at 10 o’clock. Q), anvenfiun guard. Vol. 1 .1 --——KENTUCKY-—- CCNSTITUTICNAL CCDNVENTION - Saturday,] FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 20, 1890. VvOOD—JONSON—LASSING—APPLEGA'I‘E. [No. 10 [September 20. At 10 o’clock A. M. the President called the Convention to order, and the proceed- ings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bagby. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the Journal of yesterday’s proceed- ings. _ The Journal was read and approved. Mr. WOOD. I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Laruc. The PRESIDENT. The (hair hears no objection, and the leave is granted. Mr. J ONSON. I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Boyle. The PRESIDENT. \Vithout objection it is granted. Mr. LASSING. I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Campbell (Mr. Washin gton ) . The PRESIDENT. Without objection it is granted. Mr. APPLEGATE. I ask leave of ab- sence for the Delegate from Grant, who is sick. The PRESIDENT. Without objection‘ and the Chair hears none, the leave will be granted. Mr. STRAUS. I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Nicholas. The PRESIDENT. Without objection the leave is granted. Mr. BRONSTON. I ask leave of ab- sence for the Delegate from Fleming (Mr. Hendrick). The PRESIDENT. There is no objec- tion and leave is granted. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order is petitions; are there any petitions? If there are no petitions, then the unfin- ished report of the Committee will be in order. Mr. HENDRICK. I want to know the construction the Chair puts upon that. I understand the unfinished business of yes- terday is the completion of the roll-call for resolutions. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the order which was adopted yester- day, and under which we are acting. Mr. JOHNSTON. I remind the gentle- man that they were executing the order when they arrived at the time named, and - that the resolution was offered by me under that order. The PRESIDENT. The unfinished bus- iness is carrying out the order adopted by the Convention, which the Secretary will report. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered on yesterday by the Delegate from Fleming concerning the call of the roll for resolutions. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will now continue the call of the roll. Mr. P. P. JOHNSTON offered the fol- lowing additional resolution: WHEREAS, Public service should be met by just compensation commensurate with the dignity, extent and importance of the duty performed, and any pay in excess of that is unjust to the people and a tempta- tion to the venal, therefore the following amendment (mainly from the Constitution of Maryland) is proposed: Every person holding any office created by or existing under the Constitution or laws of the State, the entire amount of whose pay or compensation received for the discharge of his ofiicial duties shall exceed the yearly sum of five thousand dollars, ex, 2 RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] KIRWAN—LASSING—LEWIS. [September 20 ,. cept wherein otherwise provided by this Constitution, shall keep a book in which shall be entered any sum or sums of money received by him or on his account as a pay- ment or compensation for his performance of official duties, a copy of which entries in said book, verified by the oath of the officer by whom it is directed to be kept, shall be returned yearly to the Auditor of the State for his inspection and that of the General Assembly of the State; and each of said officers, when the amount reeieved by him for the year shall exceed five thou- sand dollars, shall yearly pay over to the ' Auditor of the State the amount of such excess received by him; and such officer failing to comply with this provision shall be deemed to have vacated his ofiice, and be subject to suit by the State for the amount that ought to have been paid over to the Auditor. Referred to Committee on Schedule. Mr. E. E. KIRWAN offered the follow- ing resolutions: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that local legislation shall be curtailed, and that the (fonstitution shall be so amended as to create some proper forum with powers such as will relieve the Legis- lature as far as practicable of the annoy- ance incident to the consideration and passage of local measures, charters, etc. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Amend section 8 of article 2 so that it will read thus: “Every male citizen who has attained the age of twenty-one years, who has resided in this State two years or in the county, town or city in which he offers to vote one year next preceding the election, shall be a voter: Provided, That he shall only vote in the precinct wherein he has a b'mn‘fide res- idence when the election is helc.” This omits the requirement for a residence of sixty days in a precinct, and inserts in lieu a boner. fide residence. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. LASSING offered the following res- olutions: Resolved, That section 1,article 2, of the Constitution be amended so as to read; The Legislative power shall be vested in a House of Representatives and Senate, which together shall be styled the Legisla- ture of the State of Kentucky, and all pro- cesses and proceedings shall be in the name of the State of Kentucky instead of Com- monwealth of Kentucky. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That sectlon 24 of article 2 of ‘ the Constitution be amended so as to read: Members of the Legislature shall severally receive from the public treasury a compen- sation for their services which shall be five dollars ($5) a day during their attendance on, and ten cents per mile for necessary travel in going to and returning from the sessions of their respective Houses for the first sixty days of a regular session, and two dollars and fifty cents per day for twenty additional days of said session, if the majority of members elected to each House should agree to extend the session so long; but in no event shall a regular session extend beyond eighty days, nor shall there be an adjourned session: Provided. however, That in emergencies deemed necessary by the Governor, he may convene the Legisla- ture for a specific purpose, and for no other; and when the business of the session so convened shall have been transacted, the called session shall immediately adjourn, and for which service the members shall re— ceive the same per diem pay and mileage as for service at a regular session. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That all members of the Legis» lative, Executive, Judicial or Ministerial Departments of the State, or of county or municipal governments within the State, shall be prohibited whilst in ofiice from re— ceiving or using free passes, or from accept— ing concessions to travel on lines of public transportation within this State at less than the rates paid by citizens generally for like services. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. J. W. LEWIS offered the following resolution: Resolved, That the following be inserted as an article in the Constitution of Ken- tucky: - No county shall be divided or have any part stricken therefrom without submitting the question to a vote of the people of the county, nor unless a majority of all the legal voters of the county voting on the question shall vote for the same: Ami pro- RESOLUTIONS. 3 Saturday,] MACKOY—MILLER. [September 20 . 'm'ded further, That there shall be no terri- tory stricken from any county unless a ma- jority of the voters living in such territory shall petition for such division, and no ter- ritory shall be added to any county without the consent of the majority of the voters of the county to which it is proposed to be vadded; but the portion so stricken off and added to another county, or formed in whole or in part into a new county, shall be holden for and obliged to pay its propor- tion of the indebtedness of the county from which it has been taken. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. HACKOY offered the following res- olutions; Resolved, That it is expedient to incor- porate in the Constitution to be formed provisions to the effect that: 1. All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class with- in the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax, and shall be levied and collected under general laws which shall prescribe the kind or class of property to be taxed, and shall also prescribe such reg- ulations as will secure a just valuation of all property upon which taxes may be im- posed. 2. The property, real and personal, of the State, counties, cities, towns and other mu- nicipal corporations, and all public libra- ries, shall be exempt from taxation. 3. Every act passed by the General As- sembly, and every ordinance or resolution passed by any county, city, town, or mu- nicipal board or local legislative body levy- ing a tax, shall specify distinctly the pur- pose for which said tax is levied, and no tax levied and collected for one purpose shall ever be diverted to another purpose. 4. The General Assembly shall not im- pose taxes for the purposes of any county, city, town or other municipal corporation, but may by general law vest in the corpo- rate authorities thereof. respectively, the power to assess and collect taxes for all purposes of such corporations. 5. The General Assembly may by gen- eral law provide for the payment of license fees for the various trades, occupations and professions, and may by general laws dele- gate the power to counties, cities, towns and other municipal corporations, to im- pose and collect license fees from said trades, occupations and professions, Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Resolved, That it is expedient to incor- porate in the Constitution to be framed by this Convention a provision to the effect that: Neither the General Assembly nor any county, city, town, taxing district. or governmental subdivision of any kind, shall ever make any appropriation or pay from any public‘ fund or moneys any thing in aid of any church or sectarian society, or for any sectarian purpose, or to help, support or sustain any school, academy, seminary, college, or other university or scientific institution controlled by any church or sectarian denomination; nor shall any grant or donation of land, money or other personal property ever be made by the State or any county, city, town, taxing district, or governmental subdi- vision, to any church or for any sectarian purpose. Referred to Committee on Education. Resolved, That the Committee on Print- ing and Accounts be directed to inquire into, ascertain and report to the Conven- tion the average compensation paid to the Reporter or Stenographer in the last ten Constitutional Conventions held in the dif- ferent Sates of the country. Resolved, That until his compensation is fixed, the Reporter be allowed to draw one hundred and seventy-five dollars per week, and the Auditor is hereby directed to draw his warrant upon the Treasurer in fa- vor of said Reporter for such amount week- ly, to be afterwards credited upon the com- pensation allowed. The PRESIDENT here resigned the Chair to Mr. Thomas S. Pettit. Mr. MACKOY. I ask the immediate adoption of that resolution last read. Mr. W. H. MILLER. A resolution re- lating to the compensation of the Reporter has already been adopted by this Conven- tion, which I think will meet the views of the gentleman from Covington. It pro- vides for a compensation of $15 per day to the Reporter and $20 per day for his As- sistants; and the act under which this Con- vention is assembled provides that that com- pen sation may be drawn in the same manner that the Delegates to this'Convention may draw their compensation. 1 think the res- olution of the gentleman is unnecessary. Mr. MACKOY. I don’t think the Re- 4 RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] MILLER—SPALDING—M ACKOY. [September 20 . porter understands that the resolution adopted provides for that. This is offered simply to enable him to draw an amount sufficient to cover the weekly expenses of himself and assistants. I believe the com- pensation fixed by the Committee on Printing was per day, $15 for the prin- cipal and $20 for the Assistants. That will amount to more than the amount specified here, for which he will be permitted to draw his warrant weekly. The amount specified here is $175 per week. If the gentleman is correct, and he can draw his per diem of per day, this resolution would be useless. I don’t think the Re- porter understands, under the resolution already adopted, he has a right to draw what will be necessary for the expenses of himself and his assistants. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I don’t remem- ber whether or not the resolution reported by the Committee on Rules, which was adopted, provides for him to draw that compensation, but that resolution, under the act calling the Convention, I think, authorizes the Treasurer to pay that com- pensation to the Reporter. I desire to make this further suggestion, that, as I un- understand it, ‘the resolution provides for an amendment to the rules, and, under the rule adopted, shouldnot be made until one day’s notice is given. Mr. SPALDING. I desire to call the attention of the gentleman from Lincoln (Mr. W. H. Miller) to the fact, that while that was among the rules which was before the Committee on Rules, it was not reported as a rule to the House; and the fact of the matter is, it has never been reported. We agreed upon it in Committee, but it has not been reported or acted upon. Mr. MACKOY. I understand that the resolution providing for compensation to the Reporter and his Assistants has not been adopted; and, as matters now stand, it will be impossible for him to draw any thing unless this resolution is passed. And so far as the act is concerned, I think the gentleman is mistaken in saying the act authorizes him to draw without resolution of this body. It simply says the Delegates shall receive, as compensation, the same amount allowed to members of the House, but shall not be paid for any recess longer than five days. It says compensation to the Delegates, President, ofi'icers, etc., shall be paid as provided by law. Unless that provision is broad enough to cover it, the Reporter will have to provide for the sup- port of his staff until some such resolution is adopted; and the resolution was intro- duced simply for that purpose, in order that he might have sufficient funds to pay those persons, and provide for their expenses; and the amount is loss than the per diem fixed by the Committee on Rules. Mr. MILLER. My understanding of the fact is, it has not been adopted. I move, as a substitute to the gentlenu-m’s resolution, that the compensation fixed by the Com- mittee on Rules, $15 to the Reporter and $20 for his Assistants, be the compensation which he is allowed to draw for himself and Assistants, instead of $175 provided for in the resolution offered. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Reduce your substitute to writing. The substitute was read, as follows: Strike out $175 per week in the second line, and insert in lieu thereof, $15 per day for the Reporter and $20 per day for his Assistants. Mr. MACKOY. I accept the amend- ment. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The ques- tion is upon the adoption of the resolution offered by the gentleman from Covington, as amended by the Delegate from Lincoln. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I have an amend- - ment to offer. The amendment read, as follows : Amend by striking out $15 where it oc- curs, and inserting $10, and striking out $20 and inserting $15. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I call for the yeas and nays RESOLUTION S. 5 Saturday,] MACKOY—CLARDY—SPALDING. [September 20. Mr. MACKOY. I want to call the at- tention of the Convention to the fact that this does not provide for the permanent compensation of the Reporter and his As- sistants. It simply provides he shall draw so much per week until the matter is de- termined. by the Committee on Printing and Accounts, and the resolution is offered to accomplish that purpose. The whole matter of fixing the permanent compensa- tion of the Reporter and his Assistants is with the Committee on Printing and Ac- counts, and I make this point of order: At the present time it would not be proper to fix the permanent compensation, which it is designed by this amendment to do, because the matter has been referred to, and now is under consideration by the Commit- tee on Printing and Accounts, which Com- mittee has not reported. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair must hold that the amendment of the gen- tleman from Daveiss is strictly in order, even for a temporary compensation. .In the absence of a report from the Committee - on Printing and Accounts, we can not prejudge the rate of compensation, because the work of reporting debatesin this Con- vention is a matter requiring special skill; and it is a matter, therefore, that should be considered by the Committee on Printing and Accounts carefully, in order that no injustice may be done; and that we may, on the one hand, not pay more than we ought to pay, and in that no injustice should be done to the gentleman who is engaged in that capacity by this Conven- tion by underpaying him. The question is on the adoption of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Daveiss. Mr. CLARDY. In order that we may vote intelligently on the question, I would like to know something of the work that this Reporter has to do. It may be that he has to do a good deal more work than some members think he does. He does the work of an expert, and, of course, demands a higher'price according to the amount of work he does; but I would like to know if he has any other work to do outside of this Convention; what are his duties outside of it, so that we can vote intelligently upon the question. We want to pay a fair price, and we must know what that is before we can vote intelligently. I would like to have that matter explained by somebody. Mr. SPALDING. This is a very small part of the work. This is the expert part, but he has to copy the work off on a type- writer; that is the laborious part, and it takes five times as long as this. The fact is that he has to keep four or five men em- ployed all the time. Besides two Assistant Stenographers, he has to have three or four type-writers constantly at work. had some little experience in this matter— not as much, perhaps, as other gentlemen on the floor. I remember we had this same gentleman taking proof before the Railroad Commission in a matter at Louisville. The State didn’t pay the bill; but I understand it was very far in excess of the amount asked here. They pay by the page or line, and I think $15 a day is not enough for this Reporter myself. In the former Con- vention they gave $20 to the Reporter, and they didn’t have any thing like so full a report as we shall have here; and I think that this is too small, and we ought to give him $25 instead of $15, because it is a very difficult kind of work; not only laborious, but it requires peculiar knowledge, such as very few people possess; and the reporting of debates, of all other kind of reporting, is the most difiicult to perform. Taking down testimony in court, where you have time to go over the matter and have it cor- rected, or taking down ofiice work, is a very different thing, indeed, from taking down the speeches made by Delegates upon this floor, and the proceedings of this Con- vention. It requires a first-class stenog- rapber to do that, and one who has expe— rience in that line; and I think really that $15 is not enough for this Reporter. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I would like to ask I have- 6 RESOLUTION S. Saturday,] SPTEDINe—BRENTs—MILLER. [September 20 _ the gentleman a question. I understand that he says that the part which is being performed here is not any thing like that which has to be done outside, but that it is necessary to have type-writers employed. I would like to understand now, and I think the Convention would like to under- stand, whether this embaaces the full compensation for all the work‘? It is important to understand that, because I understand there is some doubt about that proposition. Mr. SPALDING. In answer to the questions of the gentleman, I will say that the matter was before the Committee on Rules, but their report was not made to the Convention. It was agreed to allow the Chief Stenographer fifteen dollars and twen- ty dollars for any Assistants he might need, whether one or ten, and whether they were Type-writers or Stenographers; that is the full compensation, and I think it too little instead of too large. Mr. BRENTS. I would like to say a word. This matter was formally before the Committee on Rules. They have not made a report. I do not know what the services of a Reporter are worth or what is a customary price, but I am willing to abide by and accept the report of the Committee on Rules. Upon the request of a Delegate, the reso- lution and amendment were read. The vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Daveiss, the roll-call was announced as follows: visas—15. Amos, D. C. Hogg, S. P. Bennett, B. F. James, A. D. Birkhead, B. T. McElroy, WV. J. Boles, S. H. Pettit, Thos. S. Bourland, H. R. Quieksall, J E. Doris, W. F. Smith, W. Scott Durbin, Charles Harris, Geo. C. NAYS—II. Allen, C. T. Hopkins, F. A. Applegate, Leslie T. Jonson, J ep. C. Askew, J. F. Johnston, P. P. Auxier, A. J, Kirwan, E. E. Ayres, W. W. Knott, J. Proctor Wood, J. M. Beckham, J C. Beckner, W. M. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, WV. G. Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. Edrington, WV. J. Elmore, T. J. English, Sam E. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. WV. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley E. G rah am, Sam uel Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, WV. J. Hines, J. S. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W. Lassing, L. WV. Lewis, J. WW". Lewis, W. WV. Mackoy, WV. H. Martin, WV. H. McDermott, E. J. Miller, WVill. lWIiller, WV. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. WV. Nunn, T. J. O’Hara, R. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Petrie, H. G. Phelps. John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh. Sam'l J. Rodes, Robt. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Swango. G. B. Trusdell, George W’Vest, J. F. Whitaker, Emery WVilliams, L. P. W’. WVoolfolk. J. F. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—I4. Berkele, Wm. Burnam, Curtis F. Forrester, J. G. Goebel, Wm. Jacobs, R. P. Kennedy, Hanson May, John S. Mr. W. H. MILLER. McHenry, H. D. Ramsey, WW". R. Smith, H. H. Twyman, I. WV. VV-ashington. George Young, Bennett H. I think the in- vestigation it proposes is, entirely unneces- sary. This Committee has made an inves- tigation in regard to that matter, and we have had a conference with the Reporter, and I think he will be satisfied with the compensation which is offered him by the action of the Committee on Rules, which has not yet been adopted by the Conven- tion, and, for that reason, I think the reso- lution making inquiry is entirely unneces- sary; and further, on the other branch of his resolution I desire to say, this in addi- tion to the remarks made by the gentleman from Union, that the Reporter has super- vision of the printing of the debates of this Convention, that he has to read the proof RESOLUTION S. 7 is aturday,] ArPLEeATE—MILLER—MacxoY. [September 20. and make corrections, which is an addi- tional labor imposed on him; and after ‘investigating the whole matter, the Com- mittee on Rules came to the conclusion that this was a just and fair compensation, and for the reasons I have stated, I ask for a division of the question. I think it is unnecessary to adopt the first portion of‘ the gentleman’s resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will "report the first part of the resolution. The first part of the resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Reso/med That the Committee on Print- ing and Accounts be directed to inquire into, ascertain and report to the Convention the average compensation paid to the Re- porter or Stenographer in the last ten Con- stitutional Conventions held in the different States of this country. Mr. APPLEGATE. I, hope that the first part of that resolution will be adopted. What we want is information. Possibly this Committee has reported too high an amount, or too low an amount. I don’t know any thing about it. After we have this information, I think I could form a better judgment, and know how to vote much more intelligently, and it won’t cost any thing to get the information. Knowl- edge ought not to hurt any one, and it will not injure this Convention. . Mr. W. H. MILLER. To relieve the ‘gentleman, I will state that there is not a bit of danger of that Committee reporting -any thing too high. The vote on the first part of the resolu- tion was taken, and the same was adopted. The second part of the resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, and, upon a vote, was also adopted. Mr. MACKOY. I offer a resolution. The Reading Clerk then read the resolu- tion, as follows: Resolved, That the Auditor is hereby directed to draw his warrant upon the Treasurer in favor of the Secretary of this Convention for the sum of $69.05, to pay :for the twelve copies of Poore’s compila- tion, ordered by this Convention, telegram and express charges. as shown by accom- panyin g bill. Mr. MACKOY. I move the adoptien of that resolution. The resolution was put to the House and the same was adopted. ' Mr. MACKOY. For the information of the Convention, the Secretary has requested me to say that he has now those copies of Poore’s Manual, so the Committees desiring copies for use can procure them. The See- retary has also twelve copies of the Con- stitutional amendments of the State of In- diana, which Committees can have. Mr. MCDERMOTT requested that his name be passed until the end of the call, and his request was granted, there being no objection. Mr. MCELROY. some resolutions. The resolutions were read by the Reading Clerk, as follows:' Resolved. That the Judiciary shall be di- vided as follows: - A Court of Appeals, con- sisting of -- number of Judges and a -—, number of Circuit Judges; a County Judge in each county, and one Justice of the Peace in each district; and that all inter- mediate or statutory courts be prohibited; and that the salaries of the Judges of the Court of Appeals be fixed at $3,000 per annum, and not to be raised or diminished during the term for which they are elected. I desire to introduce Referred to Committee on Court of Ap- peals. Resolved. That the Committee on Circuit Courts be requested to so amend the-section of the Constitution applying to Circuit Courts as to fix their salaries at $1,800 per annum; and said salaries not to be raised or diminished during the term for which they are elected. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to in- troduce a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows : Resolved, 1. The judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in the Sen- ate when sitting as a court of impeach- ment, a Supreme Court (to be styled the 8 RESOLUTION S. Saturday,] MILLER. [September 20 . Court of Appeals), Circuit Courts, Courts to be styled the Criminal, County and Pro- bate Courts, and in Justices of the Peace and Police Courts. 2. The Court of Appeals should consist of seven Judges, one to be the Chief J us- tice; and their term of office should be fourteen years, with provision for the elec- tion of one Judge every two years. They should be not less than thirty-five years of age, and should, before their election, have been practicing lawyers for fourteen years, or their service upon the bench of a court of record and at the practice of law should be equal to fourteen years. Their compen- sation should remain unchanged for the period of their respective terms, and they should be ineligible to re-election. 3. The Court of Appeals, for the hearing and determination of causes, should be separated into two divisions, each to be composed of three Judges, and each to be presided over by the Chief Justice. One of said divisions should hear and decide appeals from the Criminal, County and Probate Courts, and the other appeals from the Circuit Courts, and the decision of each division should be final with- out the concurrence of the other. The Chief Justice should take no part in any opinion or decision of either of such divisions, but his duty alone should be to hear and decide upon petitions for rehear- ing, which should be addressed to the Chief Justice instead of the court. If a rehear- ing is granted, then the case should be heard and determined by the whole court. Provision should be made for the selection of a Chief Justice pro tem. from among the Judges, in cases of his inability to act; and for assistance to him, in like manner, should petitions for rehearing become too numer- ous for him to decide; and in cases of a want of a quorum in one division for the transaction of business, provision should be made for supplying it from the other. 4. The term of office of the Clerk of the Court of Appeals should be reduced to four years. Referred to Committee on Judicial De- partment and Court of Appeals. 1. The Circuit Courts should be established in each county with jurisdiction in civil cases substantially as at present, but such courts should be divested of all criminal jurisdic- tion. Provision should be made for four terms of a Circuit Court a year in each county. The term of oflice of the Judges of the Circuit Courts should be for eight years; they should be ineligible to re-elec- tion, and their compensation should remain unchanged during the period for which they shall have been elected. 2. The terms ‘of office of the Clerks of ' the Circuit Courts should be for four years. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. 1. A court, to be styled the Criminal, County and Probate Court, should be estab- lished in each county. Such courts should have substantially the same jurisdiction now possessed and exercised by the courts styled County Courts, and,in addition there- to, the jurisdiction in criminal and misde- meanor cases now exercised by the Circuit Courts. The qualifications and the term of office of the Judges of said courts should be the same as those of the Judges of the Circuit Courts, and they should be ineli- gible to re—election, and their compensation should remain unchanged during the period for which they shall have been elected. 2. The State should be laid off into con- venient districts, to be styled the Criminal, County and Probate Court Districts. Said districts should consist of not more than four counties each; of a less number of counties where the population and business make it necessary, so that a term of said court may be held in each county every month. A Judge for each district should be elected. The said courts should not be subordinate or inferior to the Circuit Courts; and appeals from their decisions should be direct to the Court of Appeals. In all matters pertaining to the county rev- enues, roads, turnpikes, bridges, the main- tenance of the poor, and other matters pertaining to the public affairs of the coun- ty, which should constitute the County Court department of said courts, the Judges thereof should have associated with him ‘the Justices of the Peace of their respect- ive counties. Referred to Committee on County Courts. 1. Each county in this State should be laid off into Magisterial Districts of conven- ient size, as nearly equal in population as possible; but no county should have more than three of such districts until its popu- lation shall exceed fifteen thousand, after which it should have one additional district for every five thousand additional popula- tion. elected in each district for the term of six years, whose age should be not less than thirty years. 2. The jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace should be substantially as at present in civil and criminal and misdemeanor-- One Justice of the Peace should bev RESOLUTION S. 9 Saturday,] MONTGOMERY. [September 20. cases, but should be kept uniform through- out the State. Appeals from their decisions should be, in misdemeanor cases, to the Criminal, County and Probate Courts, and in civil cases to the Circuit Courts. It should be their duty to attend at each term of the County Court, on the first day thereof, to be associated with the Judge thereof, in the transaction of county busi- ness, for which service they should receive a stated salary to be fixed by law, and pay- able monthly out of the county treasury and not to exceed one hundred and twenty dollars per annum. The Justices of the Peace should be ere qfi’icz'o Assessors of their respective districts; and upon the comple- tion and return of their books, the whole of them, together with the County Judge, should constitute the Board of Supervisors. The Justices of the Peace should be in- eligible to re-election; and their compen- sation and rate of fees should remain unchanged during the period for which they shall be elected. 4. The office of Commonwealth’s Attor- ney should be abolished. 5. There should be a County Attorney elected, as at present, who should discharge, in their respective counties, all the duties now required of Commonwealth and Coun- ty Attorneys. The salary of County At- torneys should be fixed by law, and should be the same for each, and should not exceed $600 per annum, which should be paid monthly out of the State Treasury. They should, in addition to their salary,'be al- lowed a percentage of all fines and forfeit- ures, the salary and percentage to remain unchanged during the term. Provision should be made empowering the Judge of each Criminal, County Court and Probate Court district to require the attendance and assistance of any one or more of the Coun- ty Attorneys from a county or counties other than that in which he may be holding court, whenever, in his opinion, it may be beneficial or necessary. 6. All civil jurisdiction should be prohib- ited to Police Courts. 7. The Quarterly Courts should be abol- ished, and the jurisdiction of said courts exercised by the Justices of the Peace. Referred to Committee on County Courts. Mr. MONTGOMERY offered the fol- lowing resolutions. The resolutions were read by the Read- ing Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the President of this Convention appoint a Committee of‘ nine members, to be styled the Supervising Committee, whose duties it shall be to take into consideration the various sections and parts that may be agreed upon by this Convention, from time to time, as part of the Constitution to be formed, and deter- mine as to whether or not they harmonize, and report thereon, so that when the Con- stitution is agreed upon it may harmonize as a whole. Referred to Committee on Rules. Resolved, 1. That all of article 1 of the resent Constitution of Kentucky, concern- ing the Distribution of Powers of the Gov- ernment, be adopted as part of the Constitu- I tion to be formed by this Convention. 2. That the following sections of article 2 of the present Constitution of Kentucky, concerning the Legislative Department, be- adopted as part of the Constitution to be formed by this Convention, to wit: Sec- tions 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12,13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28, 30, 31, 37, 39 and 40. 3. That in lieu of section 29 of said article the following be adopted, to wit; No bill shall have the force of a law until on three several days it be read over in full in each House of the General Assembly, and free discussion allowed thereon, the ovte taken thereon by yeas and nays; and this rules hall not be dispensed with. 4. The General Assembly shall not, by special act, create or extend any corporate right or franchise to any person, associa- tion or corporation, but may pass general laws conferring upon the courts of original jurisdiction authority to grant or extend such rights or franchise; but such laws. shall not authorize the granting or extend- ing such corporate rights or franchises, except to such associations as are common carriers, the owners, builders or improvers- of railroads, canals, locks and dams for the improvement of navigation, turnpikes, bridges, telegraph or telephone lines, bank- ing or, insurance companies; but no law shall be passed whereby the property of such association or company, or its fran- chises, shall be exempted from taxation for State, county, district or municipal pur- poses, upon the value of such property or franchise, as other property of like value may be taxed. And such general laws shall provide that the private property of ' the owner of any share, stock or interest in such corporation, association or company, shall be liable for the debts of such asso- ciation, corporation or company, to an amount equal to par value of the shares 10 RESOLUTION s. : Saturday,] MOORE. [September 20. stocks or interests that such person may own therein. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That the following be made part of the Constitution to be formed by this Convention: 1. The credit of this Commonwealth shall never be given or loaned in aid of any per- son, association, municipality, or corpora- tion, nor shall any money or property be given, paid or loaned, or tax be levied or collected, or authorized to be levied or col- lected, by the Commonwealth, in'aid of any association, municipality or corporation, except to such charitable reformatory, edu- cational or other institutions as are owned and controlled exclusively by the State. 2. That no county, district, municipality or civil division in this Commonwealth shall, by taxation, loan its credit or give any aid to any association or corporation, except two-thirds of all the qualified voters in said county, district or civil division, at two gen- eral elections, to be held in such county, district, municipality or civil division, shall vote for the proposition to give such aid; but no such aid shall be given in an amount exceeding three per cent. of the value of the taxable property in such county, district, municipality or civil division; and no in- debtedness on account of such aid shall ex- tend for a period greater than five years. The General Assembly may pass laws to carry this provision into effect. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. J. H. MOORE offered the following resolution : Resolved, 1. That the County Judge ap- point or elect three men, well qualified, for every precinct geographically selected, to hold sessions not less than three nor more than five days, whose duty it .shall be to list all the taxable property of said district, at a salary of two dol- lars per day. In case the property-hold- ers do not all appear during the time specified to list their property, an extra per cent. be added to defray the cost of assessment. 2. That all property be assessed at its actual cash value, and the indebtedness of the property-holder be deducted therefrom. 3. That one Magistrate be elected in each precinct instead of two, and that he shall have jurisdiction for all sums not exceeding tnree hundred dollars. Referred to Committee on County Courts. Resolved, 1. That it is the sense of this Convention that a clause should be inserted in the Constitution, fixing the time of the meeting of the General Assembly at every four years, unless the exigen- cies of the times demand that they should be called together in the interim, by power to that effect being invested in the Governor. . 2. That all loccal legislation shall be inhibited, and the same shall be lodged or vested in the respective counties of the Commonwealth; that the number of Rep- resentatives shall be diminished, and the time and length of their sessions abridged. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, 1. That knowledge is power, and it behooves the people of this great Commonwealth to foster and build up the best system of education that can be ob- tained, and to that end would suggest- that a compulsory clause be inserted in the Con- stitution now being formulated. 2. That when a course of study shall have been adopted in the public or com- mon schools of the State, some provision by law enacted should be made whereby the standard book adopted shall remain in force for a term of years, thereby relieving the poor of a great burden. 3. That the fund now held for educational purposes shall be held inviolate, and never diverted for any other purpose. Referred to Committee on Education. Mr. L. T. MOORE. On the fourth day of the session of this Convention I intro- duced a resolution, by way of substitute, to the seventh section of the resolution pre- sented by the gentleman from Warren. I desire to have that resolution read and re- ferred to the Committee on the Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and such reference is ordered. In case of a mis-reference to Committees, if they are reported to the Convention, the references can be corrected. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to say that this is a resolution inhibiting local legisla- tion. The PRESIDENT. The statement of the Chair had no particular reference to RESOLUTIONS. 1 1 Saturday,] the resolution of the gentleman from Boyd In case any reference is desired, and there is objection, then the Chair will take a vote as to the reference; but without objection, it is considered that the reference is made ‘by unanimous consent. Mr. L. T. MOORE offered the following resolution: Resolved, That it is the sense of this ‘Convention that the Legislative Depart- ment of the Government of this State should be inhibited from passing any local or private bills; and if it is not possible to ‘provide, by general laws, for all subjects of legislation, then the Legislative Depart- ment should be inhibited from passing any local or special law authorizing the crea- tion, extension or impairing of liens, regu- lating the affairs of counties, cities, towns, wards, school districts or other political sub- divisions of the State, changing the name of persons or places, changing the venue in civil or criminal cases, authorizing open- ing, altering or maintaining roads, high- ways, streets or alleys, relating to bridges or ferries, or incorporating ferry or bridge companies, except for the erection of bridges crossing streams which form boundaries be- tween this and any other State, vacating wards, town plats, streets or alleys; relat- ing to cemeteries, grave-yards or public grounds not of the State; authorizing the adoption or legitimation of children, locat- ing or changing county seats, erecting new counties or changing county lines, incorpo- rating‘cities, towns or villages, or changing their charters; for the opening and con- ducting of elections, or fixing or changing the place of voting; granting divorces; erecting or ehangine~ school districts; cre- ating offices, or prescribing the powers and duties of officers in counties, cities, towns or villages, election or school districts; changing the laws of descent or succession; regulating the practice or jurisdiction of or changing the rule of evidence in any judi- cial proceeding or inquiry before courts or other tribunals, or permitting or changing methods of collection of debts, or the en- forcing of judgments or prescribing the effect of judicial sales of real estate; regu- lating the fees and extending the powers and duties of aldermen, justices of the peace, magistrates or constables; regulating the management of public schools, the building or repairing of school-houses, and raising money for such purposes; fixing the rate of interest affecting the estate of mi- MooRE. [September 20 , a nors or persons under disabilty; remitting fines, penalties or forfeitures, or refunding money legally paid into the Treasury; ex- empting property from taxation; regulat- ing labor, trade, mining or manufacturing; creating corporations or amending, renew- ing or extending ‘the charters thereof; granting to any corporation, association or individual any special or exclusive privi- lege or immunity, or to any corporation, association or individual the right to lay down a railroad track; nor shall the Gen- eral Assembly, indirectly, enact such spe- cial or local law by the partial repealing of ageneral law, but laws repealing local or special acts may be passed; nor should any law be passed granting powers or privi- leges in any case where the granting of such powers and privileges shall have been or can be provided by general law, nor where the courts have power to grant same. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. WHEREAS, In a number of counties, and subdivisions of counties, in this State, an indebtedness, or apparent indebtedness, exists, which threatens bankruptcy and ruin to said counties and subdivisions of counties; and whereas, said indebtedness was incurred by unjust and unconstitu- tional legislation, enacted by the Legisla- tive Department of this State, authorizing a majority of the citizens and voters of said counties and subdivisions to impose a tax upon the people and property of said counties and subdivisions of counties in aid of railroads and private corporations, which legislation has been approved by the Judicial Department of this Govern- ment; and its agents are engaged in or threatening to collect the same, which, if proceeded in, will be more disastrous than flood or cyclone to the people of said coun~ ties or subdivisions; and for which condi- tion of threatened disaster this State is re- sponsible; therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the duty of this State to assume the responsibility of such indebtedness or supposed indebtedness, and on behalf of said counties or subdivisions of counties to remit payment thereof; but if this can not be successfully done, then the State should pay such indebtedness, or such an amount as can be agreed upon with the holders of such indebtedness, and that a clause be inserted in the draft of a Consti- tution to be made by this Convention pro- viding the means of ascertaining such in- debtedness and the payment of the same. 12 . RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] N UNN—O’HARA. [September 20 .. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Mr. MUIR offered the following resolu- tion, which he desired referred to the Com- mittee on Charities and Charitable ‘Institu- tions. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: ‘ Resolved, 1. It shall be the duty of the General Assembly to provide by law for the support of institutions for the education of the deaf and dumb and of the blind, and also for treatment of the insane. 2. The General Assembly shall provide houses of refuge for the correction and reformation of juvenile offenders. 3. County Boards shall be established, who shall have power to provide farms as an asylum for those persons who, by reason of age, infirmity or other misfortune, may have claims upon the symathies and aid of society. Referred to Committee on Charities and Charitable Institutions. Mr. NUNN. I desire to offer a resolution, and have it referred to the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The Reading Clerk read the resolution as follows : \ Resolved, That equality of sacrifice for the maintenance and support of the State is the foundation upon which a free people may maintain their governmental integrity; and the above principle ' has been much abused by reason of the exception to the first section of the“ Bill of Rights,” namely: “ but in consideration of public services ;” now, be it further Resolved, That said first section of “ Bill of Rights ” be sustained in the Constitution with said exception eliminated. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. O’HARA introduced the following resolution, which he desired referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the Circuit Court system as it now exists be re-adopted by this Con- vention, and that same be incorporated in and form a part of the new Constitution, except that there be established thirty-two Circuit Judicial Districts instead of the- number now existing: Provided, That the- General Assembly may increase the num- ber of Districts as the business of the State may require. ‘ Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. O’HARA introduced also the follow-- ing resolution: Resolved, That the Secretary of the Con- vention be, and he is hereby, directed to preserve a list of the Delegates to whom copies of Poore’s Compilation and of the- Constitution enacted since the date of that compilation are delivered, so that it may at all times be known where the same are, andso that each of the Committees may have an opportunity of using the same. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate wish the resolution to be put upon its pas- sage? Mr. O’HARA. I do. Mr. HOPKINS. I desire to have the resolution reported. The resolution was reported by the Read- ing Clerk, and was put to the House and adopted. Mr. PARSONS. following resolutions. The Reading Clerk read the resolutions I desire to offer the as follows: Resolved. That there be inserted in the- present Constitution a clause allowing all women twenty-one years of age to vote- upon all questions of local option; also to vote in any matter pertaining to the com- mon schools, and to hold office in the same. Referred to Committee on Elections. Be it resolved. That if any railroad, tele- graph, express or other corporation organ- ized under any of the laws of the State of‘ Kentucky shall consolidate, by sale or oth- erwise, with any railroad, telegraph, express- or other corporation organized under any laws of any other State or Territory, or of the United States, the same shall not there- by become a foreign corporation, but the courts of this State shall retain jurisdiction over that part of the corporate property within the limits of the State in all matters which may arise, as if said consolidation had not taken place. ' Referred to Committee on Corporations. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS offered the RESOLUTION S. ' 13 Saturday,] PHELPs. [September 20 . following resolutions, which were read by the Reading Clerk to the Convention: WHEREAS, Experience hath shown that, with the meager pay now provided by law, that our best qualified men can not afford to hold the oflicc of Justice of the Peace; and whereas, the duties of said office has been of great importance to the people, both in a financial point and for keeping the peace; therefore, for the purpose of having the same service performed more \efficiently without additional expense to the people, Resolved, That there shall be the follow- ing provision in ‘the Constitution, viz: Abolish the oflice of County Assessor and Justice of the Peace, and create the office of one Commissioner in each justices’ dis- trict, whose duty it shall be to perform the duties of Assessor for said district, for the .same pay allowed to the Assessors; and he shall issue writs, make arrests, hold in- quests as coroners now do; they shall sit at the Court of Claims as justices now do. All trials now had before Justices of the Peace shall be had before the County Judge .at the court-house; and for the purpose of having the duties of said ofi'ice efficiently performed, the Legislature shall provide by law that no one shall be eligible to said ofiice until he has first obtained a certifi- cate of qualification, from a board created by law for that purpose, that he is quali- fied to perform the duties of said oflice. ‘Said Commissioner to hold office for a term of four years. Referred to Committee on County Courts. Resolved. That the State Librarian be requested to cause to be hoisted over this Capital the flag of the Nation, to remain during the sittings of this Convention. Mr. PHELPS. I ask that that last reso- lution be acted upon new. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the resolution just read. The resolution was put before the House, .and was adopted. Mr. ZACH PHELPS. I desire to offer these resolutions and have them referred to ‘the Committees named. The Reading Clerk thereupon read Mr. Phelps’ resolutions, as follows: The Committee on Executive and Minis- terial Oflices for Counties and Districts is requested to consider the advisability of in- corporating the following in the new Con- stitution: “The compensation of countv ofiicers shall be regulated by law, and all county oflicers who are or may be salaried, shall pay all fees which they may be authorized to receive into the Treasury of the County or State, as may be directed by law. “ In counties containing 100,000 inhab- itants, or more, all county officers shall be paid by salary, and the salary of anv such officer and his clerk, heretofore paid by fees. shall not exceed seventy-five per cent. of the aggregate amount of fees earned during his term, and collected by or for him.” The following is recommended in lieu of the existing system in Louisville: Circuit Court. “The Circuit Court of Jefferson county shall be composed of four Judges, and such additional number as the General Assem- bly may, from time to time, provide. “ Each of said Judges shall sit separately for the trial of causes and the transaction of business in special term. “The Judges of said Circuit Court may sit in general term for the purpose of mak— ing rules of court, and for the transaction of such other business as may be provided by law, at such times as they may deter- mine, but shall have no power to review any order, decision or proceeding of the Court in special term.” Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con- vention that article 4, of the Constitution, shall be so amended that hereafter the ju- dicial power of this Commonwealth shall be vested in two Appellate Courts, styled respectively: “ The Court of Appeals” and “ The Superior Court,” with jurisdictions provided and regulated by law, and said other Courts established, or to be estab- lished by this Constitution, or by the Gen- eral Assembly, which shall be inferior to said Appellate Courts. The Judges of “The Court of Appeals” shall be four in num- ber, and the Judges of “ The Superior Court” shall be three in number, all to be elected from Ap ellate and Superior Court Districts, to be esignated and established in the Constitution. But no person shall be eligible to said ofiice unless he shall be at least thirty-five years old, and unless he shall have been a racticing attorney for at least ten years. he salaries of the Judges of said Courts shall be fixed by the General 14 RESLOUTION S. MoNday,] QUICKSALL—SACHS. [September 20 . Assembly, but at not less than five thou- sand dollars per annum. The Judges of said Courts shall be selected for the term of fifteen vears, and shall be ineligible to hold office as Judge of either of said Courts for more than one full term. Referred to Committee on Judicial De- partment and Court of Appeals. To the end that the crowded condition of the dockets of the Circuit Courts of this Commonwealth may be relieved, and in or- der that litigants may be insured a speedy trial, the following is recommended to the Committee on County Courts: Impose upon County Courts the trial of all criminal cases. Merge into one the offices of County Attorney and Common- wealth’s Attorney, by this means securing a tribunal in each county for the trial of criminals, and allowing the Circuit Courts to give their time to the trial of civil cases. Referred to Committee on County Courts. Mr. PUGH introduced a resolution which was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: WHEREAS, There is no adequate provis— ion of law looking to the reformation of youthful criminals in this Commonwealth; therefore, be it Res'lved, That the Committee on Crimes, Punishment and Criminal Procedure be di- rected to inquire into, and make special report to the Convention, touching the expediency of establishing a reformatory institution for the restraint, correction and proper training of all persons under sixteen years of age who shall have been convicted of high crimes and misdemeanors. Referred to Committee on Crimes, Pun- ishments and Criminal Procedure. Mr. QUICKSALL. duce some resolutions: , The Reading Clerk read the resolutions, as follows : Resolved. 1. That article 2 and section 13 of the present Constitution be amended so as to read: The number of Representatives shall be sixty, and the number of Senators shall be twenty. And section 14. At every apportionment of representa- tion the State shall be laid off into twenty Senatorial Districts, which shall be so form- ed as to contain, as near as may be, an equal number of qualified voters, and so that no county shall be divided in the for- mation of a Senatorial District; and where I desire to intro- l two or more counties compose a district, they shall be adjoining. 2. That whereas, there has been in the past a great amount of litigation growing out of the unsettled condition of land titles in Eastern Kentucky, the Legislative Com-- mittee is hereby requested to examine closely into the nature of the compact with Virginia, our mother State, and report a clause in this Constitution that will secure our people in the right of property, with- out trenching upon or infringing said com- pact with Virginia,.by requiring all parties claiming lands under said Virginia grants in large bodies, to come forward, within a period of two years after the adoption of‘ this Constitution, and close up the lines to said lands, pay all taxes that have accrued thereon to the State of Kentucky, and es- tablish their title to same, or be forever barred thereafter, by the adoption of this Constitution. 3. And that said compact with Virginia be made part and parcel of this Constitu- tion. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolve/1’, 1. That no foreign corporation or syndicate be allowed to acquire title to land In larger bodies than is strictly neces- sary to the transaction of the business of said corporation or syndicate. Resolved, 2. That no subject of any King, Prince, or foreign power be permitted to acquire title to land in this State, except for actual settlement; and then in no larger bodies than three hundred acres. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. MORRIS A. SACHS introduced the following resolutions, which were read by the Reading Clerk to the Convention, and ordered to be referred to the several Com- mittees named. Resolved, That section 37, article 2, of the present Constitution be amended by adding thereto “and no law shall be amended or revised by reference to its title only, but in such case the act as revised, or section as. amended, shall be re-enacted and published at length.” Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Maxed, That section 24, article 2, of the- present Constitution be amended by strik- ing out the words “two-thirds” and insert-~ - RESOLUTIONS. 15 Monday,] SPALDING—STRAUS. [September 20. ing in lieu thereof the words “three- fourths.” Referred to Committee on Legislative’ Department. Resolved, That article 2 of the present Constitution be extended so as to include the following, viz: Sec. 41. All existing charters or grants of special or exclusive privileges, under which a. bona fide organization shall not have taken place and business been commenced in good faith, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall thereafter have no validity. Sec. 42. The General Assembly shall pass no special act conferring corporate powers, except for charitable, educational, penal or reformatory pnrposes, where the corpora- tions created are to be and remain under the patronage and control of the State. Sec. 43. The General Assembly shall pro- vide by general laws for the organization of cities (which may be classified). and in- corporated towns and restrict their power of taxation, assessment, borrowing money and contracting debts, so as to prevent the abuse of such power. Sec. 44. Corporations may be formed un- der general laws, which laws may, from time to time, be altered or repealed. The General Assembly shall have the power to alter, revoke or annul any charter of incor- poration now existing and revokable at the adoption of this Constitution, or any that may hereafter be created, whenever in their opinion it may he injurious to the cit- izens of this State, in such manner, how- ever, that no injustice shall be done to the corporators. Referred to Committee on Corporations. Resolved, That in revising this Constitu- tion the word “Common,” as used in con- nection with “Schools,” be dropped, and instead thereof insert the WOI'C “Public,” making the whole read “Public Schools.” Referred to Committee on Education. Moved, That section 1, article 8, of the present Constitution be amended by strik- ing out the following, viz: “And I do fur- ther solemnly swear (or affirm) that since the adoption of the present Constitution, I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons, within this State or out of it, with citizens of this State; nor have sent or accepted a challenge to fight .a duel with deadly weapons with a citizen of this State; nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, or aided or assisted any person thus offending.” Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Moved, That section 15, article 8, of the Constitution, be omitted, and in lieu thereof, the following, viz: 1. In all elections by the people the vet- ing shall be by ballot. 2. All elections by persons in a represen- tative capacity shall be viva voce. 3. The General Assembly shall provide by law, in cases of elections by the people, a system of secret voting by ballots ofli- cially prepared, numbered and distributed. 4. The General Assembly shall provide by law for the registration of voters in cities and counties having a population of more than one hundred thousand inhabi- tants; and may provide general registra- tion laws for the whole State or any part thereof. Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. SPALDING’S name was called, but he requested that he should be passed for the present. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the gentleman’s name will be passed for the present. Mr. STRAUS. I desire to introduce two resolutions. The Reading Clerk read the resolutions, as follows: Resolved, That the Constitution framed by this Covention should contain a provis- ion requiring all banking capital in this State to pay the same rate of taxation-— State, county, municipal and district—that may be imposed upon other property. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con- vention that all Councilmen and Aldermen which may be elected to govern the affairs of any city or town in this Commonwealth, shall be elected from the cities or towns at large, and that the ward system, so far as it pertains to the election of such officers, shall be abolished and prohibited. Referred to Committee on Municipalities. Mr. SWANGO. I desire to introduce a resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: 16 RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] SwANeo. [September 20. Resolved, That no county, district, city or town become a stockholder in any com- pany, association or corporation, or obtain or appropriate money for, or shall loan its credit to, any corporation or association in a greater amount than three per centum of the assessed value of the real estate in said county district, city or town, and then only by a vote of the people of said county, dis- trict, city or town: Provided, That no per- son shall be allowed to vote on a proposition for any county, district, city or town to be- come a stockholder in any company, asso- ciation or corporation, or to obtain or ap- propriate money for, or to loan its credit to, any corporation, association, institution or individual, unless the voter is at the time a free—holder. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Resolved. 1. A Circuit Court shall be es- tablished in each county now existing, or which may hereafter be erected in this Commonwealth. 2. The jurisdiction of said court shall be and remain as now established, hereby giv- ing to the General Assembly the power to change or alter it. 8. The right to appeal or sue out a writ of error to the Court of Appeal, shall re- main as it now exists until altered by law, hereby giving to the General Assembly the power to change, alter or modify said right. ;;4. That it shall be the duty of the Gen- eral Assembly at its first session, and from time to time thereafter, to divide the State into convenient judicial districts, so as to assign to each Judge, as nearly as practica- ble, thirty-two weeks of judicial labor per annum. 5. They shall, at the same time that the judicial districts are laid off, direct elections to be held in such districts to elect a Judge for said district, and shall prescribe in what manner the elections shall be con- ducted. The first election of Judges of the Circuit Court shall take place on the first Monday in August, 1892, and after- wards on the first Monday in August in every eighth year thereafter. 6. All persons qualified to vote for mem- bers of the General Assembly in eachdis- trict, shall have the right to vote for Judges. 7. N 0 person shall be elgible as Judge of the Circuit Court who is not a citizen of the United States, a resident of the district for which he may be a candidate two years next preceding'lhis election, at least thirty years of age, and who has not been a prac- ticing lawyer eight years. 8. The Judges of the Circuit Court shall hold their offices for the term of eight years from the day of their election, and shall not be eligible for the succeedingv eight years after the expiration of the term for which he shall have been elected. They shall be commissioned by the Governor. and continue in office until their successors be qualified, but shall be removed from office in the same manner as the Judges of the Court of Appeals; and the removal of a Judge from his District shall vacate his ofiice. 9, The Judges of the Circuit Courts shall, at stated times, receive for their ser- vices an adequate compensation, to be fixed by law, which shall be equal and uniform throughout the State, and which shall not be diminished during the term for which they were elected. 10. If a vacancy shall occur in the ofiice of Judge of the Circuit Court, the Gover- nor shall issue a writ of election to fill such vacancy for the residue of the term: Pro- vided, That if the unexpired term be less than one year, the Governor shall appoint a Judge to fill such vacancy. 11. The General Assembly shall provide by law for holding Circuit Courts when, from any cause, the Judge shall fail to at- tend, or if in attendance, can not properly preside. 12. A Circuit Court shall be held at least twice a year by the Judges of each Circuit, in every county wherein a Circuit Court now is or may hereafter be estab- lished. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. WEST introduced the following resolution : WHEREAS, It appears that a great num- ber of people in other States believe that the Superior Court of Kentucky is a higher court than the Court of Appeals; Resolved, 1. That the name of the Court of Appeals be changed to Supreme Court, and the Judges of said Court be elected as they now are. 2. That the Common Pleas Court be en'- tirely abolished, and the number of Circuit Courts be increased to a suflieient number to do all the business that the Common Pleas Court now does. 3. That the office of Commonwealth’s At- torney be abolished, and that each County Attorney by virtue of his office be made Commonwealth’s Attorney for the county in which he resides. RESOLUTIONS. 17 Saturday,] WHITAKER—WILLIA Ms—Woon [September 20, 4. The Judges of the Court of Appeals to be elected for twelve years; the t ircult Judges to be elected for eight years; the County Attorneys to be elected for eight years, and none of the above mentioned oflicers to be their successor. Referred to the Committee on Judicial Department and Court of Appeals. Mr. WHITAKER introduced the fol- lowing resolution: Resolved, That this Convention ought to require the Legislative Department of the State Government to pass laws subjecting the movable property and rolling stock of railroad corporations to levy and sale for the payment of judgments obtained against them. . Referred to Committee on Legislative Department.’ Mr. WILLIAMS introdued the follow- ing resolutions: Believing the corruption of elections can be greatly remedied by changing the system of voting; therefore be it Resolved, That the system of voting be by secret ballot, similar to the Australian ballot system of voting, and that all elec- tions'be held on the first Tuesday of No- vember. Referred to Committee on Elections. and knowl- difl'used gen- that wisdom Believing as virtue, edge, as _ well crally among the body of the people being necessary, and that the people of Kentucky should give more attention to education than is given; therefore be it Resolved, That every parent, guardian or other person in the State of Kentucky, hav- ing charge or control of any child or chil- dren, between the ages of eight and fifteen years, shall be required to send such child or children to some institution of learning for at least twelve weeks in each school year; at least six weeks of which shall be consecutive, unless it be shown that such child or children’s bodily or mental condi- tion is such as to prevent its attendance at school or application to study. Referred to Committee on Education. Mr. WOOD introduced the following resolution : Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con- vention that the Judges of Court of Ap- ‘pea‘s, Superior Court, Circuit Courts and County Courts, and Commonwealth's At- torneys and County Attorneys, hereafter elected, shall be ineligible for the succeeding term for which they shall have been elected. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Resolved, That the word “two,” in second line, of section 2, article 2, Constitution ‘be stricken out, and insert in lieu thereof the word “ four; ” and at the session next after the first apportionment under this Consti- tution, the Representatives shall be divided by lot, as equally as may be, into two classes. The seats of the first class shall be vacated at the end of two years from the day of election; and those of the sec- ond class at the end of four years, so that one-half shall be chosen every two years. Amend section 13 of said article by striking out the words “ one hundred,” and insert in lieu thereof the word “ fifty.” That the session of the General Assembly shall not extend beyond sixty days, except the first session after this Constitution goes into effect, and that session shall not con- tinue beyond one hundred days. That the members of the General Assembly shall severally receive from the public treasury for their services a salary of six hundred dollars for their full term of oflice, and mileage and stationary, as now provided by law. ' Amend article 2, section 13, by striking out the word “thirty-eight,” and inserting in lieu thereof “twenty.” Referred to'Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. WOOLFOLK introduced the fol- lowing resolutions: Resolved, That in trials by jury of all civil and misdemeanor case a verdict of three-fourths of the jury shall. be suflicient and lawful. Referred to Committe on Judiciary. Resolved, That no clause shall be en- grafted in the Constitution fixing qualifica- tions for or the eligibility of County Judges, except as now provided in section 32, arti- cle 4 of the present Constitution. Referred to Committee on County Court-st Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con-- vention that no voter shall be qualified to- vote upon any proposition to levy a pro - erty-tax, unless said voter shall at the time own dollars’ worth of property sub- ject to such proposed tax. ~ Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. 18 RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] PHELPS—MCDERMOTT—SPALDING. [September 20 . Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con- vention that a clause shall be engrafted in the Constitution directing the Legislature to pass a law at its next session after the adoption of the new Constitution, requiring all railroads now in operation in this State, and all that may be hereafter operated in this State, to provide in every passenger train running over said roads, apartments for the colored passengers separate and apart from the apartments provided for white passengers. Said apartments to be equally good and comfortable one as the other, and by said law make it the duty of the officers and employes of said railroads to see that the parties occupy the apart- ments respectively as herein indicated. Referred to Committee on Railroads. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. Hr. President: On yesterday the gentleman from Hardin county gave notice that on to-day he would call up an amendment to the rules pro- posed by him. In the afternoon he re- ceived a call to come home on some busi- ness, and requested me to ask that the time for that be extended until Monday, and to further request the Convention to give him leave of absence. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the requests as indicated by the gentleman from the First District? The Chair hears none, and such requests are granted. The Chair will new order the names of Delegates to whom were grml leave to have their names called at the end of the list to be called for resolutions. Mr. McDERMOTT. I ask that mine be extended until Monday, because my work in the Committee on Elections interferes. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the time is extended. Mr. SPALDING offered the following _ resolution : . Resolved, That the following be incorpo- rated intothe article on the Judicial De- partment, and be a part of the.new Consti- tution, to-wit: That Judges of all Courts whose salaries are paid by the State, in whole or in part, shall, at stated times, receive for their ser- vices an adequate compensation to be fixed by law, which shall be equal and uniform throughout the State, and which shall not be diminished during the time for which they were elected, except for such neglect of duty as may be designated by law; but nothing herein shall be construed to pre- vent counties or municipalities making pro- visions out of their own treasury for such additional compensation as may be pre- scribed by law. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts Mr. CARROLL. Mr. President, I of- fered a resolution yesterday that, under the rules, laid over one day, and I desire to have that resolution called up and acted upon. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the request of the gentleman? The resolution will be reported by the Secretary. The Reading Clerk read the resolution introduced by Mr. Carroll on yesterday as follows: Resolved, That before any provision of the proposed new Constitution adopted by a Standing Committee is acted upon by the Convention, or a Committee of the Whole, one hundred and twenty-five copies thereof shall be printed by order of the Commit- tee, and distributed among the members of the Convention. The question being taken upon the adop— tion of said resolution, the same was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Orders of the Day are now in order. They were sus- pended by the operation of the ‘special or- der made by the Convention yesterday, but are now in order, and the Clerk will please report the first thing in the Orders of the Day. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the resolution offered by Mr. Jonson, as fol- lows: Resolved, That, upon the arrival of the hour for calling for resolutions, the roll of counties shall be called; and, upon calling of the counties, each Delegate may intro- duce two (2) resolutions; and that the call of counties be continued until each Dele- gate shall have an opportunity to offer res- olutions. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the resolution just read. Mr. JONSON. Mr. President: The RESOLUTION S. 19 Saturday,] CLARDY—JONSON—WHITAKER. [September 20. flood has to some extent exhausted itself, yet I believe that it is necessary to adopt this resolution in anticipation that gentle- men will want hereafter to introduce reso- lutions. Quite a number have not as yet offered any. A spirit of liberality has been manifested by all the members to indulge everybody in this direction.‘ I believe it ought to be continued. My first object in offering this resolution, has been in the main accomplished by the call asked for yesterday, but I believe that there may be some necessity for it yet. I see no disad- vantage that can arise from its adoption. There were some exceptions or objections to one clause when it was offered, that it permitted the offering by one Delegate of no more than two resolutions. Ibelieve that after the experience we went through yesterday, that will be very heart- ily approved of to-day in the event that this resolution is adopted. I hope the res- olution will be adopted. " Mr. CLARDY. I would like to offer an amendment. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the amendment. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Clardy’s amendment, as follows: Amend by striking out “two,” and insert- ing “their.” The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment. Mr. CLARDY. Mr. President, my ob- ‘ject in doing that was this: When we do have to receive resolutions from a Delegate, we might as well read all he wants to intro- duce, like they have been doing up to this time. They may have two, or they may have three, and they-may be somewhat tied together. If we just say read two and no more, it seems to me it will be losing time, and it seems to me better to let a member, when his time comes, offer all his views at one reading and get through with him. It seems to me better to strike out “ two,” and say “,read the resolutions.” My object in _ making the amendment is, that a member may present all his views at one time. Mr. SACHS. I simply want to call the attention of the gentleman to the fact that if you limit the number of resolutions, you. may simply force the members of the Con- vention who desire to introduce a number of resolutions to exercise their ingenuity by way of forcing two or three into one, and what might be considered separate resolu- tions. ' Mr. J ONSON. I will accept the amend- ment proposed by the gentleman from Christian. The PRESIDENT. The amendment offered by the gentleman from Christian is accepted. Mr. WHITAKER. Mr. President, that amendment being accepted, I can see no reason for the passage of the resolution at all. It just changes from a call of Dele- gates alphabetically to a call by counties alphabetically,;for which I see no reason. A Delegate now, as the resolution has been passed, can offer as many resolutions at one time as he chooses. Every member of the Convention has now been called on, and in a way that is better than by any other reso- lution, and I think the Convention had bet- ter stay where it is now, because each mem-_- ber has offered his resolutions. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, the slight- est amendment to our rules ought to have the fullest consideration from this body Our rules ought not to be amended every day. We have now ordered that the Prin- ter should place upon our desks the rules that have already been adopted, and we have ordered them to be made a part of our proceedings. I therefore move you, sir, that this may have the fullest consideration; that it be referred to the Committee on Rules, and if that Committee reports such a rule as being necessary, then it can come again before the House. And the vote being taken upon Mr. Pet- tit’s motion, the same was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Report, Mr. Secre- 20 - RESOLUTIONS. Saturday] MACK OY—PETTIT— Br RKHEAD.__ [September 20 , tary, the next thing in the Orders of the Day. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, I move you to suspend the rules and adopt the resolu- tion that I now send to the Clerk’s desk. The PRESIDENT. The resolution will be read for information. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Pettit’s res- olution, as follows. ‘ Resolved, by this Sovereign Conven- tzov, That the Act of the last General Assembly, entitled “An act to call a (‘on- vention to adopt, amend or change the Constitution of the State of Kentucky,” approved May 3, 1890, is hereby reafiirmed, in so far as “that before any Constitution agreed upon by said Convention shall take effect or become operative, the same shall be submitted to the qualified voters of this Commonwealth, after at least ninety days’ notice, and ratified by a majority of those voting.” Mr. MACKOY. I move that it be re- ferred to the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. It is not yet before the Convention. The gentleman moves to suspend the rules in order to take up the resolution just read. Mr. PETTIT. Upon that I demand the ayes and noes. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Mr. President, is this vote upon the suspension of the rules‘? Mr. PETTIT. Is it not upon the adop- tion of the resolution? Don’t that suspend the rules ? Mr. FARMER. Will the Clerk read that again before the vote is taken‘? The Clerk read the resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Chair mis- understood the gentleman’s motion. The gentleman’s motion is to suspend the rules and pass the resolution. This vote, then, is substantially upon the passage of the resolution. Mr. COKE. I ask a division of the question. The PRESIDENT. This is a motion to suspend the rules. The Chair is under the impression that that motion does not admit of division or of amendment. The question is upon the suspension of the rules and the passage of the resolution. Mr. CARROLL. Is the resolution at all before the House until the rules have been suspended‘? The PRESIDENT. No sir; but is the motion to suspend the rules and pass the resolution, but it requires a two-thirds vote to do so. In this case the resolution is not liable to debate or amendment. Mr. MACKOY. I would like to ask for information. Whether in the shape in which the resolution has been put, is it in order to refer it to the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. No sir; the resolu-- tion is now before the Convention. The Secretary will please call the roll. Mr. SACHS. (During the roll-call). By way of explanation of my vote, I have to say that it is an unsettled question in my mind, based upon what Mr. Cooley says in his work on Constitutional Limitations, as- to whether or not we have to literally follow the act calling this Convention. I am not prepared to decide that question now, and I therefore vote no. The result of the vote was announced, as- follows: YEAS—25. Amos, D. C. Forgy, J. M. Birkhead B. T. Hendrick, W. J. Boles, S. H. James, A. D. Bourland, H. R Lewis, W. W. Brummal. J. M. McElroy, W. J. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, Laban T Chambers, G. D. Muir, J. W. Clardy, J. D. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Farmer, H. H. Pettit, Thomas S. Quicksall. J. E. Smith, W. Scott Williams,L.P.V. NAYS—55. Hopkins, F. A. Jonson, Jep. C. Johnston. P. P. Kirwan, E. E. Lassing, L. W. Lewis, J. W. Mackoy, W. H. Allen, C. T. Applegate, Leslie. Askew, J. F Auxier, A. J. Ayres, W. W. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. RESOLUTIONS. 21 Saturday,] CARROLL. [September 20. Bennett, B. F. Martin, W. H. Hogg, S. P. Mr. President Clay. Blackburn. James McDermott, E. J. Holloway, J. W. Blackwell, Joseph Miller, Will. ABSENT—20. Brents, J. A. Montgomery, J. F. Allen, M. K. May, John S. Brown, J. S. Nunn, T. J. Berkele, Wm. MeHenry, Henry D. Buckner, S. B. O’Hara, R. H. Bronston, C. J. Miller, W. H. Carroll, John D. Parsons, Rob’t. T. Burnam, Curtis F. Ramsey, W. R. Coke, J. Guthrie. Petrie, H. C. English, Sam. E Smith, H. H. Cox, H. Phelps. John L. Forrester, J. G. Twyman, I. W. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, Zack Goebel, William Washington, Geo. Elmore, T. J. Pugh, Sam’l J. Jacobs, R. P. West. J. F. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Kennedy, Hanson Wood, J. M. Funk, J. T. Sachs. Morris A. Knott, J. Proctor - Young, B. H. G161?’ Dudley 11L S‘tpaldms, 1- A- Mr. CARROLL. I move that this Con- gg; 131121333133: vention adjourn till Monday morning at 11 Harris, Geo. C. Trusdell, George. 0 clock- _ _ _ Hines, J. S_ Whitaker, Emery And the vote belng taken on said motion, Hines, Thomas H. Woolfolk, J. F. same was decided in the affirmative. gamma" guard. —- K E N T U C K Y —— CCDNS‘lLLLL' U ‘.L'lQNAL CONVENTICDN- Vol. 1.] FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 22, 1890. [N0. 11 Monday,] MCDEBMOTT. [September 22. The Convention was called to order at 11 o’clock by the PRESIDENT (Mr. Clay), and the proceedings opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Blayney. The Journal of Saturday’s proceedings was read. Mr. STRAUS. The Journal contains an error, in that it says I asked for leave of absence. Mr. LASSING. It says also that I asked leave of absence for myself. It was for the Delegate from Campbell I asked the leave. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will cor- rect the Journal in those regards, and, with those corrections, the Journal stands ap- proved. Before proceeding further, the Chair will lay before the Convention the following invitation, which the Secretary will please report. The invitation was read, as follows: FRANKFORT, KY., September 22, 1890. To the President, Ofiieers and Members of the Constitutional Convention : You are respectfully invited to attend our Emancipation Proclamation anniver- sary at the First Baptist Church, on Clin- ton street, just opposite the Kentucky Mid- land Depot. Exercises to commence at 8.15 o’clock, Monday night, September 22. Your presence would be highly appre- ciated. Respectfully, REV. EUGENE Evans, Pastor and Manager. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order is petitions. Are there any petitions? not, Rep orts from Standin g Committees; and the Secretary will please call the Standing Committees in their order. Mr, MCDERMCTT. Before that is done, I ask leave to introduce my resolu- tion. The PRESIDENT. I believe you did get permission on Saturday. The Clerk will report the resolution. Resolution read, as follows: WHEREAS, The very life of the Repub- lic depends upon pure, fair and dignified elections, and no part of the government can be satisfactory until the voice of the people is allowed clear expression at the polls, and to the end that “ election day ” may be set apart as a day of great import, and that the exercise of suffrage shall be exalted in public esteem, and that our election system may be symmetrical, and that its provision may be thoroughly and steadily enforced, beit , Resolved, That the following provisions be substituted for all provisions on the same subject 1n the present Constitution : Snfi'rage and Elections. I. Every male citizen of the United States of the age of twenty-one years, who has resided in this State one year and in the precinct in which he offers to vote sixty days next preceding the election, and who is registered as provided herein, shall be a voter in said precinct, and not else- where; but the following persons are ex- cepted, and shall not have the right to vote: 1. Such persons as the General Assembly may7 exclude from ofiice and suffrage for conviction of any infamous crime or high misdemeanor. ‘ 2. Persons who, at the time of the regis- tration or the election, are being kept at ‘any poor-house or asylum at public ex- ,pense; and persons who, by the judgment of a Court, have been confined in any ; public prison, jail, work-house or peniten- RESOLUTIONS. Monday] MCDERMOTT. [September 22 , tiary within one year preceding the regis- tration or election. 3. Idiots and insane persons. II. The General Assembly shall provide for the registration of all persons entitled to vote, and only persons thus registered shall have the right to vote. The mode and manner of registering voters shall be regulated by the General Assembly. III. No person shall lose his residence in this State by reason of his absence on business of the United States or of this State. No soldier, seaman or marine, in the army or navy ot the United States, shall be deemed a resident of this State in consequence of being stationed within the same. 1 l l | l l | l l l 1 IV. All elections by the voters of the ‘ State, orof any division thereof, or of any municipality, shall be byfsecret official 3 ’ knowledge and consent, by other persons. ballot. The General Assembly shall pro- vide by law for the preparation of the ballots by public authority before the elec- . tion, and for the furnishing of the same to the voters free of charge at the polls, as the voters severally apply to vote, and for the marking of the same by the voters severally, in private, at the polls, so as to indicate the will of each voter. The word “elections ” in this section includes the . decision of questions submitted to the ? voters, as well as the choice of ofiicers by I ‘ Convention that may hereafter be called, them. Except as otherwise expressly pro- vided in this Constitution , the General Assembly shall have full power to provide by law the mode of voting at elections and of ascertaining the result of elections, and of issuing certificates or commissions of election to all persons entitled thereto. V. Not more than one election each year shall be held in this State, or in any city, town, district or county thereof. All elections of State. county, city, town or district ofiicers shall be held on that day of the week and on. that day of the month on which elections of members of the House of Representatives of the United States are held; but no ofiicer of any city, or town, or county. or of any subdivision thereof, may be elected in the same year in which the members of the House of Rep- resentatives of the United States are ‘elected. District‘ or State ofl‘ieers, includ- ing members of the Senate and House of Representatives ofthis State, may be elect- ed either in the same year in which city, town, or county officers are elected, or in the same year .in which membersof the House of Representatives of the United States are elected. All elections by the l people shall be held between 7 A. M. and 3 P. M. The day on which elections are- held shall be a legal holiday. VI. Voters in all cases, except treason, felony, breach or surety of the peace, shall be privileged from arrest durirg their attendance at elections and while they are going to and returning from the same. VII. Every person shall be disqualified from holding any ofiice of trust or profit for the term for which he shall have been elected, who shall be convicted of having given, or offered, or promised any bribe, or treat, or any other thing of value to pro- cure his election. VII. The General Assembly shall by law provide suitable means for depriving of ofiice all persons who have been elected thereto by the aid of money, spent by themselves, or spent for them, with their The General Assembly may, by uniform laws, regulate the expenditures of candi- dates in their canvass for a public ofiice. IX. The General Assembly shall, by a general law, provide for the prompt and impartial trial of all contests over elections, and for determining the qualifications, elections and returns of all officers. This shall apply to all ofiicers oi the State, in- cluding members of the General Assembly, and the members of any Constitutional under the provisions of this Constitution. X. Vacancies in all ofiices shall be filled by election or appointment, in such manner as the General Assembly may determine; but any elections ordered shall conform to the provisions of section V. hereof. XI. The General Assembly shall provide for the appointment by the Governor, with or without the approval of the Senate, as the General Assembly may deem best, of an overseer of elections in each district in which a member of the House of Repre-- sentatives of the United States is elected in this State; and it shall be the duty of said overseers to secure the selection of good ofiicers of election and the enforce- ment of all election laws. Said overseers may, in writing, report to the Governor for transmission to the General Assembly, any suggestions or amendments deemed necessary for the perfection of our election laws. No person who holds any other public office, or who, within two years last past has held any other public ofiice, shall' be- eligible to this office; and any person who accepts this office shall not be eligible- to any other ofiice in this State or in any RESOLUTIONS. 3 Monday,] KNOTT. 1 [September 22 , city, town, district or county thereof, within two years after he ceases to hold said oflice of overseer. In all other re- spects his powers, duties, qualifications, term of office and compensation shall be determined by the General Assembly. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will call the roll of Standing Committees. The roll was called, but no reports made. The PRESIDENT. Now please call Special Committees. This was done, but no reports made. The PRESIDENT. Resolutions now in order. Mr. KNOTT. I desire to submit a res— olution looking to a general organization of the Judicial Department. While I have no pride in having it read, if any gentle- man desires it read, I ask permission to do the reading myself, as the Clerk will, probably, have great difficulty in decipher- ing my writing. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, thexgentleman may read his resolution. Mr. KN OTI‘ read his resolution, as fol- lows: WHEREAS, It is of the highest conse- quence to the happiness and welfare of a free people, not only that the courts, which are established to administer its laws, should constitute a uniform and harmoni- ous system, but that they should be com- posed of competent and upright judges, who should at all times be removed as far as possible from such influences as may unduly bias their judgments, or control their official conduct; therefore, Resolved, That the Judiciary of this Commonwealth be organized on the fol- lowing scheme: The Judicial Department. 1. The judicial power of this Common- wealth, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution, shall be vested in 9. Su- preme Court, Circuit Courts, County Courts and such inferior courts as may be, ’ 0 from time to time, established by law. are The Supreme Court. 2. The Supreme Court shall consist of a Chief Justice, woo shall Le appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and four Associate .1 l1$tlC( s, who shall be elected by the quali- fied electors of the Commonwealth at large, as hereinafter provided. 3. The Chief Justice, and each of his Associate J ustice s, shall hold his office for the term of twelve years, unless sooner removed for incompetency or misbehavior, and shall receive for his services a compen- sation to be fixed by law, which shall not te diminished during the term for which he shall have been appointed or elected. But no person shall be appointed or elected to either of said oflices except a male citizen of the United States, not less than thirty- five nor more than sixty years of age, who shall have been a regularly licensed lawyer practicing in the courts of record of this Ctmmonwealth for at least ten years or whose service as a judge of some of said courts when added to the time he shall have practiced law as aforesaid shall equal or exceed ten years, and who shall have been an actual resident of the State at least five years next preceding such ap- pointment or election : Provided, That the term of one of the Associate Justices, who shall be elected at the first election which shall be had under this Constitution, shall expire at the end of three years, that of another at the end of six years, that of another at the end of nine years, and that of the remaining one, at the end of twelve years from the date of sa d election; and the length of time to be served by each shall be determined between them by lot immediately upon the first meeting of said Court; and at the expiration of each of said terms as aforesaid, an Asso- ciate J ustice shall be elected by the qualified electors of the Common- wealth for the term of twelve years, so that one Associate Justice of said Court shall be chosen every three years: Provided, further, That no person who shall have been once elected as an Asso- ciaie Justice of said Court for the full term of twelve years, shall again be eligible to that office: And provided further, That, if a vacancy shall occur in the office of As- sociate Justice of said Court at any time within four years next preceding the expi- ration of the regular term thereof, the Governor, by and with the advice and con- sent of the Senate, shall appoint some one possessing the qualifications hereinbe- fore prescribed to fill said oflice for the re- mainder of such unexpired term; but if such vacancy‘ shall occur more than four years before the expiration of the regular term of said ofiice, the same shall be filled by such person, possessing the qualifications RESOLUTIONS. Monday,] KNOTT. [September 22 . ,_ aforesaid, as shall be chosen by the quali- fied electors of the Commonwealth, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. 4. Said Court shall hold its sessions at the seat of government; but, if it shall become necessary, in case of invasion, in- surrection, or pestilence, it may adjourn to, or meet and transact its business at, such other place in the State as it may deem most expedient for the time being. 5. Said Court shall have appellate juris- diction, co-extensive with the Common- wealth, in all cases of law and equity; and the final judgments and decrees of inferior Courts should be brought before it on writ of error, or by appeal, in such manner, and subject to such limitations as to the amount or value of the thing in controversy, as may be prescribed by law; and it shall also have power to issue writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, guo warramfo. certiorari, super- cedeas, prohtbitz'on, or other remedial pro- cess, and to hear and determine the same, as may be provided by law. 6. A majority of said Court shall consti- tute a quorum; but no judgment, afiirming or reversing a final judgment or decree of a lower Court in any case, shall be valid, unl>ss concurred in by at least three Jus- tices of the Supreme Court; and no Justice of said Court shall sit on the hearing, or take part in the determination, of any mat- ter pending before it in which he shall be interested, or in which he shall have acted as counsel, or on the trial of which in an interior Court he shall have presided as judge, nor where any party thereto shall be connected with him either by afiinity or consanguinity within such degree as shall be prescribed by law; and in case any Justice of said Court shall be disqualified to sit on the hearing of any such matter, the Chief Justice shall certify the fact to the Governor, who shall immediately ap- point some other person possessing the qualifications hereinbe‘ore prescribed to take the place of such Justice in the hear- ing and determination thereof. 7. Saii Court shall appoint its own Clerk and such other ofiicers necessary to the proper conduct of its business, as shall be authorized by law, who shall respectively hold their offi:es for the term of twelve years, unless sooner removed by said Court for incompetency, neglect of duty or other misbehavior. Referred to Committee on Judicial De- partment and Court of Appeals. The Circuit Court. 8. There shall be a Court in each county now existing, or which shall hereafter be established in this Commonwealth, which shall be known as the Circuit Court; at least two regular terms of which shall be held therein during each judicial year, at such times as shall be fixed by law. It shall be a Court of record, and shall have original jurisdiction co-extensive with the county, in all cases, civil and criminal, not otherwise provided for in this Constitution, or such laws as may be enacted in pursu- ance thereof, together with such appellate jurisdiction as shall be conferred upon it by statute; and may issue, hear and determine all process necessary for the proper exer- cise and just enforcement of its lawful authority. Its jurisdiction, however, both original and appe'late, shall be subject to such regulations and changes, enlargement or restriction, not inconsistent with the pro- visions of this Constitution, as the Legis- lature may, from time to time, prescribe by law. 9. The General Assembly shall, dur- ing its first session after the adoption of this Constitution, lay off the counties of the Commonwealth into twenty dis‘ tricts, of which the county of Jefierson shall be one, having due regard to popula- tion, contiguity, and tha amount of ju- ridical business in each, so as to equalize the judicial labor among them as nearly as possible, in each of which districts, ex- cept as hereinafter provided, there shall be e‘ected, by the qualified voters thereof, a Judge, to be styled the Judge of the Cir- cuit Court; but no person shall be elected to that ofiice except a male citizen of the United States, not less than thirty nor more than sixty-fur years of age, who shall have been a practicing lawyer in the courts of record of this Commonwealth for at least eight years, or whose service as J udge of a court of record, when added to the number of years he shall have prac- ticed law as aforesaid, shall equal or exceed that period, and who shall have been a resident of the State for at least four years and of the district at least one year next preceding the date of his election: Pro- vided, That there shall be elected in the county of Jefferson three Judges of the Circuit Court, each of whom shall possess all the qualifications above prescribed, and the Circuit Court of said county shall be divided into three divisions, in the first of which alone the criminal jurisdiction of said Court shall be exercised, and between RESOLUTIONS. 5 Monday,] KNoTT. [September 22 . the other two of which the civil causes in said Court shall be apportioned for hearing and determination, so as to equalize, as nearly as may be, the labors to be per- formed in each; which apportionment shall be made from time to time by the two Judges presiding in said divisions, as the business therein pending may require. 10. Judges of the Circuit Court shall hold their oflices for the term of eight years, and until their successors shall be elected and qualified, unless sooner re- moved for incompetency or misconduct; and shall receive for their services a com- pensation to be fixed by law, which shall not be diminished during the term for which they shall have been elected. They shall also have jlll'lSdlCtlOl'l co-extensive with their respective circuits, as hereinafter provided for, to issue, hear and determine writs of habeas corpus, and such other remedial process as may be prescribed by law; but no Judge of said Court shall preside in any cause in the event of which he shall be interested, or where any parties thereto shall be related to him by affinity or consanguinity within such degree as shall be prescribed by law, nor in which he shall have acted as counsel for either party, nor in which he shall have presided as Judge in a lower Court, 11. The Legislature shall fix the time ior holding the regular terms of the Circuit Court in each county, and deter- mine b law the number of days which shall be allotted to each: Provided, That the fall term of the first court to be held in each district shall commence on the first Monday in September in each year, which shall be the beginning of the juri- dicial year. 12. The Legislature shall, by law, divide the several districts into five cir- cuits, having due regard to contiguity, population and the amount of judicial business in each; and it shall be the duty of the Chief Justice of the Su- preme Court, on the first Monday in August of each year, to assign to the Circuit Judges residing in each of said circuits the courts which shall be held by them respectively during the ensuing juridicial year, allotting to each, as near as may be, an equal amount of labor, and tak- ing care that no one Judge shall have a Cir- cuit Court in the same county twice in any one year. And if any Circuit Judge shall willfully refuse or neglect to hold any court thus assigned to him, the Chief Jus- tice may, after ritation to him and a hearing thereon, suspend such Judge from ofiice until the General Assembly at its next meeting shall determine whether such removal shall be permanent or not. In the interim, the Governor shall ap- point some person possessing the quali- fications hl-rrinbefore prescribed, to take the place of such Judge until he shall be restored, or the vacancy caused by his re- moval shall be filled according to law. 13. The Legislature shall prescribe by law in what way vacancies in the oflice of Circuit Judge shall be filled, and for the appointment or election of special Judges to preside, temporarily, in case of the absence, or disqualification, or inability of the Circuit Judge to preside; but the authority of such special Judge shall not extend beyond the term or case for which he is chosen. 14. The Clerk of the Circuit Court shall be elected by the qualified voters of the County. and hold his ofiice for the term of eight years, unless sooner removed for ineompetency or misbehavior, He shall possess such qualifications, and receive such remuneration for his services as may be prescribed by law. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Countv Courts. 15. There shall be in each county which now exists, or which may hereafter be established in this Commonwealth, a Coun- ty C urt, the Judge of which shall be elected by the qualified voters of the county, who shall held his office for the term of six years, and until his successor shall be elected and qualified, unless sooner re- moved for incompetency or misbehavirr; and who shall receive for his services a compensation to be fixed bylaw, which shall not be diminished during the time for WlllCll he shall have been elected ; but no person shall be eligible to said office except a male citizen of the United States, who shall have been a regular practicing lawyer of good standing, in the Courts of record in this Commonwealth, for at least six years, and who shall have been a resi- dent of the State for at least three years, and of the county at least one year next preceding his election: Provided, That there shall be three Judges of the County Court for the County of Jefferson, who shall possess the qualifications, be elected in the manner, and hold their ofiices for the term herein-above prescribed. 16 The several County Courts shall have jurisd‘ction co-extensive with their respec- tive counties, of all matter pertaining to 6 RESOLUTICNS. Monday,] KNOTT—BUCKNER. [September 22. the probate of wills, the granting of letters testamentary and of admlnistration, the appointment of guardians and curators of minors and persons of unsound mind, set- tling the accounts of executors, adminis- trators, guardians and curators, of the binding out, care and control of appren- tices. They shall also have jurisdiction of all civil Qcauses in their respective counties, where the amount involved or value of the thing in controversy. exclusive of interest, shall not exceed five hundred dollars; and ot the trial of misdemeanors and breaches cf the penal law, where the punishment shall not extend beyond fine or imprison- ment in the county jail or both such fineand imprisonment; and all indictments for such ofi'enses which shall be found by the Grand Jury in the Circuit Court, shall be certified by the Clerk, under order of the Judge thereof. to the County Court for trial: 'Provided, That there shall be held not less than four terms of the County Court at the county seat in each county each year for the trial of criminal causes, and the Legislature shall determine how many terms of said court shall be held in each county for the trial of civil causes, and also provide at what time and place the same shall be held. 17. Each county shall be divided as equally as may be into four districts, having due regard to extent of territory and population, in each of which there shall be appointed or elected, in such man- ner as the Legislature may direct by law, one County Commissioner, who shall be a male citizen of the United States, at least twenty-five years of age, and a sober, dis- creet and intelligent housekeeper, of good moral character, residing in the district for which he shall be elected or appointed, who shall hold his office for six years, and until his successor shall be duly elected or appointed and qualified, unless sooner re- _moved for incompetency or misconduct, who shall receive for his services a com- pensation to be fixed by law. 18. Such commissioner shall be the assessor of taxable property in his district, and perform such other duties as may be required of him by law; and the four Commissioners shall, to- gether with the Judge of the County Court, who shall be ex ofiicio president ‘thereof, constitute a Board for the super- vision of assessments, levying of taxes, auditing and allowing claims against the county, and the management generally of the fiscal and administrative affairs of the County, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. The three judges of the County Court of Jefferson county shall each constitute a member of said Board for said county, and shall determine by lot which of them shall be president thereof; and they shall also, from time to‘ time, ap- portion the businesss of said Court among themselves, so as to equalize as'nearly as may be the labors thereof between them. 19. The Clerk of the County Court, who shall also be ea: ofiicz'o clerk of said board, shall be elected by the qualified voters of the county, and hold his office for six years, unless sooner removed for incompetency or misbehavior, and shall possess such qualifi- cations and receive such compensation for his services as may be prescribed by law. Referred Courts. Mr. BUCKNER. I have several reso- lutions to ofi'er. I do not ask their read- inp, unless it be the desire of some Delegate to have them read. I would like to have them referred as indicated. The PRESIDENT. Unless some Dele- gate* desires them read, they will be so referred. Mr.FUNK. Read them. Mr. PETTIT. I would like to hear them. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the resolutions offered by Mr. Buckner: to Committee on County As all persons and all property are equally under the protection of the laws, they should contribute equitably to main- tain the Government which protects them; therefore Resolved. That the Constitution shall provide that no property shall be exempt from taxation, except that which is purely governmental in character. The Governor shall have power to re- move any ofiicer whom he may appoint, in case of incompetency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in ofiice; and he may declare his office vacant, and fill the same as pro- vided in other cases of vacancy. Any public Prosecuting Attorney who shall fail faithfully to prosecute a person charged with the commission of a crime in his county which may come to his knowl- edge, and any ministerial ofiicer who shall fail to execute process properly intrusted to him, shall be removed from oifice by the RESOLUTIONS. 7 Mon day] BUCKNER. [September 22~ Governor, after due notice, and an oppor- tunity of being heard in his defense. The Governor shall nominate, and, by and with the advice and consent of two- thirds of all the members of the Senate, ‘shall appoint a Secretary of State, an Attorney-General, a Treasurer, and a Su- perintendent of Public Instruction at pleasure, and such other officers of the Common wealth as he is or may be author- ized by the Constitution (1‘ by the law to appoint. As the oflice of Governor has been cre- ated, not only for the enforcement of the laws. but also as a tribune of the people, to protect them from hasty or in- temperate legislation; therefore, Resolved, 1. That the Constitution shall provide that 1t shall require a vote of two- thirds of all the members-e‘ect of each House of the General Assembly to pass a law over the objections of the Governor. 2. That bills and resolutions which shall not have become effective before the ad- journment of the General Assembly, may be considered and approved or disapproved by the Governor during a period of thirty days after such adjournment; but unless approved by him within that time, shall have no validity whatever. 3. That the section of the Constitution forbidding the Governor to succeed him— self be retained, and the inhibition made applicable to the present incumbent of that oflice. The General Assembly shall not grant any extra compensation to any public oifi- cer, servant, agent, or contractor. The General Assembly shall, by general law, conform all charters of cities, towns and other municipal corporations to a uni- formity of powers, rights and liabilities. The General Assembly shall neither .audit nor allow any private claim or ac- count against the State, but may appropri- ate money to pay such claims as shall have been audited and allowed according to law. The election and appointment of all ofii~ 'cers, and the filling of all vacancies, not otherwise provided for by this Constitution, or the Constitution of the United States. shall be made in such manner as may be directed by law; but no appointing ‘power shall be exercised by the General Assembly except as prescribedin this Con- stitution, and in the election of United States Senators. ‘‘ The presiding ofiicer of each House shall sign, publicly, in the presence of the House over which he presides, while the same is in session and capable of transacting business, all bills and joint resolutions passed by the General Assembly, announcing the title of the bill or resolution before affixing his sig- nature, and the Clerk shall record such ac- tion on the Journal. When the General Assembly shall be convened in special session, there shall be no' legislation upon subjects other than those designated in the proclamation of the Governor convening the same. A member who has a personal or private interest in any measure or bill proposed or pending before the General Assembly, shall disclose the fact to the House of which he is a member, and shall not vote thereon. While the enforcement of law is the chief safeguard of society, and the pun- ishmcnt of crime should be swift and sure, its infliction should be consistent with the highest principles of humanity. 1. Therefore, it is declared that the pun- ishment for felony other than the death penalty should be by solitary confinement in the Penitentiary at hard labor, and the General Assembly shall not have the pow- er to authorize the employment of con- Victs elsewhere, except when, from any cause, they cannot be provided for in the prison. The State shall maintain control of the discipline, and provide for all supplies and for tne sanitary condition of the convicts, and the labor only of the convicts may be leased. The control of the Penitentiary shall be by a commission of not exceeding three persons, appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice of the Senate, and under such regulations, and with suzh assistants as the General Assembly may prescribe. 2. The General Assembly shall direct by law that the costs of all criminal prosecu- tions shall be borne equally by the county where the crime is charged and the indict- ment found, and by the State. Resolved, That all educational funds now payable out of the State Treasury, and derived by a direct tax levied upon all the people of the State, shall be supple- mented by an equal sum to be raised by the county, city, town or school district. as a condition precedent to receiving such State aid, and the General Assembly shall 8 RESOLUTIONS. Monday,] HOPKINS. [September 22, direct by law the terms and preliminary conditions upon which such State aid shall hereafter be given, consistent with this provision of the Constitution. Mr. HOPKINS. There is a question involved in a resolution which I offer, which is one confined to a section of the State and not to the entire State; therefore, I deem it just, not only to the Convention, but to the question involved, that I should make a statement of the facts which prompt the offering of the resolution. The resolution attempts to secure a remedy against an evil which exists in the eastern portion of this State, and which is peculiar in its application to our land titles. I have been asked the question a number of times since it has been mentioned, whether or not this is a job in favor of some corpora- tion, ring or syndicate? It is not. It is a question that involves the interests of every citizen of the eastern portion of the State, and embraces within its scope the interests of the entire State. We have in Eastern Kentucky a system of Virginia land grants, issued long before Kentucky was admitted to the Union, that are lying dormant under patents which have since been issued by the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky. The people to whom those grants were issued have failed for more than one hundred years to assert their claims. They have failed to take possession, or to list them for taxation, and have refused to contribute their part of the expenses of the State. They stand to-day as a barrier between Eastern Kentucky and her devel- opment. The question has been asked by some, why do you come to the Constitu- tional Convention to settle thisquestion‘? In answer to that, I say it is the last tribunal to which we can come. We have presented ourselves to every Legislature that has convened since the year. 1850, pre- senting our claims and the reason why this question should be settled; and a deaf ear 'has been turned to our appeals, and we have been sent- back home to wait for developments until the time would present j itself when we could be heard. The time is coming when Eastern Kentucky, if that barrier is removed, will not be as she is to- day, dependent upon other portions of the State for support, but will take the lead. We have the mineral resources and the natural advantages, if we onlyr had opportunities for- their development. West Virginia settled a similar question by constitutional provision. Pennsylvania settled a similar question, and California did the same thing. Our case is like theirs, except that we are trammelled with a compact with the State of Virginia, which is construed by some persons to be stronger and more binding than I concede it to be. As I said, we have applied to the- Legislatures, and they have turned us off; but in spite of that fact, with this cloud hanging over us and our land titles, and threatening our homes, Eastern Kentucky has advanced in progress. We have had our titles blackmailed constao tly. Parties, with money to invest, have been met upon our threshold and the threat made to them, “ If you invest up here, there are claims older than those offered on the market that will take from you your investment.” In spite of all this, some investments and progress have been made. But as our property advances in value, the interest, the reason and the motive for looking up these old claims, and bringing them out for the purpose of blackmailing our titles- increase, and I have known one instance- within the last two years where four hundred thousand dollars was demanded from one company, which had bought land in that section, and the alternative given to pay or defend a suit. It has been unfeel- ingly said that we were pauper counties. It is an unjust appellation, and I do not believe the parties charging it fully appre- ciate the force of their expression, when the rest of the State is, to some extent, re- sponsible for the condition of our finances- and our lack of development. They ought to be more charitable under the circum~ stances, because, if this question had been RESOLUTIONS. 9 Monday,] settled by the Legislature years ago, we would then have moved on at the same rate of progress as the rest of the State,and would be defraying our equal share of the ex- penses of maintaining and carrying on the government. There are a great many reasons why this question should be settled. Our homes are involved, and we are un- able to fence a large portion of our lands, and are unable to foresee what the deci- sions of the Courts of the United States will be, for, in all probability, that is where the suits will be brought if they are ever able to unearth their claims and con- nect themselves with the Virginia land grants. We cannot foresee what the rul- ing of that Court will be on the Statute of Limitation. That is the important question, and the only means by which we can place the question beyond dispute is here, and we present the resolution oflfered, and ask that it be read and referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. At a former sitting there was a resolution of- fered by the Delegate from Pike county looking to the same end, and it was refer- red to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. A member of that Committee suggested that the question be withdrawn from that Committee and referred to a Special Committee. I believe that the members composing the Committee on Circuit Courts are fully alive to the im- portance of this measure, one of the most important that will come before this Con- vention, and I ask that it be referred to that Committee. The resolution was then read, as follows: Resolved, That all grants or patents for land lying within the State of Kentucky, hearing data prior to 1820, where the said grantees or patentees, or those claiming un- der them, have not taken actual possession of said lands under their said grants or patents, and the said lands are in the actual possession of other persons by inclosure, and claiming to a well marked and defined boundary, the owners of the said lands who claim to derive title thereto, under and by virtue of Mooan—Anxrna—Jonns'ron. [September 22 . said grants or patents, issued prior to 1820, shall, within three years from and alter the adoption of this Constitution, institute ac‘ tions in courts of proper jurisdiction for the recovery of the possession of the same, or forever thereafter be barred from said right of action. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts- The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such reference will be ordered. Mr. MOORE. I desire to ask indefinite- leave of absence for the Delegate from Barren and the Delegate from Lincoln, The PRESIDENT. There being no ob- jection, the leaves are granted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to intro- duce a resolution, and ask its immediate- consideration. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the resolution. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the resolution, a follows :' - Resolved, That S. B. Erwin, the Presi- dent of the Farmers and Laborers’ Union of Kentucky, be tendered the use of this hall, in which to deliver a lecture on Tues- day evening, September 23, 1890, at 7.30‘ o’clock. The motion being put on the adoption of ' the resolution, the same was adopted. Mr. AUXIER. Having introduced the. original resolution on that question on a former day of this session, and that reselu-- tion having been referred to the Committee‘ on Revenue and Taxation, the resolution of the Delegate from Floyd being in the- nature of an amendment to that resolution ,. I ask that the resolution referred to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation be- taken with this and referred to the Com-~ mittee on Circuit Courts, that the whole‘ question may be considered there. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to that change of reference. Mr. JOHNSTON. It is due to the Com- mittee on Revenue and Taxation to say that the question was first referred to them and it is in course of investigation by the- members of that Committee. The mem- bers of that Committee who requested that IO RESOLUTIONS. Monday,] JOHNSTON. [September 22 , those questions be referred to some other Committee, did it on their own personal responsibility. without any Committee action, and it was unauthorized. I second ‘the gentleman’s motion, however; but those Delegates have placed the Committee somewhat awkwardly by assuming that it does not desire to investigate questions of that kind. They have spoken for them- selves and not for the Committee. In so far as there is any question of taxation in- volved, it was proper to refer, and would have been properly investigated, notwith- standing the disinclination of certain members of the Committee. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the change of reference from the Committee on Revenue and Taxation ‘to the Commitee on Circuit Courts of the resolution as indicated by the Delegate from Pike? The Chair hears none, and the change will be ordered. The Secretary would like to know the date of the resolu- tion. When was it referred? Mr. JOHNSTON. I have it in my possession. I will hand it to the Clerk as soon as I can. The PRESIDENT. That is sufficient. The Secretary will now report the resolu- tions offered by the Delegate from Wolfe. The Reading Clerk read the following resolutions offered by the Delegate from Wolfe There shall be established in each county in this State a County Court, which shall be a court of record; and there shall be elected in each county, by the qualified voters, a County Judge, who shall be well informed in the law of the State; shall be a conservator of the peace, at least twenty- five years of age, a citizen of the United States, a man of upright character, of good business education, and a resident of the State for two years before his election, and a resident of the county at the time of his election and during his continuance in ofi‘ice; shall hold his oflice for six years, and until his successor shall be elected and qualified, and shall not be eligible for the next succeeding term for which he is elect- ed. He shall receive, as a compensation for his services: such fees and perquisites as may be prescribed by law. 2. The County Court shall have jurisdic- tion of all misdemeanors; and they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil cases where the matter in controversy shall exceedin value one hundred dollars, and not exceed five hundred dollars, exclu- sive of interest and cost; but shall not havejurisdiction of suits for the recovery of land. They shall have appellate juris- diction in cases, civil and criminal, of‘ which Justices’ Courts have jurisdiction; but of such civil cases only where judg- ment of the Court appealed from shall exceed twenty dollars, exclusive of inter- est and cost, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. In all appeals from Justices’ Court there shall be a trial de novo in the County Court, and when the judgment rendered or fine imposed by the County Court shall not exceed one hun- dred dollars, such trial shall be final; but if the judgment rendered or fine imposed shall exceed one hundred dollars, as well as in all cases, civil and criminal, of which the County Court has exclusive jurisdic- tion, an appeal shall lie to the Circuit Court, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. 3. The County Court shall probate wills; appoint guardians of minors, idiots and lunatics; grant letters of administration; settle accounts of executors, administrators and guardians; transact all business apper- taining to the estate of deceased persons, minors, idiots and lunatics, including the settlement, partition and distribution of estates of deceased persons, and to appren- tice minors, as provided by law. They shall have power to issue writs of man- damus, injunction, and all other writs necessary to the enforcement of the juris- diction of said Courts; and to issue writs of habeas corpus. 4. The County Court shall hold a term for civil and criminal business at least once in every four months, and shall dispose of probate business as may be provided by law ; and said court shall hold aterm of County Court for other business, once in every month, as may be provided by law. Grand Juries, impaneled in the Circuit Courts, shall inquire into misdemeanors, and all indictments therefor returned into the Circuit Courts shall forthwith be certified to the County Courts for trial. A jury in the County Court shall consist of six men, as may be prescribed by law. 5. The County Court shall have juris- RESOLUTIONS. 11 Monday,] FUNK. September 22. diction in all matters relating to coun- ty taxes, roads, bridges, ferries, paupers, bastardy, vagrants, the disbursement of money for county purposes, and in every other case that may be necessary to the internal improvement and local concerns of the respective counties. 6. Each coenty in the State now, or hereafter existing, shall be divided, from time to time, into convenient magisterial precincts as is now provided by law. In each precinct there shall be elected every fourth year one Justice of the Peace and vone Constable, each of whom shall hold his ofiice for four years and until his suc- cessor shall be elected and qualified: Pro- vided, That in any precinct in which there may be a city of eight thousand or more inhabitants, there shall be elected two Jus- tices of the Peace. The Justice of the Peace, with the County Judge a presiding ofiicer, shall compose the County Levy Court or Court of Claims, which shall exercise such powers and jurisdiction over all county business as is now conferred by the laws of this State, or as may be here- after prescribed. 7. Justices of the Peace shall have juris diction, in all civil matters, of all cases where the amount in controversy is one hundred dollars or le=s, exclusive of inten- -est, and in all criminal jurisdiction less than once hundred dollars, not hereinbe- fore expressed, as may be prescribed by law, and such other jurisdiction, criminal and civil, as may be prescribed by law; and appeals to the County Courts shall be al- lowed in all cases decided in Justices’ Courts where the judgment is for more than twenty dollars, exclusive of cost, and in all criminal cases, under such regula- tions as may be prescribed by law. The Justices of the Peace shall hold their Courts at such times and places as may be prescribed by law. 8. There shall be elected in each county by the qualified voters a County Court Clerk, a Circuit Court Clerk, a County Attorney, Sheriff, Assessor, Surveyor and Coroner, whose duties, perquisites and fees of office shall be prescribed by law; who shall hold the oflice six years except Sherifl‘, who shall hold four years; who shall not be eligible for re-election. 9. The Legislature shall have power by local or general laws to increase, diminish, or change the civil and criminal jurisdic- tion of County C iurts; and in case of any such change of jurisdiction, the Legislature shall also conform the jurisdiction of the other Courts to such change. Mr. FUNK offered the following resolu- tion : Resolved, That the legal age of responsi- bility in this Commonwealth shall be twen- ty-one years for males, and eighteen years for females. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Resolved, That all citizens of this Com- mon wealth shall be subject to service as ju- rors for the trial of any case, civil or erim- inal; and the fact that such citizen has informed himself of the nature of the case which he is subpoened to try, shall be no bar to such service; provided such citizen shall swear or affirm that neither of the parties are his kinsmen. that he bears no enmity to either, and that his de- cision will be governed by the law and evidence in such case. Referred to Committee on General Judi- ciary. Resolved,'That the General Assembly shall have power to regulate the times and places for the holding of elections: Pro- vided, That all elections, State, city and town, shall be held biennially, on the Tuesday aftergthe first Monday in Novem- ber of the evenly-numbered years, Referred to the Committee on Elections. Resolved, That punishment by the lash, for offenses against the laws of the Com- monwealth, is prohibited. Referred to the Committee on Crimes and Punishments. Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention, that a clause be inserted in the new Constitut'on that all goods, of whatsoever character, manufactured by convicts, shall be branded “Prison made.” Referred to the Committee on General Provisions. Resolved, That for legislative purposes the State shall be divided into ten districts, each containing as near as possible the same population; that each district shall be entitled to two Senators, who shall hold oflice for the term of four years: Provided, That at the next election after the adop- tion of this Constitution, Senators in the five odd-numbered districts shall hold of- 12 RESOLUTIONS. Monday,] SMITH—BECKNER—AYRES. [September 22, fice for two years, and those in the five evenly-numbered districts for four years; that each district shall be entitled to six Representatives, who shall hold ofiice for two years; that electors, in choosing Sena- tors, shall be entitled to two votes, all of which may be given to one person or di- vided among the candidates as the elector may see fit; that the two persons receiving the largest number of votes shall be Sena- tors, if otherwise qualified; that electors for Representatives shall be entitled to six votes, all of which may be given to one person or divided as the elector may see proper. The object of this provision be- ing to secure to the minority of electors a due proportion of representation. Mr. H. E. SMITH offered the following resolution : Resolved, That the General Assembly shall establish, organize and provide for the maintenance,support and direction of a University7 of high standing, to be located by the Constitutional Convention, and named or styled the “State University of Kentucky,” for the general di~tribution of learning, the promotion of literature, the arts and sciences. 2. The General Assembly shall make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of the Agricultural and Me- chanical College, established by set of the General Assembly, in the county of Fayette, is herebv de- clared and constituted a branch of the State University. But the General As- sembly shall not, at any session, make an appropriation to exceed thirty thousand dollars for the support and maintenance of said branch college. Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that no county, city, township, town, village, or other political or munic- ipal division of the State, ‘shall become a stockholder, either directly or indirectly, in any joint stock company, corporation, or association; or shall raise money for, or in aid of, or loan its credit to, or in aid of, any such company, corporation or association; or shall purchase or construct, or in any way aid in purchasing or constructing, any railroad, canal, or appurtenances belong- ing, unless authorized by two-thirds of all the qualified electors of said township, city, county, or incorporated village. as ascertained by the returns of the latest general election for State officers, and subject to further regulations hereafter prescribed by law. year, and located ' Referred to Committee on Municipali- ties. Mr. BECKNER offered the following resolutions : Resolvd, That it is the sense of this Con- ventien that no more patents or warrants for land should be issued in the name of this Commonwealth; and that the Regis- tership of the Land Oflice should be abol- ished, and its records placed in the custody of the Secretary of State. Referred to the Committee on Executive Department. No person who can not read any part of this Constitution shall ever hold an oflice of honor or profit in this Commonwealth. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Mr. AYRES offered the following reso- lutions: Resolved, 1. That, in the reivision of the present Constitution, it is the sense of this Convention that all special legislation be prohibited, and that the power to grant acts of corporations, of every character and description, be conferred upon the courts. 2. That the sessions of the General As- sembly be biennial, and limited in their duration to sixty days. 3. That the oflice of County Assessor be discontinued, and that the Justices of the Peace be authorized to assess and make out a list of the taxable property in their re- spective districts. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. 4. That a clause be ingrafted in the new Constitution prohibiting any county, civil district, or municipal corporation, from taking stock in, or giving aid to, any rail- road or corporation whatever. Referred to the Committee on Munici- palities. Resolved, That under the new Constitu- tion, a secret ballot shall be adopted in the election of all State ofiicers. Referred to the Committee on Elections. Mr. COX offered the following resolu- tions: :iWHEREas, In section 6, article 2, 'of the present Constitution, the State of Ken- RESOLUTIONS. 13 Monday,] SMITH. a [September 22 . 'tucky is divided into ten districts for the purpose of securing equal representation in the General Assembly; and whereas, great inequality in the number of legal voters .now exists between those districts; and whereas, great equal rights can not be secured in the absence of equality in rep- resentation ; Resolved, That the Committee on the Legislative Department be requested to report an article, to be made a part of the Constitution, in which the State shall be again divided into ten districts, as nearly equal in the number of legal voters as pos- sible, and that the General Assembly, at ‘its first session after the adoption of this Constitution, shall divide each of said dis- tricts into as many representative districts as the districts are severally entitled to; and shall, at the expiration of eight years after the first apportionment, and at the expiration of every eight years thereafter, divide the State into the same number of districts before any representative districts are formed, or any apportionment of Representatives is made in such districts. The General Assembly shall, immediately after the formation of said ten districts form as. many Representative districts within them as each of said ten districts are entitled to, which shall be the number in all of said ten districts. 2. In the apportionment of Representa- tives in each of said ten districts by the General Assembly, no surplus that may appear in any large county, shall_ beused to aid any county outside of the district in which such surplus is found, and the Rep- reseitatives shall be apportioned among the counties, cities and towns in each dis- trict; and in making such apportionment every county, tiwn or city having the ratio, shall have one Representative, 1f double the ratio, two Representatives or more, according to the number of legal voters. The counties cities or towns hav- ing one or more Representatives and the largest number of legal voters above the ratio, and counties having the largest num- ber under the ratio, shall have a Represent- ative, regard being had to the greatest number of qualified voters. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That the Committee on Reve- nue ‘and Taxation be requested to consider .and report the following proposed amend- ment to the Constitution, to wit: _ There shall be electedg'in each county in a this Commonwealth at the first general election after the adoption of this Consti- tution, a County Treasurer, who shall hold said office for a term of four years, but who shall be ineligible to fill said office during any part of the succeeding term; and every four years thereafter said oflice shall be filled by the election of a successor in said office. The county treasurer shall be a citizen of the county in which he is elected, shall be more than twenty-one years of age, and shall reside in and keep his office in the county seat of the county in which he is elected, and shall give such bonds, with security, as may be required of him by the acts of the General Assembly. He shall receive all the State and county taxes in the'county in which he has been elected - annually at his oflice, and shall pay over and account for said taxes at such times and in such manner as shall be prescribed by law. The form of his bonds, the power to enforce the payment of such taxes the penalties for non-payment of taxes as well as all other duties made incumbent upon the County Treasurer, shall be prescribed by law. Mr. SCOTT SMITH offered the follow- ing resolution: WHEREAS, The prosperity and happi- ness of the people of our State would be greatly augmented by erecting a higher standard of intellectual citizenship; and whereas, our governmental immunities would be more safely guarded by exacting a more strict ballot in all elections by the people; therefore, Be it resolved, That the Committee on Elections be, and it is hereby, directed to investigate the propriety of inserting in the new Constitution a clause similar to the one hereto ap oended, viz.: All persons who shall become twenty- one years old on or after the 1st day of Jan- uary, 1910, must be able to read the Con- stitution and write a legible hand before they shall be deemed legal, qualified vot- ers: Provided, That nothing in this clause shall apply to those who may become voters prior to that date. Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. MONTGOMERY offered the fol- lowing resolution: Resolved, That it is not the province or right of this Convention to undertake to govern the people of this Commonwealth in all the relations ‘and transactions of life, 14 RESOLUTIONS. Monday,] HARRIS—BRENTS— PETRIE. [September 22 . r by a complete code of laws, under the guise of constitutional provisions, which, “according to the laws of the Medes and Persians, altereth not,” but it is the duty of this Convention to reaffirm and adopt such general rules and prin- ciples of government, which the wis- dom and experience of the past has man- ifested to be essential to the well being of free and enlightened government; to ascertain what evils of government has grown up under our present Constitu- tion, and whether or not such evils are on account of defects in the same, and wheth- er or not there is any remedy therefor, and if there be any, to adopt the principle by general provisions, and leave to the wisdom and patriotism of the Legislature to carry out such general provisions in matters of detail. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. HARRIS offered the following res- olution: WHEREAS, The Governor of this Com- monwealth, by virtue of his veto powers, his powers of appointment, and other powers incidental to the discharge of his dut’es, may have more influence with the members of the Legislatures of this State than his merits as a statesman may justify; therefore Resolved, That a provision be inserted in the Constitution making the Governor of this State ineligible to the office of Senator of the Congress of the United States during the term of ofilce for which he may be elected. Referred to Committee on Executive De- partment. Mr. BRENTS offered the following res‘ olution: ' WHEREAS, The provisions of the pres- ent Constitution concerning elections, are arranged under separate articli s, and as a better arrangement would be to place on Constitutional provisions concerning elec- tions in one article; threfore, Resolved, That sections 8 and 9, of arti- cle 2, sections 3, 4, 14, 15, 16, 24 and 25 of article 8, and section 7 of article 13, of the present Constitution, be stricken from their present places, and that all constitu- tional provisions concerning elections be embraced in one article; and that the Committee on elections prepare and re- port to the Convention an article embrac- ing all necessary constitutional provisions, fixing the time and regulating the manner of holding elections and making returns thereof. Resolved, That in order to prevent bribe- ry and corruption in elections, the Com- mittee on Elections are instructed to pre- pare and report a section providing for a special court to be held soon after each regular election, to investigate and ascer- tain violations of the election laws, and commence prosecutions for such violations. Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. PETRIE offered the following res-- olutions: Resolved. That the convenience as well as the security of the people of Kentucky require that the General Assembly shall meet and hold annual sessions for the en- actment of necessary general laws, at times to be fixed by law, but the length of such annual session should be restricted by Constitutional provision to a period not exceeding forty days, with compensation; But this restriction should not apply to the first session to be held after the adop-L tion of the new Constitution. ' Resolved, 1. That the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals under the new Constitu. tion shall consist of a Chief Justice and six Associate Justices, who shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at Large for a term of twelve years. 2. That the mode and manner of said election should be so arranged, by a Con- stitutional provision, as to secure a fair and equitable representation to minority par- ties in the composition of said Court. Mr. HOGG offered the following resolu- tions: Resolved, That the preamble of this Con- stitution be as follows: ' Preamble. We, the representatives of the people of the State of Kentucky, in Convention as- sembled, grateful to Almighty God for the welfare of our State and nation, and in order to secure to all the citizens of said State the enjoyment of life, liberty and property, and of pursuing happiness, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the government of this great Common-s wealth. Referred to the Committee on Preamble. ' and Bill of Rights. RESOLUTIONS. 15 Monday,] PHELPS—BLACKWELL. [September 22. WHEREAS, The great hindrance of speedy trials in criminal cases in this Com- monwealth is caused by the number of challenges allowed the Commonwealth and defendants to jurors; therefore Resolved, That the Commonwealth, in a criminal trial, he allowed only one chal- lenge. unless for cause shown, and the de- fendants only four challenges, unless for cause shown, to jurors in criminal cases. Resolved, That when any Circuit Judge is absent from his Court, and it becomes ne- cessary to elect a special Judge to hold said term of the court, or any part thereof, caused by the absence of the regular Judge, the pay of the special Judge shall be de- ducted from the pay or salary of the regu- ular Judge. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. WHEREAS This State is layed ofi“ into caunties with well-defined boundary lines, each county forminga part of this Com- monwealth, and each county provided with the same number of county officers and courts; therefore Resolved, 1. That each of said counties be entitled to one member in the Legisla- ture to represent the interests of each of said counties in this Commonwealth, and each city or town with over 30,000 inhab- itants shall have a separate member. 2. That said members shall hold their ofiice for the term of four years, and shall hold only one session during said time, un- less convened by the Governor. Referred to Committee on Legislative _ Department. Mr. ZACK PHELHS offered the fol- lowing resolutions: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the new Constitution shall he so framed as to provide that all bills and acts shall originate in the House of Repre- sentatives, and none shall originate in the Senate. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolqed, That the following shall be in- serted in the new Constitution: The Legislature shall provide for a sys- tem of common schools. by which at least one school shall be kept up and supported in each school district for at least six months in every year‘; and any school dis- trict neglecting to keep up and support such a school may be deprived of its equal proportion of the public school fund, which shall be made up of one-half of the net amount of school tax collected in all coun— of this State, the other one-half being re- tained by the proper oflicials of each county, and by them equally distributed amongst their own schools. Mr. BLACKWELL ofiered the follow- ing resolutions : Resolved, That sections 1 and 2 of article 1. of the present Constitution, be stricken out, and in lieu thereof the following be inserted as section 1 of article 1 of the proposed new Constitution: The powers of the government of this State are di— vided into three distinct departments, the Legislative, the Executive and Judicial; and no power or collectien' of powers changed in the exercise of powers properly belonging to one of these departments, shall exercise any powers properly belong- ing to either of the others, except as in this Constitution expressly directed or per- mitted. Resolved, That among the provisions re- lating to the Legislative Department of~ the proposed new Constitution, there shall be contained the following provisions: The enacting clau=e of every law shall be as follows: Be it enacted by the Legis- lature of the State of Kentucky. No law shall be passed except by bill, and no bill shall be so altered or amended, on its passage through either House, as to change its original purpose. No law shall be revised or amended, or the provisions thereof extended, by a ref- erence to its title only; nor by providing that designated words be inserted, or desig- nated words he stricken out and others in- serted in lieu thereof; but so much of any law as is revised, amended. or extended, shall be re-enacted and published at length, No bill, except general appropriation bills and bills for the codification and gen- eral revision of the laws, shall be passed containing more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title; but iffany subject is embraced in any act which is not expressed in the title, such act shall be void only as to so much thereof as shall not be so expressed. Referred to the Committee on Legisla- tive Department. Mr. JONSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask indefinite leave of absence for the Dele- gate from Muhlenberg. 16 RESOLUTIONS. Monday,] The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the leave of absence is granted. Mr. HARRIS. I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Allen county. The PRESIDENT. Such leave is grant- ed, the Chair hearing no objections. There HARRIS—~BURNAM. [Septem ber 22 _ is no business before the Convention. Mr. BURNAM. I move that the House adjourn. And the question being taken on said motion, same was adopted. And the Convention thereupon ad- journed. Qnnvrniien guard. *KENTUCKY— CONSTITUTIONAL OON'V'E NTION- Vol. 1. FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 23, 1890. No. 12. Tuesday,] NUNN—CLARDY—CARROLL. [September 28 . The Convention met at 10 o’clock A. M. and the proceedings were opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Blayney. - The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read by the Reading Clerk. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the Journal will be considered as approved. Petitions are now in order. Mr. NUNN. I have a petition from the citizens of Livingston county, one of the counties which I represent, asking that the Justices of the Peace be given exclusive jurisdiction in all cases involving fifty dollars or less, where the defendant resides in the precinct. The PRESIDENT. What reference does the gentleman desire of the petition ‘? Mr. NUN N . I desire it referred to the Committee on County Courts. The PRESIDENT. If there are no more petitions, reports from Standing Committees are in order. If there are no reports from Standing Committees, re- ports from Special Committees are in order. If \none, motions and resolutionsv are in order. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Harri- son county. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and such leave will be granted. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from the Fourth District of the city of Louisville. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and such leave is granted. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Wayne. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and such leave is granted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to intro- duce a resolution, and ask that it be put upon its passage. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: WHEREAS, In the first days of this ses- sion of this Convention, a Stenographic Reporter was elected, and authorized to employ assistants to prepare for the print- ers employed by this Convention reports of its proceedings; and whereas, three Clerks were employed to make and keep its Journals; and whereas, upon a report from the Committee on Printing, this Con- vention adopted a resolution that its Printer should daily provide its members with copies of its proceedings, for their use and distribution among their constituents; and whereas, up to this time no part of the proceedings or the Journal have been printed and distributed; therefore be it Resolved, That the Committee on Print- ing and Accounts do ascertain and re- port the reason why the members of ‘ this Convention have not been furnished with thesprinted proceedings and Journal of this Convention, and ascertain what work of the Stenographer and assist- ants is required to be done by them, the length of time each is employed daily, the number of assistants necessary to do the work; and afair compensation for the same, based upon the length of time em- ployed, the number necessary to do the work, and that said Committee report as soon as practicable. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the resolution, the same was adppted. Mr. FIELD. I have two resolutions which I desire to offer and have referred to the Committees designated. 2 . RESOLUTIONS. Tuesday,] Moons. [September 23 . The resolutions were read by the Read- in Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the Court of Appeals and the Superior Court, as they now exist in the State of Kentucky, be hereby abolished, and that there be established instead there- of two courts, one to be styled the Court of Appeals and the other as the High Court of Chancery, each of said courts to be com- posed of three Judges; and that for the purpose of the election of said Judges, the State be divided into three districts, to be known as the Appellate Judicial Dis- trict, and that one Judge be elected to each court by the qualified voters of each dis- trict, each court to be final as to all mat- ters within its jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals to have appellate jurisdiction of all common law and criminal causes, and the High Court of Chancery to have appellate jurisdiction of all equi- table causes, said Judges each to pos- sess all of the qualifications now re- quired by law for Judges of the Court of Appeals, and to be not less than forty-five nor more than sixty years of age at the time of his election. Said Court shall have appellate jurisdiction only, which shall be co-extensive with the State, under such re- strictions and regulations, not repugnant to this Constitution, as may, from time to time, be prescribed by law. The Judges of said Court shall, after the first term, hold their ' offices for twelve years from and after their election, and until their successors shall be duly qualified, subject to removal as now prescribed by law. The General Assembly, at its first session after the adoption of this Constitution, shall divide the State into three districts, and at the same time shall direct elections to be held in each district, to elect one Judge to each of the above named Courts for said district. Section 5, article4 of the present Constitution shall be made part of this. The Judges first elected in each of said Courts shall serve as follows, to wit: One in each Court shall serve until the first Monday in -— V _, 1894; one until the first Monday in -—, 1898, and one until the first ‘Monday in -——-, 1902. The Judges in each Court shall determine by lot the length of time which each one shall serve; and at the expiration of the service of each, an election in the proper district spall be held to fill the vacancy. The Judge having the shortest time to serve in the Court of Appeals shall be styled the Chief J ustlce of Kentucky. The Judge having the shortest time to serve in the High Court of Chancery shall be styled the High Chancellor of Kentucky. Sec- tion 7, article 4 of the present Constitution shall be adopted as part of this. Said Courts shall hold their sessions at seat of government. Referred to Committee on Judicial De- partment, Court of Appeals. Resolved, That the various County Courts and Circuit Courts, including Common Pleas and Criminal Courts, and all Courts of similar jurisdiction, and the office of County Attorney, Commonwealth Attor- ney, Circuit Court Clerk and County Court Clerk, as now existing under and by virtue of the existing laws of the State of Kentucky, be, and are hereby abolished; and that the State of Kentucky be divided into Judicial Districts, as fol- lows,to-wit: Each county having not less than , nor more than voters, shall constitute one Judicial Distric; any county having less than voters may be added to an adjoining county or counties, thus forming a judicial district : Provided, That they shall not in the aggregate contain over voters: and provided, Not more than three counties shall be put in one district; any county having more than —- voters shall be divided into Judi- cial Districts containing not less than nor mbre than —— voters; and that in each of said districts there shall be estab- lished one Court, to be known as the Court of Common Pleas; said Court to have original jurisdiction of all matters, civil, penal and criminal, except as to those mat- ters: the original jurisdiction of which is given to other Courts, and of these the said Court of Common Pleas shall have appellate jurisdiction. Said Court, in dis- tricts composed of one county or less, shall always be in session, except as hereinafter provided. Said Court, in districts com- posed of more than one county, shall, when the district is‘ composed of two coun- ties, hold six terms during the year in each county in said district, each of one month duration, alternating between said counties in regular succession, the Court always be- ing in session in one or the other of said counties, except as hereinafter provided. Said Court, in any district composed of three counties, shall hold four terms each year in each of said several counties, each of one month’s duration, alternating be- tween said counties in regular succession, the Court always being in session in one, RESOLUTIONS. 3 Tuedsay,] AUXIER. [September 23 or another of said counties, except as here inafter provided. 2. The Judges of said Court of Common Pleas shall each possess the qualifications now required by law for Judges of the Cir- cuit Courts, and shall be elected by the qualified voters of each district for the term of years. They shall be commissioned by the Governor, and continue in ofiice until their successors are qualified. Said Courts shall have the power to impanel a Grand Jury at any time the public good, in the opinion of the Court, may require it: Provided, That it may impanel not more than four nor less than one Grand Jury in any one year; and when no Grand Jury is in session, the Court may sit as an examining court, and may commit until the next sitting of the Grand Jury. 3. A Judge of said Court of Common Pleas shall be removed from office in the same manner as the Judges of the Court of Appeals, and the removal of a Judge from his district shall vacate his office. If, from any cause, a vacancy should occur in said office, the Governor shall appoint a Judge, having the same qualifications as herein required, to preside over said Court until the next regular election, at which time a Judge shall be elected to serve dur- ing the unexpired term, unless the unex- pired term be less than two years, in which event the Judge appointed by the Gov- ernor shall serve during the whole of the unexpired term. 4. The right to appeal or sue out a writ of error to the Court of Appeals shall re- main as it now exists until altered by law, hereby giving to the General Assemby the 1 power to change, alter or modify said right. 5. In each Judicial District, as organized under this Constitution, there shall be elected, by the qualified voters of said dis- trict, one Attorney, having the same quali- fications as the Commonwealth Attorney is now required to have under the present Constitution, whose duties shall be the same as now prescribed by law for County Attorney and Commonwealth Attorneys. 6._ There shall also be elected by the qualified voters of each Judicial District, in districts composed of one county or less, one Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas; and in districts composed of more than one county, there shall be elected one Clerk of the Common Pleas Court in each county. each of whom shall be the Clerk of said Court in their respective counties. 7. At the first session of the General Assembly after the adoption of this Consti- tution, said General Assembly shall divide the State into Judicial Districts as above set out; they shall at the same time direct elections to be held for the election of the Judges, Clerk and Prosecuting Attorneys, as directed in the foregoing. Referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. WOOD offered the following reso- lutions: ' Resolved, That section 10, article 3, of the Constitution, be amended as follows: By addinfi to said section the words, “ The Governor shall communicate to the Legis- lature,‘ at the beginning of every session every case of fine or forfeiture remitted, or reprive,pardon or commutation grant- ed, stating the name of the convict, the cause for which he was convicted, the sentence, its date and the date of its re- mission, commutation, pardon or reprieve. Referred to Committee on Executive Department. Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the several Committees report at the earliest day practicable their proceedings, and the same shall be refer- red to the Committee of the Whole in the order in which they are reported; that the Convention will then proceed in the fol- lowing order to dispose of the reports of Committees : 1. Committee on the Legislative Depart- ment. 2. The report of the Committee on Ex- ecutive Department. ' 3. The report of the Committee on the Judicial Department. That the said reports be taken up, con- sidered and disposed of in the foregoing order before the reports of other Commit- tees are disposed of. - Referred to Committee on Rules. Mr. AUXIER. I desire to introduce a resolution, and have it referred to the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Preamble. We, the people of the State of Ken- tucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liber.y which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing upon our 4 RESOLUTIONS. Tucsday,] S'WANGO. endeavors to secure and transmit the same unimpaired to succeeding generations, in order to form a more perfect govern- ment, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common de- fense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the State of Ken- tucky. Referred'to the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. SWANGO. I desire to introduce a resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, 1. The Legislative power shall be vested in a House of Representatives and a Senate, which together shall be styled the General Assembly of the Com- mon wealth of Kentucky. 2. The members of the House of Repre- sentatives shall continue in service for the term of two years from the day of their election. 8. No person shall be a Representative who, at the time of his election, is not a cit- izen of the United States, has not attained twenty-four years, and who has not resided in the State two years next preceding his election, and one year in the county, town, or city for which he may be chosen. 4. The General Assembly shall divide each county of this Commonwealth into convenient election‘ precincts, or may dele- gate power to do so to such county author- ities as may be designated by law; and elections for Representatives for the several counties shall be held in the several elec- tion precincts into which the counties may be divided. 5. Representation shall be equal and uniform in this Commonwealth, and shall be forever regulated and ascertained by the number of qualified voters therein. 6. The apportionment may be changed by the General Assembly after each ‘census by the United' States Government, but in no event shall the aggregate number of Representatives and Senators be increased. 7. The Representatives shall be appor- tioned, as near as may be, among the counties, towns and cities in the State, and in making such apportionment, the follow- ing rules shall govern, to wit: Every county, town or city having the ratio shall have one Representative, if double the ratio two Representatives, and so on: Provided, That when a county may not have a sufficient number of qualified voters to entitle it to one Representative, then such county may be joined to some ad- jacent county, which counties shall send one Representative; but in no event shall , more than two counties be in one Repre- sentative district. 8. The House of Representatives shall choose its Speaker and other oflicers, and fix the pay thereof, as may be'provided for by law. 9. The Senator shall be chosen for the term of four years, and the Senate shall have power to choose its ofiicers biennially, who shall receive such compensation as may be provided by law. 10. The Senators shall be divided into two classes; the odd numbers shall be elect- ed for two years, and all of the even num- bers shall be elected for a term of four years for the first term after the first appor- tionment, and thereafter they shall be elected for a term of four years. 11. The number of Representatives shall be one hundred, and the number of Sena- tors thirty'eight'. 12. At every apportionment of repre- sentation, the State shall be laid off into thirty-eight Senatorial districts, which shall be so formed as to contain, as near as may be, an equal number of qualified voters, and so that no county shall be divided in the formation of a Senatorial district, ex- cept such county shall be entitled, under the enumeration, to two or more Senators; and when two or more counties compose a district, they shall be adjoining: Provided, That in no event shall there be more than five counties in any one district. 13. N 0 person shall be a Senator who, at the time of his_election, is not a citizen of the United States, has not attained the age of thirty years, and who has not resided in this State six years next preceding his election, the last year thereof in the district for which he may be chosen. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. BULLITT. Idesire to introduce a resolution, and have it referred to the Committee on Court of Appeals. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the judiciary system of every government should have a final arbi- ter must be apparent to all; and however many persons that final arbiter may be [September 23. RESOLUTIONS. 5 Tuesdayfl BULLITT. [September 23. composed of, the advantages of securing the conjoint action of the minds of all of the members thereof, freed from personal im- pulses in disposing of all questions of law, - must be equally as apparent. But it is not generally known that the system prevailing in the several States of this country of overloading the courts of last resort, forces the members thereof to relax into mere judges for deciding causes, and that for the want of time to perform ‘the duties of jurist in systematizing a jurisprudence, drawn from the philosophy and principles of the law, they are com- pelled to look to cases to guide them in deciding causes,instead of the principles and logic of the 1aw,which fact every lawyer has been made to feel; therefore, to enable the court of last resort of this Commonwealth to re-establish itself on the proud plane it once occupied, it is suggested to the Com- mittee on the Court of Appeals that it shall consider the propriety of dividing the Court of Appeals into two parts or divis- sions, asssigning to one part the duty of trying causes, and the other the duty of revising law questions only, and estab- lishing rules of law, which may be done by having one Court for each part, as in the States of New York and Illinois; or, by establishing two or three intermediate Courts in the State, the judgments of which shall be final as to the facts; and in all ap- peals therefrom the Court, with the aid of the counsel in the case, shall certify so much of the facts as may be necessary to present the law question or questions appealed from. This will keep the ‘evidence of ap- pealed causes away trom the Court of last resort. The strong equities shown by the evidence often causes the‘Court “composed of sympathetic persons,” to bind the rules of law to fit the equities of the case before it. It is estimated that the consideration of the evidence of appealed causes constitutes one-half of the labors of the court, which, when taken in conjunction with the fur- ther fact that the jurisprudence will be systematized (which alone) will permit a large number of cases that now go to the Court of Appeals from being appealed, the labors ot the Court of last resort will thus be reduced to about one-fourth of what it now is, so that three Judges will be sufficient to do all of the business that will be taken before it, and allow ample time to that court to perform the duties of jurists, instead of acting as merely Judges to try disputes between citizens, and we are more apt to get the conjoint action of the three Judges, than of a greater number, and for the same reason, the intermediate Court should be composed of three Judges only. The Judges of all of these Courts should be elected for twelve years, one to be elected every four years at a general elec- tion, so that the election thereof will fit either the biennial or the quadrennial sys- tem of election; and they should not be less than forty nor more than fifty-five years of age; and the Judges of neither of said Courts should be eligible to be re- elected to the same office; but the Judges of the intermediate Courts should be eligible to be elected to the court of last resort. Referred to Committee on Judicial De- partment and Court of Appeals. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Jessamine is recognized, but before the Clerk reports the resolution, the Chair will call the attention of the members to an omission in Rule 26 of the rules as as adopted by the Convention. In line three of rule 26 “a motion to adjourn” immediately after “to take a recess,” is omitted; so the, members will please in- sert after “to take a recess,” in Rule 26, line three, “to adjourn.” The Secretary will now report the resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows. Each individual of the society has a 'right to be protected by it in the enjoy- ment of his life, liberty and property ac- cording to standing laws. He is obliged, consequently, to contribute his share to the expenses of this protection; to give his personal service or an equivalent when necessary; but no part of the property of any individual can, with justice, be taken from him or applied to public uses without his own consent or ‘that of the representative body of the people; in fine, the people of this Commonwealth are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent; and whenever the public exigencies require that the property of any individual should be ap- propriated .to public uses, he shall receive a reasonable compensation therefor. Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. APPLEGATE. I have a resolu- 6 RESOLUTIONS. Tuesday,] PETTIT—PUGH—ALLEN. [September 23 . tion which I desire to offer and have adopt- ed. - The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: ~ Resolved, That the Railroad Commission- ers be requested to report to this Conven- tion the number and nature of complaints that have been made to it against the rail- roads of this State, within the last three fis- cal years, for violations of the provisions of the act approved April 6,1882. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the resolution, the same was’ adopted. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to introduce a resolution, and have the same referred to the Committee on Education. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows : Resolved, That the better to facilitate and cheapen the education of the children of the State— 1. The general supervision of the public schools of the State shall be vested in a Board of Education. The Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Secretary of State and the Attorney General shall con- stitute the board, of which the Superin- tendent of Public Instruction shall be President. 2. It shall be the duty of the Board of Education to select, according to their best judgment, the best “series” of school books adapted to all the grades taught in the public schools of the State, and, by purchase or otherwise obtain the right to publish the same; and they shall be an- thorized to have the series of book selected published by the Public Printer at the ex- pense of the State, and furnish the same at actual cost to the people for the purposes - of the common schools. 3. The series of books once adopted and published should not be superceded or abolished in ashorter period than eight years, but may be added to as may be directed by the Board of Education. 4. The Board of Education shall perform such other acts and duties as may from time to time be prescribed by law. 5. The Legislature shall pass all laws necessary to carrying out the provisions of the foregoing articles. Referred to Committee on Education. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to call the atten- tion of theConvention to the fact that another mistake occurs in Rule 26. It will be 1eme-nbered that I ofiered an amend- ment to insert the words, "a call of the House,” which was adopted by the House, and ought to have been inserted after the word “ recess,” on the eleventh page, which would make the Rule read: “When a question is under debate, no motion shall be received but to fix ‘the time to which the Convention shall adjourn, to adjourn, _ to take a recess, a call of the House, to lie on the table,” etc. Mr. PUGH. I ofl‘er a resolution looking to the proper organization of Committees, and ask that it be read and put upon its passage. ‘ The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the Chairmen 0f the several Standing and Special Committees be requested to meet in conference in this hall to-morrow morning at 9 o’clock, for the purpose of arranging the hours of convening of said Committees, having due regard for the individuals composing same, and avoiding as nearly as practicable any conflict as to times of sitting. -Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I would suggest to the gentleman from Lewis that from nine- o’clock to ten o’clock A. M. ‘will not give suflicient time to these gentlemen to ar- range the respective hours at which the different Committees shall meet. Mr. PUGH. I do not fix any special time at which they shall report. The trouble is that our Committee on the con- tested election case meets at three o’clock. Yesterday afternoon at three o’clock I was called to meetings of four difl'erent Com- mittees. Of course I could only be pres- ent at one, and that was the contested. election case; and I think you will all readily see the importance of this resolu- tion, and of adopting some .plan to avoid conflicts in the time of the meetings of Committees; and that can only be properly arrived at by the respective chairmen thereof meeting in conference and fixing a time for the meeting of the respective RESOLUTIONS. Tuesday,] BURNAM—WASHINGTON. [September 23. Committees. I care not as to whether they will be able to report to-morrow; they can report as soon as they agree. The resolution being put upon its pas- sage, was adopted. Mr. BURNAM. I rise to a matter that is personal to myself. I find that in this publication of the Standing Committees of the House, my name has been omitted from the Committee on Rules. If it is the pleasure of the House, I desire to be in- formed of the fact. The PRESIDENT. That is certainly an omission on the part of the Printer. The gentleman is on that Committee. Mr. WASHINGTON. After the some- what elaborate, and, in many respects, ad- mirable scheme for the reorganization of the Judiciary, which was submitted upon yesterday by the very able and distin- guish-ed Delegate from Marion, I feel some reluctance in presenting any thing that may have occurred. to me which falls within the scope of his resolution; but there is one branch of that department in with member of this Convention, feel such an interest that, at the risk of incurring the suspicion of presumption, I present a reso- lution restricted entirely to the Court of Appeals; and if the President will per- mit it, and it is the wish of the Convention, I will read it. I have doubt of the Score- tary being able to decipher, at least, one section of it. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the gentleman will pro- ceed. The resolution was read by Mr. Wash- ington, as follows: which I in nnmmnn evnrv ntbnr I V Resolved, 1. The judicial power of this Commonwealth shall be vested in the Sen- ate, sitting as a Court of Impeachment, under this Constitution; in a Supreme Court, Circuit Courts. County Courts, Jus- tices of the Peace, and such inferior courts as the General Assembly may establish from time to time. 2. The Supreme Court shall have appel- late jurisdiction co-extensive with the State, under such restrictions and regulations, not repugnant to this Constitution, as may be prescribed by law; and shall have power to issue writs of certz'omri, superse- cleas, prohibition, mandamus, habeas corpus and of guo warranto, as to all oflicers con- nected with the general government of this Common wealth, and such other writs as may be necessary or proper to the complete exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. 3. The Supreme Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and six Associate Justices. It shall sit in two departments, designated respectively as Department N o. 1 and De- partment No. 2. The Chief Justice may assign three of the Associate Justices to each department; and they may inter- change with each other by agreement among themselves, or as directed by the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice, when not otherwise engaged, shall sit with either department, at his option. The. depart- ment in which he may, for the time being, not be sitting, shall, in such manner as it may choose, select oneot their number to act, and be designated as Presiding Judge of such department. The presence ‘in either department of three Justices shall be necessary to the transaction of busi- ness in such department, except such as may be done at Chambers, and the concurrence of three Justices shall be necessary to a reversal. and two to an affirmance. And where two are for a reversal, the Chief Justice, or such Associate Justice in the other department as he may designate, shall act upon the case; and if then the Judges be equally divided, there shall be an afiirmance. 4. The Chief Justice shall apportion the business of the department in which he may be sitting, and the Presiding Justice shall apportion the business of his depart- ment. The Chief Justice, upon applica- tion of three Associate Justices, for reasons assigned, or when, in his judgment, it is proper, order any cause to be heard and decided by the Court, sitting in bank, and in such case the concurrence of four Judges shall be necessary to a decision. When sitting in bank, the'Chief Justice shall preside. 5. All decisions of the Court, whether sitting in bank or in departments, shall be in writing, and shall set forth the grounds thereof. In case of absence of the Chief Justice, or his inability to act, the Associ- ate Justices shall select one of their num- ber to act as such. If a vacancy should 8 RESOLUTIONS. Tuesday,] WASHINGTON—Al’PLEGATE—MACKOY. [September 23, occur in said Court, the Governor shall issue a writ of election to fill such vacancy for the residue of the term: Provided, That if the unexpired term shall be less than one year, the Governor shall appoint some suitable person to fill such vacancy. 6. The Judges of the Supreme Court shall be elected from the State at large. To this end the General‘ Assembly shall divide the State, by counties, into four grand divisions, as nearly equal, in respect of voting population, as may be; and not more than two Judges shall reside in either of such divisions. ’ 7 N 0 person shall be eligible to the ofiice of Judge of the Supreme Court who is not a citizen of the United States, a resident of the State for five years next preceding his election, at least thirty-five years of age, and who has been a practicing lawyer twelve years, or whose service upon the bench of any Court of record, when added to the time he may have practiced law, shall not be equal to twelve years. 8. The Judges of said Court shall be first elected, and serve as follows, to-wit: On the —— Monday in , 1892, there shall be elected three Judges, who shall serve as follows: One until the -— Mon- day in , 1900; one until the — Mon- day in , 1902; and one until the Monday in , 1904. The Judges‘ so elected to determine by lot the term for which each shall serve. On the Mon- day in ——, 1894, one Judge shall be elected, who shall serve until the Monday of -—-—. 1906. On the — Mon- day in , 1896, one Judge shall be elected, who shall serve until the —— Mon- day in , 1908. And on the Mon- day of , 1898, one Judge shall be elect- ed, who shall serve until the Monday in , 1910. Each of said Judges shad shall serve as above indicated, and until the election and qualification of his suc- cessor; and thereafter, to-wit, on the Monday in , 1910, a Judge shall be elected every two years, who shall hold his oflice for aterm of twelve years, and until his successor shall be elected and qualified ; after which he shall not be eligible for re- election. ‘ 9. The Judges of the Supreme Court shall, at stated times, receive for their ser- vices an adequate compensation, to be fixed by law, which shall not be diminished or increased during their respective terms of ofiice. Mr. WASHINGTON. I ask that the l resolution be printed,’ and referred to the Committee on Court of Appeals. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the printing of the resolution and its reference to the Committee on Court of Appeals‘? Mr. APPLEGATE. I would like to ask if that printing is in addition to the regular daily proceedings. The PRESIDENT. It will be so un- derstood. , Mr. MACKOY. I desire to offer a res- olution. The resolution was read by the Reading 'Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the Printer of this Con- vention be, and he: is hereby, directed to wrap, stamp and mail to such addresses as may be furnished him, so many of the printed copies of the daily proceedings of this Convention, not exceeding thirty (30), however, as such Delegate may request; and the said Printer is authorized to charge the cost and expense of doing so to the State as a part of the expenses of this Convention. Mr. MACKOY. I desire this resolution to be put upon its passage. . ‘ Mr. APPLEGATE. If I am not mis- taken, a resolution covering that point has been adopted, requiring a one or two-cent wrapper to be put around them, and twenty- five laid upon the desk of each member, to be addressed to their constituents, as they see fit. Mr. MACKOY. I did not know that such a resolution had been offered, nor did. my friend, the Delegate from Union, who seconded my motion; and if it has been done, of course, this resolution will not be necessary. I do not know the terms of the other resolution. I was not present in the House, but I would ask the Clerk to turn to it and see whether such a resolution was adopted. The PRESIDENT. On what day was it adopted‘? Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Last Friday, I think. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk wil_ RESOLUTIONS. 9 Tuesday,] MACKOY—ALLEN. a [September 23 . turn to the minutes of last Friday and see if such a resolution was adopted. Mr. MACKOY. The Reporter has in- formed me that his recollection is that they are to be wrapped, stamped and laid on the desks of the Delegates, to be addressed by the Delegates. It seems to me that it would be very much better to have them addressed by the Printer, who will simply print the addresses and paste them on the wrapper. It will impose a labor upon each Delegate that ought not to be im- posed upon him to address them himself and send them off. I suggest, therefore, that if such a resolution has been adopted, that that portion of my resolution be adopted which requests the Printer to direct and mail them to such addresses as may be furnished by each Delegate. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the part of the resolution indi- cated by the Delegate from Covington. The Reading Clerk read the part of the resolution referred to, as follows: Resolved, That the Printer of this Con- vention be, and he is hereby, directed to wrap, stamp and mail, to such addresses as may be furnished him, so many of the printed copies of the daily proceedings of this Convention, not exceeding thirty, however, as such Delegate may request; and the said Printer is authorized to charge the cost, etc. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks the best way would probably be to recon- sider, by unanimous consent, the adoption of the other resolution, and then substi- tute this resolution in lieu of that. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I was on the Com- mittee of which the gentleman from Mc- Cracken was Chairman, to consider this matter of printing the daily proceedings, and I wrote the resolution which was adopted by this Convention last Friday, I think it was Friday, and I can not be mistaken that it was ordered by that reso- lution that 125 copies of the daily proceed- ings, taken down in short-hand by the Oflicial Reporter, just as they occur, should beprinted and laid upon our desks every morning at 10 o’clock for correction, and when corrected and sent back to the Public Printer on the following day, 4,000 copies were to be printed, 1,000 to be preserved and bound for certain purposes, stated in the resolution, and 3,000 copies of these leaflets, if I may so call them, la'd upon our desks; but before being laid on our tables they were to be wrapped in a one or two-cent wrapper, as their size and weight require, to be addressed by the Delegates, or to be directed by the Public Printer, as the members of the Convention might determine and direct. That is to say, if I desire to send my copies off to different persons every day, I must have that privilege; and, therefore, I should require them to be laid upon my desk, and I direct them and send them off; but if any other gentleman of the Convention should see fit to send his copios to the same persons every day, then he directs the Public Printer not only to wrap, but to direct them as well; and we reported in favor of thirty copies being laid upon our tables but it was amended, on mction of the gentleman from Louisville, and it was finally determined that twenty-five copies should be given to each member to be thus disposed of. Mr. MACKOY. In order to relieve the House from any difficulty in ‘the matter, as there seems to be some uncertainty on the subject, I move that the resolution which I have just ofiered be referred to the Com-* mittee on Printing and Accounts. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Ought it not to be the special Committee of which the gentle- man from McCracken is Chairman? The PRESIDENT. The parliamentary status of a Special Committee is that its exis- ten ce expires wh on it in akes‘its report,and the Chair thinks that the Committee, having made its report, its existence asa Special Committee has expired; and that all these matters should be referred to the regular Standing Committee on Printing and Ac- counts. 10 RESOLUTIONS. Tuesday, ] MACKOY—MUIR—WEST. [September 23 Mr. MACKOY. I desire my resolution to be referred to the Committee on Print- ing and Accounts. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, said reference will be made. Mr. MUIR. I desire to introduce a resolution and have it referred to the Com- mittee on General Provisions. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, 1. The real and personal estate of a female acquired before marriage, and all property to which she may become en- titlled during marriage, shall be her sepa- rate estate, and not liable to be affected by the debts or contracts of her husband, and may be devised or bequeathed by her as if she were a feme sole, and shall be controlled by her during marriage. 2. A married woman’s separate estate may be charged in equity with her liabili- ties, which may be evidenced by her writing; and the General Assembly shall enact such laws as may be necessary to _ carry into efi'ect this article, and may re- quire a registration of such separate estate to distinguish same from the estate of her husband. ' The PRESIDENT. The Chair would like to again call attention to the Rules. There is an emission in Rule 50. It reads thus as printed: “ On the adjournment of the Convention from day to day, the regu- lar hour of meeting shall be 10 o’clock, Standard time.” What is omitted is about as follows: “And the Convention shall, at each day, adjourn at 1 o'clock P. M., stand- ard time.” Mr. WEST. I desire to introduce two resolutions. The resolutions were read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That all members of this Con- stitutional Convention who hold at this time another office, the salary of, which is paid by the State, that said members shall draw no salary from the State for said oflice while this Convention .isin session; or if they draw pay for the oflice which they hold, they shall draw no pay as Delegate to this Convention. Referred to Committee on Executive Ofiicers. Resolved, That all railroad companies owning railroads in this State shall here- after be required to keep the same fenced on both sides. Referred to Committee on Corporations. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I desire to in- troduce a resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That whereas, by an act of Congress, approved August 30th, 1890, the sum of $15,000 for the year ending June 30th, 1890, and an annual increase of the amount thereof for ten years by an addi- tional sum of $1,000 over the pre- ceding year, and thereafter $25,000 per annum, is set apart to each State and Territory as an educational fund, upon the conditions contained in said act; it is, therefore, recommended that the Committee on Education take said matter into con- sideration, and report such provisions as may be necessary to secure said fund to the State. Referred to Committee on Education. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to intro- duce a resolution, The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows : Resolved, That the following shall be made a section under the head of the Leg- islative Department in any draft of a Con- stitution made by this Convention: “ Provisions may be made by general law for bringing suits against the State as to all liabilities originating after the adoption of this Constitution; but no special act author- izing such suit to be brought or making compensation to any person claiming dam- ages against the State, shall ever be passed.” Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to in- troduce two resolutions. The resolutions were read by'the Read- ing Clerk, as follows: The following provision is recommended to the'consideration of the Committee on Capital Removal. At the first general election held in this State, after the final adoption of thisCon- RESOLUTIONS. 11 Tuesday,] MARTIN. [September 23. stitution, every voter may vote for any city or town he may think best as the proper location of the State Capital, and the one of those places receiving the largest number of votes shall be the Capital of the State until changed in the manner pre- scribed in the Constitution; and every person qualified under the law to vote for members of the General Assembly may vote on this subject. Referred to the Committee on Capital Removal. The following is recommended to the Committee on General Provisions: All property, both real and personal, of the wife, owned bv her at the time of her marriage, and that acquired afterwards by gift, devise or descent. is declared to be, and shall be held as, her separate property; and laws shall be passed clearly defining the rights of the wife in relation as well to her separate property as to that held in common with her husband. Laws shall also be passed providing for the registration of the wife’s separate property. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Mr. MARTIN. I desire to introduce a resolution, and have it referred to the Com- mittee on Revenue and Taxation. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That a clause of the Constitu- tion shall read: “ Real estate shall be assessed for taxation only once in four years: Provided, That any improvements made thereon shall be reported to the County Clerk and added to the original assessment. Mr. APPLEGATE. I move that we now adjourn, And the question being taken upon the motion to adjourn, the Chair declared the same carried, and the Convention there- upon adjourned. g nnvmiiun guard. —-— K E N T U C K Y ~— CCDNS'T'LJ.‘ U ‘.L'TQNAL CCDNVENTIGN. Vol. 1 .1 FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 24, 1890. [No. 13 Wednesday,] NUNN—MAoKoY—PE'rrIT. The Convention met at 10 o’clock A. M., and the proceedings were opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Blayney. The reading of the Journal of yesterday was begun, and immediately interrupted. Mr. NUNN. Neither of those petitions are from Crittenden. They are from Liv- ingston county. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please correct the Journal in that respect. Mr. MACKOY. I move that the read- ing of the Journal be dispensed with this morning.’ The motion, being put to a vote, was de- clared to have been lost. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will proceed with the reading of the Journal. The reading of the Journal was con- tinued, and, as corrected, was approved. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. Mr. PETTIT. I have a petition from Marcus L. Ogden, of Daveiss county, ask- ing that a clause be inserted in the new Constitution concerning elections, primary and others, and prohibiting the sale of in- toxicants on the day of elections, and the reasons therefor. I ask that it be referred to the Committee on Elections. Said petition was as follows: OWENSBORO, KY., Sept. 22, 1890. Hon. Thos. S. Pettit, Frankfort, Ky; DEAR SIR: I beg leave to call your at- tention to a suggestion or two touching desirable legislation to be incorporated in the Constitution. First. To have the regulations concern- ing voting and the penalties attached there- ‘a to apply to all primary elections. In all cases where either political party has a clear majority, the primary election becomes sub- stantially the regular election; and it is the - interest and duty of all good citizens to eliminate from the primary as well as from the regular election the floating and venal vote. Second. To prohibit the sale of spiritu- ous, malt and vinous liquors on all regular and primary election days; requiring the closing of all saloons from sun-up till sun- down. If there is any time when one should be able to exercise all of his mental powers, it is when he is called on to exer- cise his elective franchise. Third. To formulate a plan by which current accounts—as distinguished from legal indebtedness, such as mortgages, judgments of Courts, etc—can be barred from payment after a published notice, of say thirty days, in an official paper, for all creditors to present their accounts for pay- ment at some named place, and, on failure to do so, are barred in law. A law of this character has been in existence in Brazil for many years, and has worked well. If any of these suggestions meet your approval, I will be obliged if you will give them such attention as‘ you think they may deserve. ' With assurance of best regard, I am very truly your friend, MARCUS L. OGDEN. Referred to Committee on Elections. The PRESIDENT. There being no further petitions, reports from Standing Committees are in order. Mr. ELMORE. I offer a report from [September 24. 2 RESOLUTIONS. Wednesday,] WILLIAMS~—PHELPS. [September 24 - the Committee on Printing and Accounts. The report was read, as follows: FRANKFORT, KY., Sept. 24, 1890. To Hon. 0. M. Clay, Jr., President Consti- tutional Convention : The following resolution, offered by the Delegate from Covington, was referred to the Committee on Printing and Accounts on yesterday: Resolved, That the Printer of this Con- vention be, and he is hereby, directed to wrap, stamp and mail, to such addresses as may be furnished him, so many of the printed copies of the daily proceedings of this Convention, not exceeding thirty, how- ever, as such Delegate may request; and the said Printer is authorized to charge the cost and expense of so doing to the State, as a part of the expenses of this Conven- tion. The Committee report that the said resolution is substantially embdied in the resolution of the Delegate from Fleming, adopted on the 19th inst, the only differ- ence being that the last-named resolution fixes the number of copies to be given to each Delegate for distribution at twenty- five instead of thirty. The Committee think twenty-five is a sufficient number, and, therefore, are of opinion that the reso- olution offered by the Delegate from Cov- ington should not be adopted. The following resolution was also re- ferred to said Committee: WHEREAS, In the first days of this ses- sion of this Convention, a Stenographic Reporter was elected, and authorized to employ assistants to prepare for the print- ers employed by this Convention reports of its proceedings; and whereas, three Clerks were employed to make and keep its J our- nal; and whereas, upon a report from the Committee on Printing, this Convention adopted a resolution that its Printer should daily provide its members with copies of its proceedings, for their use and distribu- tion among their constituents; and whereas, up to this time no part of the proceedings or the Journal have been printed and dis- tributed; therefore, be it Resolved, That the Committee on Print.» ing and Accounts do ascertain and report the reasons why the members of this Con- vention have not been furnished with the- printed proceedings and Journal of this Convention; and ascertain what work of' the Stenographer and assistants is required to be done by them, the length of time each is employed daily, the number of as- sistants necessary to do the work, and a fair- compensation for the same, based upon the length of time employed and the number- necessary to do the work; and that said Committee report as soon as practicable. The Committee report that the delay in furnishing copies of the daily proceedings of' the Convention to the members arises from the fact that the Printer did not have the order to print until the 19th inst. When said order was received by the Printer, he did not have the necessary force of men or a sufficient quantity of type on hand to do- the work. The Committee learns that the Printer now has a sufficient force and quan- tity of type, and will probably be up with all the work by the middle of next week. As to the other matters called for in said resolution, your Committee is not now sufficiently advised to report. T. J. ELMORE, Chairman. J. M. 'FORGY, E. E. KIRWAN, J. E. QUICKSALL, SAM’L GRAHAM. The PRESIDENT. The report is be- fore the Convention. What is the wish of the Convention‘? Mr. WILLIAMS. I move its adoption. The question being put, the resolution was declared adopted. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. On the 19th of‘ September there was an amendment offer- ed and referred to the Committee on Exec- utive and Ministerial Officers. the amend-4 ment being offered by the Delegate from the Second District of Louisville. The Committee has considered the amendment with some favor, but it is a matter we feel is hardly within the province of that Com- mittee, and, in order to avoid confusion in the work of vthe Committee, the Commit- tee directs me to return it, and request that RESOLUTIONS. 3 Wednesday,] ALLEN—B ECKNER—BRONSTON. [September 24. that Committe be discharged from further consideration of the matter, and that it be referred to the Committee on Judicial De- partment and Court of Appeals. I will say, it has for its object the abolishment of a Constitutional Court. We think it should go to the Judicial Department. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion to discharge the Committee on Executive and Ministerial Ofiicers from the consideration of the resolution, and refer it to the Committee on Judicial Department and Court of Appeals. The question being put, it was declared to have been carried. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. I have a resolu- tionto offer. The Reading Clerk then read the resolu- tion offered by Mr. Allen, as follows: The following is recommended to the Committee on Revision of the Consti- tution: Should the General Assembly of this Commonwealth, at any time deter- mine, by athree-fourths vote of each House, that any amendment to this Constitution is necessary, then they may propose the same, and provide for a submission of same to a vote of the people of Kentucky, at any regular State election; and, when the vote is taken, each voter shall be asked: Are you “for,” or “against” the proposed amendment to the Constitution? and his vote shall be recorded according to his an- swer; and, if three-fourths of ' all those voting at said election shall vote “ for ” the amendment, it shall [become a part of the Constitution, otherwise it shall not be- come a portion thereof. Referred to Committee, on Revision. Mr. BECKNER. I offer a resolution. The Reading Clerk then read the reso- lutions offered by Mr. Beckner, as follows: Every citizen may freely speak, ‘write, and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions or indictments for libels, the truth may be given in evidence to a jury; and, if it shall appear to the ury that the matter charged as libelous is true, or was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the party shall be acquit- ted; and in all such prosecutions or indict- ments, the jury shall have the right to de- termine the law and the facts. Referred to Committee on Bill of Rights. The General Assembly shall have power to create a Board of Arbitration to hear and determine disputes or differences be- tween employers and employes, and to define its powers and duties, and to pro- vide in all respects for its maintenance and ef‘ficiency. Referred to Committee on General Pro- Visions. The question being taken upon Mr. Beckner’s resolution with regard to the salary of the Janitor, the same was adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon read Mr. Beckner's third resolution, which is as fol- lows: Resolved, That Todd Hall, the Janitor, is allowed to draw the sum of two dollars and fifty cents per day, as the members and ofii- cers of the Convention now draw their per diem, until his allowance is permanently fixed. ' Resolved. That the Committee :on Rules be, and it is hereby, directed after each Com- mittee has reported, to set a day for the dis- cussion of the topic or question embraced in the report of such Committe e, so that tinqe may be given for its consideration, and preparation may be made for its intelligent discussion. Mr. BECKNER. I move its immediate consideration. Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. President, it occurs to me that that resolutiution is go- ing to produce some confusion. Without giving any instructions to the_ Committee on Rules, I think it would better to submit that to them for their consideration. I therefore move that it be referred to the Committee on Rules, without instructions. And the question being taken upon the motion, it was adopted, and the resolution so referred. Mr. BREN TS. Mr. President, I have a resolution to offer. I don’t care to have it read. I would like to have it referred to. 4 RESOLUTIONS. Wednesday,] BRENTS. [September ‘24. the Committee on Elections. 1 have an- other also. The PRESIDENT. The first resolution will be referred as indicated on the resolu- tion, unless some Delegate calls for the reading of it. ‘ Mr. PETTIT and others. Read it. The PRESIDENT. The reading is called for, and the Secretary will please report the resolution. ' The Reading Clerk read two resolutions offered by Mr. Brents, which are as fol- lows: WHEREAS, The following are funda- mental principles of our government, viz: 1. That all men are created equal. 2. All just powers are derived from the consent of the governed. 3. Equal and exact justice to all men of whatever persuasion, religious or political. 4. That the people are capable of self- government, and have the right to choose their own officers. 5. That the powers of government should be divided into three distinct departments, Legislative, Executive and Judicial, and that no person of one department shall ex- ercise any power properly belonging to an- other; and WHEREAS, It is inconsistent and in vio- lation of these fundamental priciples, 1. To proscribe or exclude from ofi‘ice any class of citizens. 2. To place in the hands of an oflicer of one department the power to appoint a responsible officer exercising power in an- other department. ' 3. To make an ofiicer ineligible to a sec- ond term, and deny the people the right to re-elect an officer who has been faithful to the trust confided to him, and whom they desire to serve them above all others. It proscribes the individual, and restricts the people in their right to a free choice. 4. To give office-holders long terms, with- out being required to return to the people ' the authority given them in reasonable pe- riods of time; therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con- vention that clergymen, priests, and relig- ious teachers ought not to be excluded from ofiice; that all ofiicers should be eligible to a re-election by the people, and short, rather than long terms of ofiice, is better, as it makes the ofiice-holder responsible to the people from whom he receives his authoritty. Elections. 1. The General Assembly shall by law provide for the division of each county and city into convenient election precincts; and all State, district, county and precinct elec- tions shall be held at the places selected within the several precincts into which the counties and cities may be divided. Cities shall be divided by squares which are con- tiguous, so as to make the most compact and convenient precincts. 2. Every male citizen of the age of twenty-one years, who has resided in the State two years, or in the county or city one year, and sixty days in the precinct, next preceding the election, shall be a qualified voter, and may vote in said pre- cinct, but not elsewhere, for any of the offi- cers elected by the people. No other quali- fications to vote shall be required in any State, district, county, city, town, precinct, or municipal election held in this State. 3. Voters in all cases, except treason, felony, or breach of the, peace, shall be privileged from arrest in going to, during their attendance at, or in returning from, elections. 4. The General Assembly shall provide by law for the protection of the voters in the free exercise of the elective franchise; for making the returns of the votes cast at all elections; prohibit, with suitable penalties, including exclusion from ofiice and the right to vote, the giving or offering any bribe or treat, directly or indirectly by any candidate or other person, to influence any voter in casting his vote at any election held in this State; accepting a bribe in any election; prohibit, under adequate penal- ties, all undue influence, tumult, intimida- tion, crowding around the polls, and improper practices at any elections in this State, and to punish corruption or bias in any officer or oflicens in holding elections or making returns thereof. 5. The General Assembly shall provide by law when, where, how, and to whom all election returns shall be made; by whom, when and where election returns shall be compared and certified, and by whom cer- tificates of elections shall be issued to the persons found to be elected, and by whom, when, where, and in what manner all con- tests of elections shall be tried and decided. 6. All elections in this State by the peo- ple shall be by ballot, between the hours of 8 o’clock in the morning and 4 o’clock in the evening, by such ofiicers and in such a man- ner as may be provided by law; but no law shall be enacted which will prevent RESOLUTIONS. 5 Wednesday,] SPALDING—BUCKNER. [September 24. any voter free access to the polls and the privilege to vote. 7. The General Assembly shall, by law, provide for the selection of a board of not less than two in each county and city, to be equally divided between the political par- ties, who shall select the ofiicers to hold the elections in each precinct in the county or city, to be equally divided between the political parties. 8. Any person convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction of giving or accept- ing a bribe, corruptly making a false return of an election, of perjury, false swearing or of a felony, shall be disqualified to vote or hold any ofiiee in this State, unless par- doned by the Governor. The General Assembly shall enact suitable laws to carry this section into effect. 9. All elections in this State for State, district or county officers, shall be held on the second Tuesday after the first Monday in November, until another day be fixed by law, except elections to fill vacancies, then another day may be provided by law. 10. The County Judge in each county shall, on the first Monday after an election, convene and organize an examining court to investigate and ascertain all violations within the county of the election laws, and commence prosecutions of any and all persons, where there are reasonable grounds to believe the person or persons guilty of violating any election law. It shall be competent, and it shall be the duty of said court -to examine all candidates at. said election, residing ‘in the county, as to his expenditures; and the General Assembly shall enact suitable laws to carry this sec- tionv into effect, and provide for the trial of all persons against whom prosecutions may be commenced. If the County Judge was a candidate at the election, or otherwise in- terested, or can not preside, the General Assembly shall provide by law by whom said court shall be held. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would lay before the Convention the follow- ing communication from the Auditor which the Secretary will please report. The Reading Clerk read said communi- cation, which is as follows . STATE or KENTUCKY, OFFICE AUnIToR PUBLIC AccoUNTs, FRANKFORT, September 23, 1890. Hon. C. M Clay, J12, President Consti- tutional Convention : SIR: Referring to the resolution of your ; honorable body hearing date of September 11th, I beg to say, that all the information required thereunder, except that portion relating to local and ‘municipal indebted- ness, is in course of preparation in my oflie, and will be laid before the Conven- tion at an early date. I would respectfully suggest that no sta- tistics relating to the subject of local and municipal indebtedness are to be found in this oflicc. But, desiring to render the Convention all the facilities and informa- tion obtainable, either in my office or else- where, to enable it to properly consider this question, I addressed a communication to the Hon. Robert P. Porter, Superintend- ‘ ent of the 11th Census of the United States, who has been for the past twelve months collecting this class of information, and to whom I have given considerable assistance-in this State, asking that he fur- nish me with such statistics as he might have on hand. To this request the Super- intendent replies, that he has a large amount of such statistical information, but that it is not yet in a tabulated or summa- rized form. However, he kindly ofi'ers desk-room and all reasonable facilities to obtain it from the records of his office. As I know of no other means of getting it in time to be of any service to to your honorable body, I respectfully request authority from the Convention to send a competent man to secure it, if in its judgment such a course is warranted by the importance of the information desired. Very respectfully yours, L. C. NORMAN, Auditor. Mr. SPALDING. Mr. President, I move that the communication from the Auditor be referred to the Committee on Rules to report. And the question being taken upon said motion, same was adopted and the commu- nication so referred. Mr. BUCKNER. MrfPresident, 1 have a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution ' 6 RESOLUTION S. Wednesday,] VVoon—STRAUs—SxcHs. [September ‘.24. offered by Mr. Buckner, which is as fol- lows: Resolved, That the Committee on Execu- cutive Oflicers for the State at Large be instructed to consider the propriety of establishing the Insurance Bureau as a distinct department of the Government. Referred to the Committee on Executive Officers for the State ot Large. Mr. WOOD. Mr. President, I have a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Wood, which is as follows; Resolved, That a Select Committee of seven Delegates be appointed by the Presi- dent, whose duty it shall be to inquire into the public debt of the State, and present to this Convention the best practical mode of preventing its increase; also the best man- ner of liquidating the same by the time it shall become due. Mr. WOOD. I ask that the resolution be immediatejy taken up and passed. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the resolution just read. And the vote being taken thereon, the resolution was adopted. I Mr. STRAUS. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Meade. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and such leave is granted. Mr. SACHS. I have a resolution which I desire to present. ' Mr. PETTIT. Is there not now a reso- lution before the House‘? I think the resolution of Mr. Vvood is still pending. The PRESIDENT. That resolution was adopted. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Sachs, which is as follows: Resolved, That section 40, article 4, of the present Constitution (concerning the Louis- ville Chancery Court), be amended by striking out the proviso at the end of the section, which reads as follows, viz: “Provided, that the Marshal of said court shall be ineligible for the succeeding term.” Referred to Committee on Municipali- ties. The PRESIDENT. )Iotions and reso- lutions are in order. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Mr. President, I have a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. H. H. Smith, which is as follows: 1. The legislative power of the Com- monwealth shall be vested in a Senate and House of Representatives, which shall be named or styled the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. . 2. The Senate shall consist of thirty members, and the’ number 'shall never be increased unless the population of the State exceed two millions of inhabitants. The House of Representatives shall consist of ninety members, and not be increased unless the number of Sena-tors be increased; then there shall be three Representatives for each additional Senator, to be chosen in the manner hereinafter prescribed. 3. The Senatorial District hereafter cre- ated, as hereinbefore prescribed, shall be apportioned in the proportion of thirty Senators to the present population of the State. 4. They shall be chosen by the qualified electors for the term of four years, and shall be divided by lot into two classes; the Senators of the first class shall be vacated at the expiration of two years, and those of the second class at the expiration of four years, so that one-half of the Sena- tors shall be chosen biennially thereafter. 5. The members of the House of Repre- sentatives shall be chosen every two years by the qualified electors of each Senatorial District, and their term of ofiice shall be two years from the day of their election. 6. The qualified electors of each Senato- rial District shall be qualified to vote for three Representatives, but in no case shall the qualified voter cast more than one vote for each Representative. 7. No person shall be a Senator unless he be a citizen of the United States, and at the time of his election a qualified elector of this State, and shall have been a resident of the State two years and a resident of the district for which he shall be chosen one year, and shall have attained the age of. twenty—six. 8. No person shall be a Representative unless he be a citizen of the United States, and at the time of his election a qualified elector of this State, and shall have been a resident of the State two years and a res- ident of the district for which he shall RESOLUTIONS. Wednesday,] MOORE—SPALDING—MACKOY. [September 24. have been chosen one year, and shall have .attained the age of twenty-one. Referred to the Committee on Legisla- tive Department. Mr. J. H. MOORE offered the following resolution : Resolved, That a clause shall be inserted in the Constitution inhibiting counties, towns, villages, or other municipal corpora- tions from going into debt more than five per cent. of the taxable property therein, and this must be paid within twenty years. Referred to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. SPALDING. Mr. President, the Delegate from Ohio county is absent, and .I want to ofl'er a resolution he prepared. The Reading Clerk read the resolution ofl'ered by Mr. Spalding, which is as ‘follows: . ' Resolved, That until the Committee on Claims reports, Bowman Adams, the As- .sistant Cloak-room Keeper, be allowed the .sum of one dollar and fifty cents per day. Mr. MACKOY. I move the adoption -of that resolution. Mr. WOOD. ~read. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resolution again. The Reading Clerk again read the said ‘resolution. And the question being taken upon the .adoption of said resolution, the same was I would ask that it be .adopted. Mr. CLARDY. I move the adoption of this resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Clardy, being to the effect that the Chairmen of the different Com- mittees endeavor to arrange meetings so as to avoid conflicts. Mr. J ONSON. Mr. Chairman, I would :say, for the benefit of the gentleman who has offered that resolution, that the Chair- 'men of the several Committees met this morning, and they have taken this identi- ‘tical course, and will report to an adjourned _.meeting of the Chairmen, which has been called for to-morrow morning at 9 o’clock on that subject. The PRESIDENT. What does the gentleman wish done with the resolution‘? Mr. CLARDY. If they have already arranged for this matter, and this is not neeessary, I simply beg leave to withdraw the resolution till they meet to-morrow morning. I saw that something had to be done in the matter. Y Hr. BURNAM. Mr. President, I have a little short resolution that I would like to have the privilege of reading to the mem- bers, as it is written in pencil, and ask to have a direct vote upon it. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the gentleman can read his own resolution. , Mr. BURNAIVI thereupon read the fol- lowing resolution: Resolved, That the present Constitution of Kentucky, as our organic law, is liberal and republican in its essential features, con- servative in spirit, and generally accepta- ble to the people of the Commonwealth, and should be amended by this body only by striking out all reference to the dead system of slavery, and by such other changes and modifications as time and ex- perience have shown to be necessary to meet the advancing growth and civilization in the State; that these changes shall be formulated by the Committees respective- ly, and acted upon by the Convention es- pecially, as may be, and thus bring the la- bors of this body to a close. Hr. BURNAM. Mr. President, I have a conception, sir, that there will be radical differences among the members of the Con- vention, judging from the vast mass of mat- ter that has been referred to the Commit- tees, as to the character and purposes of the election which sent us here, and of the thoughts of the people. Now, I do not conceive, sir, that we were sent to this body for purposes of destruction or of radical ' . . . . revolution, but, as that resolution indicates, only to amend the Constitution of Ken- tucky in these matters which will make it more in accord with the advance of civili- zation in the State; and in order to make 8 RESOLUTION S. Wednesday,] HENDRICK—MACKOY—AUXIER. [September 24- some test as to that, I believe that the House will sustain me in the motion. I would ask that the resolution be acted upon now. Mr. HENDRICK. I think the Conven- tion will be edified by hearing that resolu- tion read again. I would ask for a report of it by the Secretary. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the resolution. The Reading Clerk again read the reso- lution offered by Mr. Burnam. _ Mr. MACKOY. Mr. President, I agree with the spirit of the resolution presented by the gentleman,andIshall vote for it if it is submitted to a vote of the House; but, at the same time, I can not see what good could be accomplished by the adoption of that resolution. The dead system of slavery, as thegentle- man has said, is dead; we need not disturb ourselves in regard to that any further. Then, the changes that are needed in our Constitution, or made necessary by time and civilization, are matters upon which every one of the Delegates to this Conven- tion will probably differ from every other Delegate in some respects. There are one hundred Delegates in this Convention, and every one, in regard to some portion of the Constitution, may have his own opinion with regard to some particular part of the Constitution; he believes that change is needed to meet the changes that have been made by time and civilization in our society here in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. For that reason, while I regard the resolution as eminently proper in spirit, I cannot see what good can be accomplished by adopting it, be- cause it leaves us just where we are at the present time. Mr. AUXIER. Mr. President, on the question presented by the Delegate from Madison, I would simply say this: There are no important changes demanded by the people of Kentucky except upon three or four questions. One of the most impor- tant, as I think, is that in reference to the judicial system. We think we. need changes in that respect. The system of the Circuit Courts seems to have been ordained forty years aga for the benefit of ' those who followed the circuits, the lawyers, who began at one end of the district and fol-- lowed it until the end of the term; and there has not been that justice administered and law enforced, and the people throughout the‘ State under thatsystem have been denied the right of obtaining speedy trials. There- is a clause in our present Constitution which says that justice shall be meted out to all without sale, denial or delay. That system has certainly been a denial of justice. Both civil litigants and the Commonwealth have been denied the right to a speedy prosecu- tion, and bringing to justice of those who have been charged with. crime. Another remedy we need is in reference to local leg- islation. Our Legislatures have consumed too much time, devoted too much attention to local legislation, and there is a need of a. remedy in that respect. ~ Another great and important question has sprung up since the adoption of the present Constitution, and that is in reference to the corporations of ' the present day. They did not then exist, and did not have the power in Kentucky that they have to-day. I concur with the Delegate from Madison, that we ought not to waste much time in re- vising this organic law of ours. It is acceptable generally to the people, and with these few exceptions, we have nothing here to attract our attention in Einvestigating, amending and revising our Constitution. I see no reason for a lengthy session of this Convention. When the Commitees to_ which these several subjects. are referred make their report, and the questions presented are discussed in Com--v mittee of the Whole, I do not think it will take this Convention very long to get. through with all its deliberations, and speed- ily submit to the people of this State the. new instrument which we propose to make- Outside of these changes already suggest-- RESOLUTIONS. 9 Wednesday,] PETRIE—APPLEGATE—BURNAM. [September 24. ed, the people aresatisfied with the present Constitution. I shall, therefore, vote for the resolution introduced by the Delegate from Madison. Mr. PETRIE. I do not know whether the adoption of the resolution will work any material change in the minds of the members of this Convention, but it serves at least to call the attention of the Con- vention to a very important matter, and that is, that the people of the State of Kentucky, so far as I have observed or know, have not asked for any revolution- ary system or any very radical change in our organic law. There may be (and I am inclined'to think there is) a spirit in the Convention, at least in the minds of some of the Delegates, to go much further in the matter of changes in our Constitution than is contemplated by the people. Therefore, the resolution which calls our attention to the fact‘ thatwe have lived under a good Constitution, and have been secured in all our rights of life, liberty and property, and that therefore no changes should be made except those which seem to be abso- lutely necessary. Of course, there are some things in the Constitution that are obsolete that would have been changed long'ago; but the people did not regard it as necessa- ry to call a Convention to strike from the Constitution those features which were really doing no harm, but which every cit- izen in the whole State desired to be out; and I have no doubt in the world that this Convention, and every Delegate in it, is en- tirely willing to strike from the Constitu- tion those provisions in regard to slavery. There will be no difiiculty about that; there will be no contention about it. I amin favor of occupying all the time that isnecessary in order to accomplish the object for which we are sent here. Of course, I desire to progress as speedily as possible, but shall vote for the resolution upon the idea that it calls the ' attention of the Convention and the Dele- gates to that one feature. It is a sort of a remonstrance against any very radical or revolutionary changes in the organic law of the State. Mr. APPLEGATE. Mr. rise to a point of order. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate will please state his point. ' Mr. APPLEGATE. My point of order is, that we have adopted this rule: That no original resolution offered to the Conven- tion, proposing any amendment to the’ Constitution, shall be discussed on its. merits until it shall be referred‘ to the appropriate Committee or to the Commit- tee of the Whole. Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a point of order on that. The PRESIDENT. There can not be a. point of order on a point of order, and the Chair will overrule the point of order of the Delegate from Pendleton, because this is not a resolution changing any part of the. Constitution. It is only in regard to pro- cedure, and regulates matters which will come up hereafter in relation to the Constitution. Mr. BURNAM. Mr. President, in re- ply to the cuzl bono argument of the gentle- man from the city of Covington, I wish to say, in addition to what has been said President, I ‘by the honorable Representative from the county of Todd, that the Convention should bear in mind that there is one feature of' the present Constitution about the change. of which there will be very general unanim- ity in this body; and with that matter before the Convention, all these various masses- of resolutions, which have. been thrown before the Convention, undertaking to make revision by putting in the Constitu- tion, Statutes and Codes, will be found necessary, and that this mode of amend» ing the organic law as it now exists will be stricken out. In 1849, when this pres-- ent Constitution was prepared, it was pro- vided, as the members well know, that in order to effect any change in that instru- ment there should be passed, within the first twenty days of a session of the Legis- 10 RESOLUTIONS. Wednesday,] WASHINGTON. [September 24. lature, an act directing a vote of the peo- ple to be taken on the proposed amendment or change in the Constitution. That re- quired a majority, not only of all the voters who voted at the election, but of all the voters of the Commonwealth present and voting, or absent from any cause. This had to be followed up by similar action of the Legislature and a similar vote of the people two years thereafter. Then the Delegates had to be elected, they had to meet and submit their work to the people for ratification, thus making a period of time that, I suppose, could hardly be cov- ered within less then six or seven years be- fore any change the people wanted could be accomplished. Now, I do not suppose ‘that on this floor there will be found any gentleman who 'will be an advocate of that system. On the contrary, there will be a provision put in the Constitution by which it can be amended by a vote of the people upon specific propositions sub- mitted to them, or what is generally known and recognized as the open clause. There can be no doubt of that, and with such a provision as that, it does seem to me that the labors of this House, when once formu— lated, changing the present mode of elect- _ ing people to office, and to secure, by the Very best means and agencies known to us, future purity of elections; and that when the reports of the Committee shall be made to the House and acted upon, by which our great common school system of the State shall have been strengthened and placed upon broader ' and better foundations; when, as the honorable member from Pike has said, the courts of the country shall be so amended as that justice shall be speedily administered to high and low, rich and poor, without fail, denial or delay, and one or two other-propositions that might be sug- gested here shall have been acted upon, fixing (it may be that some gentlemen wish to have that done) permanently the seat of government and the erection of a magnifi- cient Capitol in accordance with the growth of the State—~when these ‘things shall have been done (and I think they can be done within a short period of time), I know of no reason why we should not be prepared to submit our labors to the people, and let his Excellency, the Governor, fix the time for its ratification by the people, if we do not do so ourselves. I think that it is time now to have some hope that in a short time these reports will be made to the House, and ac- tion will be taken and our labors brought to a close. Mr. WASHINGTON. Mr. President, just a word or two upon this resolution. I very much regret that this resolution is so framed as to make it impossible for me to support it. I am satisfied that the spirit and purpose of that resolution are the spirit and purpose of this Convention; but it con- tains one radical defect, at least to my mind, and that defect presents an insuperable ob- stacle to my voting for it. As I understand it, we are here for the purpose of framing a new Constitution, of getting up an entirely new instrument, to be submitted to the people for their ratification. I do not un- derstand that it is one of the functions of this Convention, or that it comes within its province or authority, to strike out any thing from the existing Constitution. That is entirely beyond the domain of this Con- vention. This resolution as it is now worded is, in ' its essence, a proposition to strike from the existing Constitution. I would like to hear the gentleman who introduced this resolution, or any other gentleman upon this floor, explain by what authority you can strike out any thing from the existing instrument. Now, if the gen- tleman will re-frame that resolution, so as to omit that portion of it, and not put those who desire to support that resolution on account of its spirit and purpose in the attitude of voting for a thing entirely be- yond the power of the Convention, I shall take very great pleasure in voting for it. As has been said by the gentleman from Covington, I do not see that it can accom- RESOLUTION S. ] 1 ‘Wednesday,] BULLITT. [September 24. plish any great good. I think whatever there is contained in that resolution will be done without it. At the same time, I am unable to see that it will accomplish any harm; and, therefore,-inasmuch as it echoes my sentiments, and perhaps those of every gentleman on this floor, I shall be pleased to vote for it. ‘So far as the system of slavery is concerned, as has been very well remarked, it is dead. It is very dead. It is entirely beyond the physician’s art. It could not be deader if it were killed a thousand times. It is so much dead mat- ter in the Constitution. There is not a slave within the boundaries of this Com- monwealth upon whom the Constitution in that particular can operate, and doubtless everybody is in favor of silently omitting it from the new instrument we may frame. N 0 other idea has occurred to any human being, and will not occur to anybody; but the thing that worries me, and gives me a great deal of bother, is simply how it is within our power to strike from the instru- ment now in existence. For these reasons, it is beyond my power to vote for this reso- lution. Mr. BULLITT. Gentlemen have in- -dorsed the spirit of the resolution offered by the gentleman from Madison. I cannot say that I do. The people of_ the Com- monwealth have sent their Delegates here for the purpose of conferring together as to whether ‘they will change, alter or amend, or make a new Constitution entirely. The resolution cuts off the only possible method for the, interchange of opinions of Dele- gates to this Convention, and whether it takes us a long or short time, that trust should be permitted to be executed by members of this Convention. It is the duty of every man to express his opinion as to what he thinks ought to be done, and by that resolution the Delegates will be cut off from giving an expression of their views upon this question. The gentleman may have been delegated simply with this lim- ited power by those who sent him here, but the sovereign people of my county dele- gated to me a higher and more extended power and authority and duty to perform, and that is to revise, examine and ascertain what part of the Constitution should be al- tered, and what part should be stricken from the organic law of the land, and what shall be added in addition to what we have now in the Constitution. Hence, I cannot say that I indorse the spirit of the resolu- tion so far as that part of it is concerned. As to the question of slavery, that was abolished by the arms of the war, and I am not alone in making that declaration. The Supreme Court of the United States so says. Without the Thirteenth Amend- ment to the Constitution; without the proclamation of the President, the institu- . tion of slavery was abolished. It was an issue of the war, and it passed with the set- tlement of the war: We all recognize the power of wars to make laws as well as Legislatures, and that was one of the laws that was made by the war. Upon that issue the war ended against the institution of slavery. But as to the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, if we give to them the literal meaning of the language of those amend- ments, here is an entire revolution of the principles of this government. Here is a transfer of every police power from the States to the Federal Government, and I hope that this Convention will listen and consider thatproposition. The Common- wealth of Kentucky is called upon now to decide whether it will indorse a resolution that transfers the police power from the State to the Federal Government. If per- chance the Federal Congress and the State Legislatures have the right, they being but agents of the sovereign people according to the theory of our government, to take away from the people the rights reserved to them, the object of the resolution is accomplished, and instead of the sovereign power being with the people, it is with the government, and we shall “have to follow the wake of 12 RESOLUTIONS. 'Congress of the United States. Wednesday-3] COX—HENDRICK. [September 24- the English Revolution. At first it was claimed the sovereign power was with the people; gradually the government en- croached on the reserved rights of the people, until finally, when Sir VV’illiam Blackstone wrote, he declared openly that the sovereign power was limited to the government. If we permit these stealthy revolutions to go on, how long will it be before some law-Writer will say that the sovereign power of this country rests with the Federal Government; and if it is true that theFederal Congress and the Legisla- ture of the State have the right to take away from the sovereign people their re- served rights, the revolution is already ac- complished, and there no sovereign power with the people, but it rests solely with the I, there— fore, move that the resolution be referred to the Committee 011 Rules. The PRESIDENT. The Chair state that the motion is not debatable. Mr. BULLITT. I will withdraw my motion. will Mr. COX. The gentleman from Camp- bell has told us that slavery is dead, a fact which we all know from the fact that it gave us considerable trouble at the time of its death; but I do not imagine any gen- tleman has come to the Convention to hear the funeral of that dead body preached. I feel that it, being dead, we ought to offer to the people of Kentucky a Constitution in which reference to slavery shall not appear. It has been dead for twenty years, and let us give to the people of Kentucky an or- ganic law in which the word slavery has no existence. This, I think, is the object and purpose of every gentleman upon this floor. But, so far as the other portions of the Con- stitution are concerned, we should not be in any particular hurry. The Convention has given us clear evidence that there are vast matters before it. The Convention has wisely created twenty-four Committees. If there were but few matters before this Convention, why, in the wisdom of this Convention, should so large a number of Committees have been created? I insist‘ that we shall make haste very slowly, and give the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky a Constitution which will be ac- ceptable to all, and for which the whole people of the Commonwealth will vote. Mr. HENDRICK. I feel some sort of responsibility for this resolution, having consulted with its author prior to its intro- duction, and I wish to add my emphatic indorsement of the resolution as presented.v My reasons for voting for it are somewhat different from those that have been pre- sented by other Delegates. I am for the present Constitution because it is Demo- cratic in all of its essential features, and I use the word “ Democratic” in its broadest sense. By this instrument under which we- have lived so happily for these many years- all power is lodged in the people, and I want that same spirit to pervade the new Con- stitution. I believe that the people of Kentucky have sent us here, not to make a new Constitution, but simply to amend the Constitution they already have; and I be- lieve that this Convention, in expressing that idea by the adoption of this resolu- tion, will give the people of Kentucky, if' it were necessary or possible to give them any greater confidence in this body, more- confidence than they have ever enjoyed. I believe I speak the minds of two-thirds of the Delegates on this floor when I say they recognize the fact that the people of Ken- tucky are devoted to the instrument made- by the gentlemen who preceded us in the Convention of 1849, devoted to it because it was the first Constitution framed for the State of Kentucky in which the sov- ereign will of the people was recognized and enforced in their organic law. If I understand the object and intent of the mover of this resolution, it is simply that this Convention re-aifirms that doc- trine. It is simply the recognition of a principle as old as liberty itself that all power resides in the people, and, in addi- RESOLUTION S. 13 Wednesday,] APPLEGATE—MACKOY—BRONSTON. [September 24. tion to that, an expression that it is the sense of this Convention that the peo- ple represented by the Delegates here are devoted to that instrument. For that reason, it seems to me that the object and purpose of this Convention should be to revise, amend, but not destroy this organic law in its spirit and strength—not to cre- ate a new instrument totally, but simply to take from that instrument whatever is ob- jectionable, and add to it whatever is shown to be necessary by the experience and wisdom of the States and people who have framed Constitutions since that time. I am very heartily in favor of the resolu— ‘tion, and the insuperable objections pre- sented by the Delegate from Campbell, I .am free to say, do not impress themselves on my mind. Mr. APPLEGATE. I think it is gen- erally conceded that the clause in the Con- stitution in regard to slavery is- dead. I believe the dead are entitled to receive re- spectful burial. I herefore move that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Revision. Mr. MACKOY. I suggest that some other gentleman may want to speak. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate from Pendleton withdraw his motion‘? Mr. APPLEGATE. If any one wants to speak I will. - Mr. BRONSTON. I would not tres- pass upon the patience and the very kind indulgence of this Convention by a single suggestion, except to answer a remark made by the distinguished Delegate from Fleming. I do not concur in the spirit of the resolution offered by the Delegate from Madison. We are here under a call by the Legislature of the State of Kentucky, in the very first section of which, it seems to me, we are met by the insurmountable dif- ficulties mentioned by- the Delegate from Campbell, and other Delegates upon the floor, who have made, similar suggestions. This Convention was called for the purpose of adopting, amending and changing the Constitution of the State of Kentucky. The power conferred is to adopt, change or amend it. The resolution offered by the Delegate from Madison in what might be termed its preamble, contains its gist, and that is all. “ The present Constitution of Ken- tucky, presenting as it does (I was about to read from a copy, but the substance I will attempt to state), is acceptable to the peo- ple of Kentucky; and all we should do is to repeal the clause referring to the dead issue of slavery, and then provide and make such other changes and modifica- tions as time and experience have shown to be necessary, to meet the advancing growth and civilization of the State.” Had the Delegate from Madison incor- ‘ porated in his resolution his views as to what was necessary to meet the advanc- ing growth and civilization of the State, we might have been able to vote intelligently upon this proposition, and I submit that there is not a Delegate upon this floor who has not been for the past two weeks giving all his energy of body and of mind in endeavoring to ascertain and to formulate what he believes to be necessary for the ad- vancing growth and civilization of the State of Kentucky. I do not believe that there is a Delegate upon this floor who is willing to admit that the most important and essential step to the advancing growth of the civilization of Kentucky is to blot from the Constitution the dead issue of slavery. And, on the other hand, there is not a Delegate upon this floor who is not willing that that should be wiped out, and I, for one, am able to say that my pride as a citizen, native-born of the Common- wealth of Kentucky, is only shadowed by the fact that there has ever been a law authorizing the barter and traffic of human souls. It is not only dead in spirit and in law, but it is dead in fact, and I am unwill- ing that we should attempt to give it new life by recognizing it ‘as an issue now before the people of the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky. Let it sleep, let it sleep with- 14 RESOLUTIONS. Wednesday,] HENDRICK—PHELPS. [September 24. out any reference to it. How best can we ascertain what is important for the advancing growth and civilization of Kentucky, except by conference in Committee? We are trying to do that, and though complaint has been made of the numerous resolutions that have been intro- duced by the Delegates, I regard that as the best and the most economic way of ascer- taining the views of the Delegates. They present them in writing; they are to be considered by the Committee. They go abroad to the people of Kentucky, and we can hear expressions from them; and I am unwilling to reflect upon myself, and upon every other Delegate upon this floor, by saying we are not doing everything we can to meet the advancing spirit and civiliza— tion of the people of Kentucky; and, therefore, I do not concur in this resolution, because? believe it to be a censure upon each and every Delegate upon this floor, virtually saying you are not doing your duty, not: doing what your people have sent you here to do. I concur in the other suggestion that has been made, that is, that the Constitution as we now have it has been made sacred by experience and by the wisdom of ages, and that we ought to move slowly, indeed, when we undertake to make a change in that instrument. I have confidence that the Delegates who are here assembled will do nothing either in haste or from lack of wisdom that will reflect discredit upon the great State of Kentucky, or that’ any one can say was not done for the purpose of meeting the advanced civ- ilization under which we live; and for these reasons I can not vote for the resolu- tion, because:I do not concur either in its letter or in its spirit. Mr. HEN DRICK'. It is certainly a strained construction of the resolution to suppose that it is a reflection upon the in- tegrity, patriotism or intelligence of any member of this body. The resolution of the gentleman‘I makes no such suggestion. I concur with the distinguished representa- tive from Lexington, that these resolutions offered by the Delegate, are of the very greatest moment and importance; but this- resolution has certainly none of the objec- tions which have been urged. It is simply a statement or resolution by this body, that, in its judgment, we should amend the'Con- stitution of 1849, not reconstruct it wholly and entirely. And it is for that reason, and for that reason alone, that I am willing to support it and to vote for it. If it con- tained a censure upon a single Delegate here I should certainly never vote for it; but as an expression of the deliberate con- viction of this Convention that the Consti- tution of 1849 is a wise instrument, is a broad, liberal organic law, and that its principal features should be retained in the instrument which we are to make, I do certainly approve it and heartily recom- mend it. A ‘ Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. I move that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Rules. Mr. BURNAM called for the yeas and nays, and the call was seconded by Mr. Hendrick. The result of the vote was announced, as follows: Yeas—67. Hanks, Thomas H. Allen, M. K. Harris, Geo. C. Amos, D. C. Holloway, J. W. Applegate, Leslie T. Hopkins, F. A. Allen,‘ C. T. Askew, J F Jonson, Jep. C. Ayres, W. W. Johnston. P. P. Beckner, W. M. Kirwan. E. E. Bennett B. F. Lassing L. W. Birkhead, B. T. ~ Lewis, W. W. Blackburn. James Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Clardy. John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Mackoy, W. H. Martin, W. H. May, John S. McDermott. E. J. McElroy, W. J. Miller, Will. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. ‘ RESOLUTIONS. 15 Wednesday,] BOUBLAND—GOEBEL. [September 24. (30X [1 Phelps, Zack 2. Any member of the Legislature who Defiaven S, E_ Ramsey, W, R shall be influenced in his vote or action Doris, W: F_ Rodes, Robert ' upon any matter pending before the Legis- Sachs, Morris A. Durbin, Charles Spalding, I. A. Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Straus, F. P. Farmer. H. H. Swango, G. B. Field. W. W Trusdell, George Forrester, J. G. Washington, George Forgy, J. M. Whitaker, Emery Funk, J. T. Williams, L. P. V. Glenn, Dudley E. Young, Bennett H. Graham, Samuel Nays—19. Auxier, A. J. Parsons, Rob’t T. Beckham, J. C. Petrie, H. G. Pugh, Sam’l J. Berkele, Wm. Quicksall, J. E. Blackwell, Joseph Buchanan, Nathan Smith, H. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Smith, W. Scott Hendrick, W. J. West, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Wood, J. M. Lewis, J. W. Mr. President Clay Moore, Laban T. ABSENT—14. Kennedy, Hanson Knott, J. Proctor McHenry. H. D. Boles, S. H. English, Sam. E. Goebel, William Hines, J. S. Miller, W. H. Hines, Thomas H., O’Hara, R. H. Jacobs, R, P. Twyman, I. W. James, A. D. Wuolfolk, J. F. Mr. BOURLAND. I desire to intro- duce a resolution, and have it referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con- vention that the Constitution should con- tain the following provisions: 1. Any person who shall seek to influence the vote of a member of the Legislature by bribery, promise of reward, intimidation, or any other dishonest means, shall be guilty of lobbying, which is hereby declared a felony, and it shall be the duty of the Leg- islature to provide by law for the punish- ment of this crime. lature, by any reward or promise of future reward, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon conviction, in addition to such punishment as may be provided by law, shall be disfranchised and forever disquali- fied from holding any office of public trust. Any person may be compelled to testify in any lawful investigation or judicial pro- ceeding against any person who may be charged with having committed the offense of bribery or corrupt solicitation, or with having been influenced in his vote or action as a member of the Legislature by reward"_ or promise of future reward, and shall not be permitted to withhold his testimony upon the ground that it may criminate himself, or subject him to public infamy. But such testimeny shall not afterwards be used against him in any judicial proceeding except for perjury in giving such testi- mony. Referred to Committee on LegislatiYe Department. Mr. GOEBEL. I desire to introduce a resolution, and have it referred to the Com- mittee on General Provisions. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved. That the Committee on Gen- eral Provisions be instructed to report whether or not there are now in this State any counties which are too large to be con- tinued with their present boundaries, and, if not, whether or not the creation of new counties should be henceforth prohibited. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state for the information of the Convention that there is nothing at all in the orders of the day. Mr. WILLIAMS._ I move that this Convention adjourn. _The motion being put to the House, it was declared to have been carried. The Convention thereupon adjourned. \ @unveniian guard. Thursday,] constitute a days’ ——KENTUCKY—- - CCDNS'I'I'I‘U'I‘ICDNAL CUN‘V'ENTION- Vol. 1. FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 25, 1890. No. 14. PnELPs. [September 25 , The Convention ' opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Blayney. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order will be the reception of petitions. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I have here a petition from the Trades and Labor As- sembly of Louisville, sent to me with the request that I offer it and have it referred to the proper Committees. I think there should be three copies made and sent to the Committee on General Provisions, Com- mittee on Elections, I forget the other Committee. It is on the back of the pe- tition. ' To the Honorable President and Members of the Co estimation/ll Convention of Ken- tucky: The Trades and Labor Assembly, Unions 'and Lodges, in the city of Louisville, com- posed of the laboring and workingmen, respectfully petition that the General As- sembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky be required to enact laws touching the fol- lowing subjects, or that your honorable body, by some proper mode, provide for—- 1. A system of compulsory education. 2. Fixing the minimum age at which persons shall be permitted to work at any work-shop, factory or mine in this Common- wealth. 3. As to how many hours’ labor shall work on all public works. 4. Providing for what is commonly known as the Australian ballot system in ‘all elections held in this State. 5. For the establishment of a Bureau of Labor Statistics. 5. For the establishment in this State of a Board of Arbitration, with full power to settle all industrial difficulties between em- ployer and employe. 6. Providing that all wage-earners in this Con'imonwealth shall be paid for their services in lawful currency. 7. Providing that all goods and wares manufactured by or with the aid of convict labor, shall be so labeled or marked as to distinguish it. Done by order of the Labor Unions and Lodges of the city of Louisville. Very respectfully, JOSEPH ScnEFFLER, President Trades and Labor Assembly, Louisville, Ky. C. GRAU, Vice-President. JAMES McGILL, Secretary Trades and Labor Assembly. J. W. P. RUssELL, Treasurer. J. J. HENNESSY, Fin. Secretary. HUMPHREY KNECHT, Cor. See. The PRESIDENT. The reference will be made. Reports from Standing Commit- tees are in order. Mr. DEHAVEN. The Committee on Executive and Ministerial Affairs for the State at Large have had before them reso- lution 29, relating to the powers of the Governor. That Committee has considered it, and has instructed me to report it back to the Convention and ask leave to be dis- charged from its further consideration. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resolution. The resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on the 2 ' THE EXECUTIVE. Thursday,] DEHAVEN—ALLENfl—BURNAM. [September 25 . Executive Department be instructed to in— vestigate the questions as to whether the Governor of this Commonwealth shall be permitted by the Constitution to pardon crimes before conviction of parties charged with same, and upon the propriety of the establishment of a Board of Pardons, who shall, in conjunction with the Governor, be consulted, and make report upon the grant- ing or withholding of pardons and re- prieves. Mr. DEHAVEN. The Committee has considered the two propositions embraced in that resolution. It will be readily per- ceived by every Delegate upon this floor, that the first proposition is to limit pardon- ing power of the Governor; in other words, it shall not be exercised until after convic- tion. The Committee were of opinion that it would be unwise to thus limit the power of the Governor. Numerous instances can be easily imagined where the power of the Governor can be better exercised before conviction than afterwards; and if it were necessary I could detail them, but one of the principal objects we have in view in re- porting that resolution, is to get an indirect instruction what is the pleasure of a ma- jority of the Convention. If it be the pleasure of this Convention that the Govern- or’s power shall be limited as indicated in the first branch of the resolution, then the Committee will take it as an indirect in- struction that we shall insert that; but if a majority of this Convention are opposed to the insertion of that in the Constitution we are making, they will discharge the Com- mittee, and we will regard it as an indirect- instruction to us that a majority of the Con- vention do not want that provision in the Constitution we are to frame. The same is equally true of the sec- ond proposition. This proposes to create a Board of Pardons to sit in con- junction with the Governor. Our Commit- tee think that that proposition would be unwise. If you divide the responsibility you have less discretion in the exercise of power; but what we do want, Mr. Presi- dent, is to have some expression from this Convention as to what is its pleasure upon this proposition. Suppose the Committee, of which I am a member, were to go on and prepare the provisions such as were‘ proposed to insert that in the Constitution ; as a matter of course, when that is re- .ported to the Convention, every gentleman on this floor would have a right to offer any‘ amendment thereto that he saw fit. We would then have a great mass of' amendments pending before this Conven- tion, either sitting as a Convention or as a (‘ommittee of the Whole, and it would necessarily necessitate a reference to the same Committee for the purpose- of getting it in proper shape. Can not we handle the business of the Conven- tion better, that wherever a resolution con- tains only one or two isolated propositions, by getting the sense of the majority of the Convention, so that the Committee may have some instruction about preparing the- principal provision. Iv would like very much to have the sense of the Convention on this proposition. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I think the gentle-v man from Oldham is partly right and part- ly wrong. I do not think the Convention is prepared to give even an indirect in~ struction to the Committee on so important a question as that of pardon before convic- tion. I think it opens a field for very serious discussion, and I am certain when that question comes before the Committee. of the Whole it will be discussed ably and at length, and I therefore propose that the- resolution just read he referred to the Com- mittee of the Whole, and be made a special order for to-morrow at eleven o’clock; and in that way the object desired by the gentleman from Oldham can be reached; and when the sense of this Convention is arrived at, after full discussion, he will be able to frame an article for the Constitu- tion on the matter as indicated by him. Mr. BUR-NAM. I move to amend the offer made by the gentleman from Cald- well by referring this resolution to the THE EXECUTIVE. . 3 Thursday,] DEHAVEN—WHITAKER. [September 25 . Joint Committee on Executive Affairs. I think that it may be possible, by consulting with all the members composing the Joint or General Committee on Executive Affairs, to which the Committee to which the Honorable Delegate from the county of Oldham belongs, they would be prepared to make such an investigation as this. I do not know whether I am in order or not, but I make the suggestion. Thc PRESIDENT. The Chair is of the opinion that the resolution is not before the Convention yet, and that it is not subject to a reference. The question is on the dis- charge of the Committee. A resolution must be before the Convention in order for the Convention to make any reference of it. Mr. DEHAVEN. There is one other object the Committee had in view, and that was to get, if possible, the sense of this Convention on this proposition. Here are a number of resolutions referred to that Committee, and a great number of resolu- tions that have been referred to other Com- mittees. Now what are the Committees to do with those resolutions‘? Are they to report some general measure in lieu of all the resolutions that have been referred to them, or are they to report back each sepa- rate resolution that has been offered to the Committee and make some recommenda- tion as to it? It occurs to my mind it is hardly respectful to any member on this floor that a Committee shall take the re- sponsibility of either strangling or pocket- ing a resolution. When a measure that has been introduced by any member on this floor, that member has the right not only to the judgment of the Committee, but also to the judgment of the Convention, upon his proposition; and what‘ are we to do with ' the multitude of resolutions that have been referred to these various Committees? Must we report them one by one, or must we report some general measure in lieu of 9,11 those resolutions, and just wipe out by one fell swoop every proposition that has been submitted to us‘? Mr. WHITAKER. It seems to me ‘that i the proposition of the Delegate from Old- ham is premature at this time. This Con- vention has divided up its labors and re- ferred them to Committees that have been appointed, and it looks to me like each Committee ought to pass upon all these propositions that have been referred to it, and give to this Convention, in some form, ' the conclusion they have come to. If any other rule is adopted, each Committee, when it comes to any proposition that re- quires too ‘much investigation, or that they are unwilling to decide upon, will dump it into this Convention or the Committee of the Whole. We might as well not‘have the Committee, and do all the business of the Convention in Committee of the Whole. As to another proposition which was made and brought before the Convention sudden- 1y, it amounts to this: That that Commit- tee is asking for instructions from this Convention as to what it shall do upon a certain proposition, when the Convention has had no time, or their minds have not been drawn to the proposition, and they. are entirely unprepared on it, and unable to express an opinion, unless they have time for reflection and examination. If this Convention, this morning, is called upon to decide upon that question, or to give in- structions to the Committee having that resolution in charge, it is in fact a passage upon the question at issue. It is acting in fact in Committee of the \Vhole, and if they decide that that question should not come in before that Committee, they decide it shall come up in the Committee of the Whole. The question made by the Delegate from Oldham is, to my mind, one worthy of investigation, and that is to limit the power of the Executive to grant pardons and re- missions. I would agree With him at once that there should be no Board of Pardons to pass upon remission; but it may bacon- sidered necessary by the Convention that' 4 THE EXECUTIVE. Thursday] there should be such a Board to pass upon question of pardons. It has always been an anomally to me that a Governor should pardon a man of crime before conviction, because he must pardon him of crime. The proposition, to my mind is this: How shall a Governor come to the conclusion that a man is guilty until he has been tried by a jury of his peers, and pronounced guilty‘? He needs no pardon and is not subject to pardon before that, and 'until convicted, he stands before the world and community as an innocent prisoner. Therefore I concur with my friend to the left that some time should be taken, if this Convention is to pass upon that question. My mind is led to the conclusion that every Committee should pass upon the reso- lutions referred to them, and whether they pass upon it in conformity with the will of the Convention will be tested when it comes up in Committee of the Whole, when we can pass upon the adoption or re- jection of the report then. Mr. CARROLL. I do not, at this time, see any objection to discharging the Com- mittee from further consideration of the proposed amendment to the Constitution. I think that when a Committee has acted upon any amendment or proposition sub- mitted to them ‘by a Delegate, and have come to the conclusion that it is the sense of that Committee that a new clause ought not to be inserted in the Constitution, that Committe ought to be discharged from its further consideration; and the amendment ought then to be sent to the Secretary and obtained from him by the 'person intro- ducing it, so that when the original ques- tion comes up before the House for discus- sion, the member introducing the amend- ment or new clause may have the right to offer it in Convention or Committee of the Whole, as a substitute or amendment to that section to which it refers. So far as the main question is concerned, I am ready to vote upon it now, because, as has been well said by the gentleman from Mason, it has CARROLL—BURN AM. always seemed to me as an anomalous state of affairs that a man may be pardoned for the commission of a crime before it has been legally ascertained that he was guilty of one. gate from Oldham, that the Committee be discharged from the further consideration of that amendment, in order that when the Committee, of which he is a member, re- port with an expression of opinion that we ought not to pass that section referring to the pardoning power, the gentleman who introduced the amendment may have op- portunity to offer it in Convention or Com- mittee of the Whole as a substitute; and then it can be printed and made a special order for some other time, and discussed at length and as fully as the Delegate desires. Mr. BURNAM. This resolution was presented to the House on the 18th of Sep- tember, and was prepared by me. It is in these words: Resolved, That the Committee on Exec- utive Department be instructed to investi- gate the question as to whether the Gov- ernor of the Con'nnonwealth shall be per- mitted by the Constitution to pardon crimes before conviction. Now, the proposition before the House is, shall the Committee be discharged from the consideration of this duty imposed upon them ? The idea that I have always entertained is this: That Committees in Legislative bodies bear to the House very much the relation which a Master in Chan- cery bears to an Equity Judge. He is in- structed to digest the facts and ascertain them, and report to the Chancellor whether such and such a judgment should go. And I think that this is a duty which, when it is imposed upon a Committee by the House, should be discharged. Now, it would have been very easy, if the Committee had been disposed to, to have consulted the Constitu- tions of every enlightened Commonwealth, dead and living, to ascertain what has been the action of other States and Governments upon the questions submitted to them; and I believe if that had been done it would [September 25. I second the motion of the Dele-. THE EXECUTIVE. - 5 Thursday,] BURNAM-BULLITT [September 25‘ have been found a very large majority of the States now composing the Union have in their Constitution a clause which pro- hibits the granting of pardons prior to conviction. It has grown up in the. Com- monwealth of Kentucky without any expressed statement in the present Consti- tution as to whether the power exists or not, and has been acquiesced in generally by the people. I recall the fact that about the close of the war, the then Governor of the Commonwealth, a very distinguished friend of mine, Governor Bramlette, in order to give quiet andrepose to many communities in the State, and gradually put an end to the conflicts that might have bred perpetual feuds, by discharging persons who had been reported by the grand jury for . trialyand that was the effect of it and I can readily see how, in certain states of case, even without special grant in the Constitution, this might be productive of some good; but on the whole, looking at the very theory and constitution of society, it always struck me, as it does my honor- able friend from Madison, as a most anom- alous proposition, that when a grand jury investigate a case and an indictment is found, it is put in the power of a party allied by blood and marriage of the first people in the community to have that done which, in the absence of friends, could not be sought and obtained by one in more humble station of life. And I think this matter should have been reported upon by this Committee, and I know of no Dele- gate in this body more competent to have made a thorough investigation of the ' mat- ter than the honorable Delegate from the county of Oldham, himself now, Ibelieve, a distinguished Circuit Judge; and I there— fore think that the'House should still ad- here to what it has already done, and stand by the resolution requesting this Commit- tee to report the facts in this case. Now, as to the .other ‘branch of it, that will be further along as to whether a Board of Pardons should be inaugurated. That will be considered in connection with the power of the Governor to pass upon the granting of reprieves and pardons after conviction. That obtains in some States, whilst in oth- ers it has been rejected. Whether it is wise to do so may be the subject of grave and sober reflection here, but I do think the Committee ought not to be discharged, but we ought to have full, explicit and compre- hensive reports upon these matters submit- ted to the Committee. Mr. BULLITT. As one of the ('om- mittee, I would say to the gentleman that we did make the investigation he speaks of, and came to the conclusion that the-amend, ment out not to pass; but we thought that we ought not stifle the consideration of the question by the Convention, and the pur- pose in referring it back here was to give the Convention an opportunity of discussing the question, and deciding for themselves what they would instruct us to put in that part of the Constitution that we have been ordained to prepare. I have to confess I am unacquainted with parliamentary usages; but the members of the Committee that I am serving with informed me that the request to refer it back to the House, and to be relieved from its further consider- ation, would have the effect of turning it over to the Convention for its considera- tion; and if, after consideraticlc, the Con~= vention instructed us to put it '11:, ‘we would put it in; but we thought we had about run out of business, and now was as good a time to consider these propositions as any other time, whilst we were out of business; and when the question comes up for con- sideration of the proposition itself, then it will be time for us to discuss it. We dis- cussed it fully in the Committee, and the Committee were, I believe, almostunani- mously opposed to the adoption of it; but - the Committee’s opinion ought not to pre- vail against the will of the Convention; and we thought that now was as good a time to present it to the Convention as any other, whilst we were out of business. 6' ~ THE EXECUTIVE. Thursday,] MCELROY—BRONSTON—JOXSON. [September 25. Mr. McELR-OY. I rise to make an in- quiry. It occurs to me if this Convention now discharges this Committee, that there is an end of this proposition by this Con- vention. When a Committee has had any thing under consideration and asks to be discharged from the further consideration .of it, it occurs to me like if they are dis- charged from the consideration of it that it would have the same effect as to table a proposition, which will be an end of it? The PRESIDENT- Does the Delegate ask the 1 hair that question‘? Mr. MCELROY. Yes, sir. The PRESIDENT. The effect of the passage of a motion to discharge a Commit- tee from the further consideration of a proposition is to defeat the proposition. The < ommittee asking to be discharged is the same as an adverse report upon it. Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. President, I de- sire to offer this in the form of a motion. The PRESIDENT. Report the motion. Mr. BRONSTON. “That the Commit- tee be instructed to prepare an amendment defining clearly the power of the Governor to commute sentences and limiting his power of pardoning before judgment.” The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks that that will appropriately come after this motion. This motion is not amendable; but if this motion is voted down, it will be very appropriate for the gentleman to offer the motion suggested. Mr. BRONSTON. The view I had of it was the same as that‘ announced by the Chair; that to discharge the Committee from the further consideration of the ma-t- ‘ ter now would be a settlement of this pro- posed amendment to the Constitution; that the Convention will express itself as being opposed to that amendment. Now, ,tlllS Committee makes a motion to be discharged from the further consider- ation of the proposition. Whilst that is in the form of a motion, it occurs to me that it could be met, instead of discharg- ing the Committee to require them to pre- pare an amendment embracing that sub- ject for the consideration of the Conven- tion. ' The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks the motion is not amendable ; but the gen- tleman’s motion will be in order when this motion is disposed of. Mr. BRONSTON. I so understood, and therefore call attention to the fact that it will be necessary to vote down the motion to discharge. Mr. J ()NSON. I believe that no false modesty or any fear of being troublesome ought to prevent any Delegate from having an opinion upon any subject that is being discussed. I believe that the people of Kentucky have a right to the opinion of’ every Delegate upon this floor upon every proposition that may come before .it. I hope that every gentleman will feel this spirit actuating him now and hereafter. I ' believe, sir, that the ‘Committee ought not to be discharged from the further consider- ation of this resolution. It is an exceed- ingly important matter. It is vesting in one man an extraordinary power. As a proposition, the people of Kentucky are opposed to the one-man power anywhere and under any guise. While it is true, as stated by the gentleman from Madison, that Governor Bramlette, recently, in the exercise of this most extraordinary power, did do something to pacify and allay the passions which had been engendered by a most unfortunate strife among the people of . Kentucky as well as among the other States of the United States, that time has for- tunately passed. No such circumstances surround us. We all have the sincere desire that they shall not in the future ever again come about us. I can not concur with the gentleman from Oldham that it is easy to imagine such a state of circum- stances as he says will justify the exercise of this power in the Governor. It is some- thing that, in my opinion, will not arise. .That in the nature of things, under our gov- ernment, it cannot arise unless there is THE EX ECUTIVE. 7 ‘Thursday,] ' \ CARROLL—WOOD—PETTIT. [September 25 . some great disturbing cause, such as gave .at least a color of opinion of right action in the Governor, referred to already in that .line of action. I believe that - it would be greatly to the relief of “our chief Executive to put such a prohibitory clause in our Constitu- tion. I know it is a fact that he is some- times asked to do these things. I know that exercising his powers, with an awful re- sponsibility upon him, and a full concep-' tion that he is occupying a position of re- .sponsibility, and feeling, as he must neces- sarily do, and as we all do, that he is a man and actuated by like compassions and influ- -.enced by them as others, I believe that it would be to his protection; I believe that - it would be a great relief. I believe that 0- power. the present incumbent, or any future Gov- ernor of Kentucky, would be glad to know that such a thing as this had been incorpo- rated in the Constitution of the State of Kentucky. Upon the other proposition, as to the divided responsibility, I am not so sure. The system has been adopted in other .States of having an Advisory Board. We, in a modified form, have already instituted it by our legislative action, recently had in providing a pardoning or paroling I am not ready to say that it has not resulted in good, both as affecting the .State and many individuals of the State. As at present advised, my impression is thatthe Advisory Board ought to be re- tained. I believe that that will be a re- lief to our Chief Executive. I do not be- lieve that our higher ofiicers are disposed, as a rule, to avoid responsibility. I do be- lieve, however, that, as a rule, they are ready to seek for information and assist- .ance where it can be found. So, Mr. Pres- ident, I hope that this motion will not pre- vail. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to inquire if the President intended to say, in' response to the inquiry of the gentleman from Allen, that if we discharge the Committee 0 from the further consideration of the pro- posed amendment it could not afterwards he introduced before the Convention in Committee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT. The Chair did not so intend to state. Mr. WOOD. That was the purpose that I had in arising—to get that informa- tion from the President—as I wanted to vote intelligently on the proposition. Then, I understand it from the President, that receiving the resolution back from the Committee, and discharging them from its consideration, simply leaves the resolution before the Convention. The PRESIDENT. It does not leave the resolution before the Convention, but it is in order at any time when the matter comes up to offer the same amendment, Mr. PETTIT. ' This is simply a question of discharging the Committee, and in all de- ference to the distinguished gentlemen from ' Oldham, who is the Chairman of that Com- mittee, I hope this Convention will not agree to his motion. I do it from the sim- ple fact that I think it is a bad precedent to set before this Convention. We have re- ferred matters to our various Committees for their action, for their report. We want them to report what their opinions are, after mature deliberation upon the questions sub- mitted to them, and report it to this House. Then it comes in the regular order; it runs into the Committee of the Whole, it is printed, it receives the consideration of this Convention, ‘and then is the time for every gentleman to propose what amendments he may desire to any prop- osition. It matters not whether the gen- tleman from Madison or myself, who has a resolution before that Committee covering this identical point, which is reported adversely by that Committee, or whether there is no report at all, which is an adverse report. Then we are not denied our rights. We can suggest amendments to their re- port and obtain the sense of this Conven- tion in this thorough and systematic man- 8 THE EXECUTIVE. Thursday,] AIgPLEGATE—BRQNSTON. ner. For that reason I must oppose the discharge of the Committee, and insist upon their making a report, giving their views upon this proposition, whether it be adverse or whether it be favorable. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the discharge of the Committee from the further consideration of the resolution. Mr. APPLEGATE. It seems to me that this is a very important question, and there may be many in the Convention like my- self who are not prepared to vote upon it. I therefore move that we postpone the consideration of the question until next Monday, and that it be made a special order for that day at 11 o’clock. Mr. MACKCY. I rise to a point of order. The motion has not been seconded. Mr. ASKEW. I second it. And the vote being taken upon the said motion, it was decided in the negative. The question being then taken upon the motion to discharge the Committee from the further consideration of the resolution under discussion, it was decided in the neg; ative. Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. now offer this resolution. The PRESIDENT. Report the resolu- tion, Mr. Secretary. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Rronston, which is as fol- lows: President, I Resolved, That the Committee on Execu- tive Department be instructed to prepare an amendment defining clearly the power of the Governor as to commuting sentence, and limiting power of pardon to judg- ment of conviction. Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. President, by way of explanation, I want to say that I do not mean-that the passing of that reso- lution will adopt the amendment; but it simply requires the Commitiee to prepare an amendment on that subject, and present the same for the consideration of this Con- vention. Mr. APPLEGATE. Report the resolu- tion again. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the resolution again. The Reading Clerk re-read the said reso- lution. Mr. APPLEGATE. Now, Mr. Presi- dent, if I understand that resolution cor- rectly, it instructs the Committee to report. a clause in the new Constitution limiting the power of the Governor to pardon after‘ conviction ; and therefore I move to strike‘ out that part of the resolution limiting the- "power of ‘the Governor to pardon after conviction. The PRESIDENT. That amendment- is in order. Mr. BRONSTON. It is not my inten- tion, Mr. President, at this time, to pre- cipitate the discussion of that question be- fore this body. I want to leave that matter open entirely for discussion by the Commit_ tee of the Whole. It is very clear, from the report of the Committee this morn- ing ‘that, in their opinion, such an amendment should not be the Constitution. It asks to be relieved from the consideration of the matter. We can not fairly and impartially dis- cuss the question as to power of the Governor should be limited to pardoning only after conviction till an amendment, in form, has been presented for consideration to this Convention, or an adverse report made. indicated that they would make an adverse report, and, therefore, it occurs to me that it would shorten matters, because the dis-7 tinguished gentlemen on that Committee would prepare, in proper verbiage, such an amendment, or, if they see proper, they can report to the Convention that in their opin-> ion such an amendment should not pass. That puts‘ it in form for consideration. But the Delegate from Pendleton, for the pur- pose of ascertaining the sense of the Con- vention, moves to strike out the part limiting the power of the Governor after- If he means by that to have‘ the Convention commit itself now to the: proposition that the Governorshall have: conviction. 1 [September 25.. made to - whether the- The Committee has . THE EXECUTIVE. ' 9 Thursday,] ‘ DEHAVEN—MILLER—SMITH. [September 25- power to pardon before conviction, I trust the Convention will give it careful con- sideration before they vote to sustain such a propositien. I do not believe that any Delegate upon this floor, upon calm con- sideration, after the experience we have had of forty years, will concede that the Governor, under any circumstances, ought to have the power of pardon- ing before conviction. But I do not wish to discuss the question now. I want the Convention to have an oppor- tunity of deliberating carefully and fully upon this subject. I therefore ask that this Committee be requested to prepare such an amendment and report it for the considera- tion of the Convention—for its rejection, or its adoption. Mr. DEHAVEN. I am utterly unable to perceive any difference between the res- olution now before the Convention and the motion made by the Committee. The Com- mittee asked to be discharged from the further consideration of the resolution. If they had been sustained in that, as a matter of course, it would have seemed to be the opinion of a majority of this Convention that that provision ought not to be inserted in the Constitution. Well, now, if the res- olution offered by the gentleman from Lex- ington be passed, then the Committee will be instructed to report an amendment in. cluding those two propositions. Does not that bring up a discussion upon the merits of that proposition‘? If the Com- mittee be instructed to report an amend- ment so as to embrace those ideas, are we not estopped from going back on it hereaf- ter and saying that it shall then be subject to amendment? The object I had in view in introducing the resolution and asking that the Committee be discharged, I sug- gested at the opening of my remarks, and I do not care to repeat it. Now, it is ‘a matter of total indifference to me indi- vidually as to whether that provision should be in the Constitution or not. What I want to get at is, that a majority of the Convention indicate, in some authori- tative way, their opinion upon the neces- sity of introducing that amendment- New, I have no special objection to the- resolution offered by the Delegate from Lexington; if we are instructed to report- that sort of an amendment, we can easily do it; but if, after we have been instructed. by the Convention, or a majority of it, to prepare that amendment, and we have .- done it, can the Convention then go back on it, and amend or reject it‘? Mr. W. H. MILLER. It seems to me- that this is too important a matter for hasty consideration; and, further, it seeme to me that the resolution offered by the Dele- gate from Lexington is one bearing directly upon criminal procedure, and I think it a resolution that is proper to be considered. by that Committee; and I do not want, so far as I am concerned, to vote on this. question until I receive a report and an expression of opinion from the proper Committee; and therefore I move'to refer‘ the resolution and the amendment to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments andv Criminal Procedure. The PRESIDENT. The motion to re-~ fer is not debatable. What was the gen- tleman going to say‘? ' Mr. H. H. SMITH. I rose to make some remarks upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lexington. I un-- derstand that the motion of the gentleman from Lincoln did not have a second to it. The PRESIDENT. Was there a sec-- 0nd to it‘? , A DELEGATE. I seconded it. The PRESIDENT. A motion to refer' is not debatable. And the question being taken upon Mr. Miller’s motion, it was decided in the’ aifirmative, and the resolution so referred. Mr. RODES. I am directed by the- Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights to report that the resolution offered by the» gentleman from Franklin, in regard to- taxation and the power of taxation in this- 10 REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES. Thursday,] RODES—SPALDING—JOHNSTON—OOX. [September 25. State, is not one that they can formulate any statement of in the Bill of Rights. They ask that they be discharged from its further consideration, and that the matter be referred to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. ' The PRESIDENT. You ask that the reference be changed to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation? Mr. RODES. Yes, sir. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the change of reference? The Chair hears none, and the change of refer- ence is ordered. Mr. RODES. I also have two other res- olutions, one introduced by the gentleman from Carroll and .the other by the gentle- man from Washington, in regard to the finding of verdicts by juries, and the num- her that shall enter into the jury system. ‘The Committee deemed it wise to refer that matter back to the Convention, and I ask that those two resolutions be referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. The PRESIDENT. ‘ The Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights ask that the resolutions indicated by the Chairman be referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. Is there any objection to that re- quest? The Chair hears none, and such ‘change of reference is ordered. Mr. SPALDING. Mr. President, the Committee on Legislative Department has instructed me to return to the House Reso- .lution No. 120, to amend the Constitution .so as to better secure the rights and liberties of the people, and ask to be discharged from the further consideration thereof, and ‘that it be referred to the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the request of the gentleman? The Chair hears none, and such change of _ reference will be made. Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, in behalf of the Committee on Revenue and ‘Taxation, I desire to say that there is a resolution which has been referred to us in relation to prohibiting the granting of free passes on railroads. They have direted me to report the same back to this Convention, with the request that they be relieved from the further consideration thereof, and sug- gest that it be referred to the Committee on General Provisions. It is not in the line of the subjects of investigation. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such change of reference will be made. Mr. JOHNSTON. Resolution No. ‘200, in relation to the election of County Treas- urers, was also referred to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation, and they beg leave to report it back, and suggest that it be referred to the Committee on Executive Ofiicers for Counties and Districts. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob jection to the change of reference indicated by the gentleman. The Chair hears none, and the change is made. Mr. COX. Mr. President, I introduced that resolution, and desired it to go to that Committee because I thought it was appro- priate. I conceived that there was no Committee within this House that has as properly the right to consider the question of the creation of the office of County Treasurer as that Committee to which it was referred; but, as the Committee de- sires to be discharged from it, I ask that it be referred to the Committee on Legisla- tive Department. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection ‘? Without objection, such reference is made. Mr. L. T. MOORE. At a meeting of the Chairmen of the different Committees under the resolution introduced by the Delegate from the county of Lewis, there was an adjourned meeting held, at which a schedule of Committee meetings was prepared, and I was directed by the Com- mittee to report the schedule, and ask that it be printed, and that it be an amendment to the rules, and that it be made a special order for to-morrow at 11 o’clock. I will say that that schedule makes such provis- REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES. 11 . ‘Thursday,] PETrrT—MooRE. [September 25. vion that there will be no conflict in the meeting of any Committee upon which ‘the members are appointed, with the ex- ception of one single Delegate. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary Wlll please report the resolution. The Reading Clerk then read the scedule ' of Committee meetings presented by Mr. - Moore, which is as follows: 1. Committe on Preamble and Bill of Rights to meet in office of Commissioner of Mines. ‘2. Committee on Elections to meet in room adjoining court-room of Court of Ap- peals. 3. Committee on Legislative Deprament ‘to meet in Railroad Commissioners’ oflice. 4. Committee on Executive Ofiicers for State at Large to‘ meet in Agricultural ‘office. 5. Committee on Executive Officers for Counties and Districts to meet in room at Kiernan building. 6. Committee on Militia to meet in Ad- jutant General’s office. 7. Committee on Judical Department and Court of Appeals to meet in the court- room of the Court of Appeals. 8. Committee on Circuit Courts to meet in Senate Chamber. 9. Committee on County Courts to meet in the Senate Chamber. 10. Committee on Education to meet in room —— at Kiernan building. ‘ 11 .Committee on Revision to meet in court-room of Court of Appeals. 12. Committee on Corporations to meet in room at Kiernan building. 13. Committee on Municipalities to meet meetin room -— at Kiernan building. 14. Committee on Revenue and Taxa- tion to meet in Auditor’s private office. 15. Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal procedure to meet in room at Kiernan building. - 16. Committee on Printing and Ac- counts to meet in Senate cloak room. 17. Committee on Enrollment to meetin Senate cloak room. ‘ ' 18. Committee on General Provisions to meet in room at Kiernan bulding. 19. Committee on Division, Title and Arrangement to meet in room at Kiernan building. 20. Committee on Charity and Charita- ble Institutions to meet in room at Kiernan building. 21. Committee on Schedule to meet in room —— at Kiernan building. 22. Joint Committee on Legislative De- partment to meet in Executive offices. 23. Joint Committee on Executive De- partment to meet in court-room of Court of Appeals. 24. Joint Committee on Judiciary De- partment to meet in Senate Chamber. 25. Committee on Rules to meet at Railroad Commissioners’ oflice. . “ - The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Boyd moves that the report of the Commit- tee be printed, and made a special order for 11 o’clock to-morrow. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to ask the gen- tleman from Boyd if this resolution is in accord with the agreement made by the several Committees? Mr. L. T. MOORE. Yes. sir. Mr. PETTIT. Then if it is in accord with the views of the" several Committees, I move the adoption'of it at once. The PRESIDENT. Does the gentle- man withdraw the motion to make it a special order? Mr. L. T. MOORE. I think it would be better to make it a special order for to-mor- row and have it printed. . And the question being taken upon the .said motion, same was adopted. The PRESIDENT. lutions are in order. Mr. MACKOY. desire to present. The Reading .Clerk read the resolution presented by Mr. Mfackoy, which is as follows: Motions and reso- I have a resolution I 12 ' RESOLUTIONS. Thursday,] MAcKoY— MCDERMOTT—WOOD. [September 25. Resolved, That the matter of the proper mode of paging the printed Convention Reports be referred to the Committee on Printing and Accounts, with instructions to cause the same to be paged consecutively from the beginning, so that it may hereafter be properly indexed. Mr. MACKOY. Mr. President, in con- nection with that I want to call the atten- tion of the Convention to the fact that we have now received three copies of the Convention records; that each is paged with reference to itself from one to eighteen. These publications have been sent by mem- bers of the Convention to persons at a dis- tance, and probably many of them will be sent to the same persons, who may desire to preserve and bind this record, and I suppose hereafter this Convention will order the same to be properly indexed. As it is now paged, it will be impossible to index it properly; therefore, I deem it proper that the resolution should be adopted. Mr. McDERMOTT. I ask that it be read again. The PRESIDENT. Please report the resolution again, Mr. Secretary. The Reading Clerk again read the reso- lution offered by Mr. Mackoy. And the question being taken upon the adoption of said resolution, same was adopted. Mr. WOOD. Mr. President, I have a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Wood, which is as follows: WHEREAS, Elections of , recent , years have become so corrupting and debauching by the extravagant use of money and in- toxicants, thereby enabling wicked, un- worthy and incompetent men to obtain high places of honor and trust, until the result of which is becoming fearful and absolutely alarming. In order to secure men of sobriety, in- tegrity, and the highest qualifications in every office, and to repel the idea. that money is an important factor and an essen- tial qualifications in elections; be it there- fore ‘Resolved, That section 3 of article 8, of the Constitution be amended, by ad- ding after the word “bribe,” in the fourth line of said section the word “in- ducement,” and further amended by adding‘ to said section the following words, viz: That all laws and penalties, referring and relating to bribery in elections, shall apply to conventions and primary elections for nominations. ‘ Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. C. T. ALLEN offered the following: Resolved, That the judicial power of this- Commonwealth shall be vested— 1. In one Supreme Court, which shall be styled “ The Supreme Court of Kentucky,” and shall consist of three Judges, each of whom, when elected, shall be not less than thirty-five nor over sixty years of age, each to hold oflice twelve years, and one to be elected every four years from certain well defined districts. This Court shall have appellate jurisdiction only, co-exten- sive with State, touching questions of law on the facts or weight of evidence as certi- fied by the Court of Appeals; but shall. have original jurisdiction in cases of guo wa'rmnio, mandamus, injunction, etc. The Judge having the shortest term to serve shall be known as the “Chief Justice of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.” 2. In one (‘ourt of Appeals, which shall consist of five (5) Judges, each of whom, when elected, shall be not less than thirty- five nor over sixty years of age, each to be elected every two years, from certain well defined districts. This Court shall have final appellate jurisdiction touching ques- tions of facts. This Court shall, in each case, certify to the Supreme (“ourt the facts or weight of evidence, its opinion touching the questions of law involved, and shall also certify to said Supreme Court the pleadings in each case. These five Judges shall decide by lot, after the first election, which shall serve two, which four, which six, which eight. and which ten years, and the one having the shortest term to serve shall be the Presid- ing J udge of this Court. In order to equal- ize the labor of these two Appellate Courts as near as may be, the Legislature shall have power, when the necessity for so doing may arise, to provide for the appeal in fel- ony cases, in cases in which title to land is involved, and in will cases, directly from the County Court to the Supreme (.‘ourt, in which cases the decision of said Supreme Court shall be final as to the question of law and fact. In all ‘cases the Supreme Court only shall issue the mandate. RESOLUTIONS. 13 - county in Thursday,] ALLEN—HINES. [Septem ber 25. 3. The County Courts, one for each county, and where the business to be done requires more than one, then there may be two or more. No person shall be eligible ‘to the County Judgeship unless he be, when elected, thirty years of age, shall have been a practicing lawyer seven years, or Judge of a Court of Record in or out of this State for a number of years. which, .added to the time he shall have been a prac- ticing lawyer, shall make eight years, a cit- izen of the State for five years, a citizen of the county for three years. His term of ~office shall be eight years, and the style of this office shall be “ Judge -— County Court.” He shall be elect; ed by _ the qualified voters of the which he is to serve. In counties where more than one County Judge shall be elected, the division of the business to be done by them shall be regu- lated by law. The jurisdiction of said ‘County Courts shall be the same as now given by law to County Courts, save as hereinafter excepted, to Quarterly Courts .and Circuit Courts, to be regulated as to ‘details of law. These County Courts shall be open for .the transaction of business every day in the _year,. except Sunday and legal holidays, and shall hold regular terms once each month for the trial of causes. The Judge of each County Court shall .appoint for each county a Commissioner, to be styled the Master Commissioner for county, who, when appointed, shall be not less than twenty-five years of .age, of fair education, good business quali- fications and habits, who shall perform the duties now required of Commissioners of the Circuit Courts, and shall, in addition, under the supervision of the Judge of the 'County Court, make settlements with guard- ian, administrator, etc., etc. His compen- sation shall be provided for by law. 4. Whenever it shall become necessary to exchange County Judges from ‘one county to another, in order to protect so— ciety and maintain the majesty of the law. the Governor shall have such power. 5. The Justices of the Peace, one for each magisterial district, to be, when elected, not less than twenty-five nor more than sixty ‘years of age, a citizen of the State for five years, and of the county for two years, and of the district one year, and shall hold oflice for eight years. These justices to have original jurisdiction in civil cases up to dollars, and concurrent jurisdiction “with the county court to fifty dollars; and in criminal cases, original, jurisdiction in misdemeanors, where the fine imposed by law does not exceed dollars, or the imprisonment in the county jail does not exceed years. courts of Justices of the Peace, in crim- inal and civil cases, shall be regulated by law. 6. There shall be in each county at County Attorney, who, when elected, shall be not less than — nor more than - years of age, a practicing lawyer for years, a citizen of the State for years, and of the county for years, who shall be elected by the qualified voters of the county, and shall hold office for eight years. He shall perform the duties now performed by County and Commonwealth Attorneys, and such other duties as may be required of him by this Constitution or by law. 7. The fiscal affairs of each countv shall be under the control of the Justicesvof the Peace and the Master Commissioner of said county, sitting as a “board of control,” . whereof the Master Commissioner shall be the president. This board of control shall have all the powers now exercised by the court of claims under the present Constitu- tion, and when not in session, the president of said board shall have such power as may be conferred upon him by law. v 8. The salaries of the Judges of the Su- preme Court and of the Court of Appeals shall be fixed by law, and paid out of the State Treasury, and shall not be increased or diminished during their respective terms. The salaries of the County Judges and County Attorneys shall be fixed by law, and shall be paid in part by their respective counties and the State; and the Legislature shall determine what part of each County J udge’s and County Attorney’s salary shall be paid by the State, and .the Board of Control of each county what part shall be paid by the county; and said salaries shall not be increased or diminished during the term for which each officer was elected. 9. The Justices of the Peace shall list for taxation the property in their respect- ive districts, and their compensation there- for shall be fixed by law. 10. The Legislature shall provide by law for filling vacancies, should any occur, in any of the offices above named. Mr. T. H. HINES offered the following resolution : WHEREAS, The correct theory of civil government, evolved from experience, and Appeals from the_ 1'4 RESOLUTIONS. . Thursday,] Moons—MONTGOMERY. [September 25- sanctioned by time, is that free govern- ments should deal with the act's of the citi- zen, and not with his thoughts, and that to proscribe or punish for religious or politi- cal opinions, is of the essence of despotism; therefore, be it Resolved, That whatever civil rights, civil privileges, or civil capacities, that be- long to or are enjoyed by the citizens gen- erally, shall not be taken from or denied to any citizen on account of his opinion in re- gard to religious or political matters; neither shall there be any special tax levied in the interest of, or for the support of any religious sect or denomination; nor shall there be any exemption from taxation of the property of any religious sect or de- nomination, when a like exemption, by general laws, does not embrace similar property belonging to every citizen; nor shall any law be passed authorizing an in- quiry in the Courts ofJustice or elsewhere, into the religious or denominational belief of any citizen. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. ‘ . Mr. SPALDING here took the Chair. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I have two resolu- tions which I desire to ofi‘er, and have the first referred to the Committee on Rev- enue and Taxation, and the second to the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The said resolutions were read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Rev- enue and Taxation investigate and report upon the propriety of inserting a clause in the draft of a constitution, proposed by this Convention, the following clause: The Governor, Secretary of State, State Treas- urer, State Auditor and Attorney General. shall constitute a State Board of Equaliza- tion, and the Board of County Commis- sioners of each county shall constitute a County Board of Equalization. The duty of the State Board of Equalization shall be to adjust and equalize the valuation of taxable property among the several coun- ties. The duty of the County Board of Equalization shall be to adjust and equalize the valuation of taxable property within their respective counties. Also a clause of the following import :’ The making of private profit out of the public moneys, or using the same for any purpose not authorized by law, or by any public ofificer, shall be deemed a felony, and shall be punished as provided by law, but part of such punishment shall be dis- qualification to hold public office. Referred to Committee on Revenue and. Taxation. Resolved, That the Committee on the Bill of Rights inquire into and report upon the propriety of striking from- the four- teenth section or the Bill of Rights in the present Constitution, the following words: “Be twice put in jeopardy of his life and limb,” and inserting in lieu thereof these words: “ Twice tried when his life or lib- erty is involved,” the word “tried” to- be construed to mean a complete trial from indictment to judgment. Referred to Committee on Bill of Rights. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I desire to in- troduce a resolution, and have it referred to the Committee on Executive and Minis- , terial Oficers for Counties and Districts. The resolution was read by the Reading Olerk, as follows: Resolved, That in regard to Executive and Ministerial ofi‘icers for counties and districts, this Convention adopt the follow- ing provisions : 1. Re-adopt sections one, three, six. seven, and nine of Article 6, of the present Con- stitution of Kentucky concerning Execu- tive and Ministerial officers for counties: and districts. 2. That a Sheriff and Superintendent of Public Common Schools, shall be elected in each county by the qualified yoters thereof, at the same time and for the same term as the Judge of the ( ounty Court; no person to be eligible to either of said ofiices who is not at the time he goes into ofiice, at least twenty-four years of age, a citizen of the United States, and has been a resident of the county for which he is elected, at least two years next preceding. the election; and the General Assembly may pre- scribe such additional qualifications for Superintendent of Common Schools, as they may deem proper, the Sheriff to be ineligible for the succeeding term. 3. That there shall be elected in each county at the same time, and for the same term that the Judge of the County Court is. elected, a County Assessor, whose qualifica- tion shall be the same-as that of Sheriff; but. the General Assembly may, by law, abolish said oflice, and make such other provisions— RESOLUTIONS. - 15 Thursday,] HOLLOWAY—SMITH. [September 25- from time to time as they may deem best for the assessment of property. - , 4. Each' county in this State shall be divided by the Judge of the County Court into Justices’ Districts in as compact form as can be, and except as hereinafter pro- vided, each district to contain, when laid off, as near as can be, a population of 2,500 persons, to be estimated upon the basis of five persons for each legal voter, inclusive; but no county to have less than three or more than fifteen Justices’ Districts. Any county having a population of over 7,500, and having a fraction of less than one-half the ratio required for a district, the said ratio shall be apportioned among the sev- eral districts to which such county may be entitled; but where said fraction is more than one-half the ratio required for a dis- trict, such county will be entitled to one additional district. 5. That in each J ustice’s District a Con- stable shall be elected by the qualified voters thereof, at the same time and for the same term as Judge of the County Court, and to possess the same qualifications as sheriff, whose jurisdiction shall be co-exten- sive with the county. 6. The oflices provided for in this article to have same powers and receive same fees and compensation as now provided by law, until otherwise provided by the General Assembly. Mr. HOLLOWAY. I desire to intro- duce a resolution, and have it referred to the Committee on Municipalities. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: I No political or municipal corporation in this State shall ever become indebted, in any manner or for any purpose, to any amount in the aggregate exceeding two and one-half per centum on the value of taxable property within such corporation, to be ascertained by the last- assessment for State and county taxes, previous to the in- curring of such indebtedness, and all bonds or obligations in excess of such amount given by such corporation shall be void: Provided, That in time of war, foreign in- vasion or other great public calamity, on petition of a majority of the property owners in number and value, within the limits of such corporation, the public au- thorities, in their discretion, may incur obligations necessary for the public protec- tion and defense, to such an amount as may be requested in such petition. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Inasmuch as there was a resolution passed by the (‘onvention calling upon the Auditor of State to get in- formation from the counties, towns and cities as to their indebtedness, bonded and floating, and inasmuch as he returned a re- port that such information could not be had unless there was an extra clerk employed in the Census Department, the Committee on Municipalities authorize-me to ‘report this resolution, so that each member of the Convention may get such information from his county. The letter attached thereto is to be printed. Resolution read as follows: Resolved, That each Delegate to this Con- vention is requested to write to the proper Ofljcers of the counties, cities and towns in his district, and obtain from them the amount of such county, city or town in- debtedness, and whether bonded or float- ing, and that the Committee 011 Munici- palities is also instructed to prepare a letter and have same printed and put on the desk of each Delegate for said purpose. FRANKFORT, -—, 1890. DEAR SIR :' I am instructed by a resolution passed by the Constitutional Convention to ascertain through you the amount of your - indebtedness, and whether bonded or float- mg. You will confer a great favor on the (‘on- stitutional Convention, as well as myself, by furnishing the information immediately. Very respectfully, The PRESIDENT pro tem. The a‘..- tion is upon the adoption of the resolution. The resolution being put to the House, was declared adopted. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire to ask in- definite leave of absence for_ the Delegate from Elliott. ‘ The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, such leave will be granted. Mr. BENNETT. I have two resolu- tions which I desire to offer. The resolutions were read by the Read- ing Clerk as follows: Resolved, 1. The levying of taxes by the poll is grievious and oppressive; therefore the General Assembly shall never levy, or 16 - RESOLUTIONS. 'Thursday,] MILLER—B ECKNER—B URNAM. [September :authorize any other authority to levy a per capita or poll tax for any purpose. 2. The General Assembly shall pass laws taxing, by a uniform rule, all moneys, .credits, investments in bonds, stocks, joint stock companies, or otherwise, and all net annual incomes that exceed one thousand dollars in value; also all real and personal property, according to its true value in money ; but burying grounds, public school- houses, institutions of purely public charity, public property used exclusively for any public purpose, and personal property to ‘an amount not exceeding in value for each individual may, by general laws, be exempted from taxation; but all such laws .shall be subject to alteration or repeal; and the value -of all property so exempted :shall, from time to time, be ascertained, and publishedas may be directed by law. 3. The General Assembly shall provide by law for taxing the notes and bills- dis- counted or purchased, moneys loaned, and .all other property, effects or dues of every description of all banks now existing or hereafter created, and of all bankers, so that all property employed in banking shall always hear a burden of taxation equal to that imposed on the property of individuals. 4. The General Assembly shall provide for raising revenue sufficient to defray the expenses of the State, including the sup- port of all of the charitable institutions of the State, and the public school of the State, and the interest on. the State debt in *each and every year. 5. No tax shall be levied except in pur- suance of law, and every law imposing a tax shall state distinctly the object of the :same, to which only it shall be applied. ' 6. The State shall never contract any debt for purposes of internal improve- ments. 7. No tax shall ever be levied in this ‘State for any purpose whatever that is made to depend exclusively upon a majority vote of the eople that has to pay the same. Referretfifo Committee on Revenue and "Taxation . Resolved, 1. The General Assembly shall ‘pass no special act conferring corporate ‘powers. 2. Corporations may be formed under General Laws, but all such laws, may, from time to time, be altered or repealed. 3. Dues from corporations shall be se- cured by such individual liability of the .stockholders, and other means, as may .be prescribed by law, but in all cases each stockholder shall be liable over and above the stock by him or her owned, and any amount unpaid thereon to a further sum at least equal in amount to such stock. 4. The property of corporations now existing, or hereafter created, shall for- ever be subject to taxation, the same as the property of individuals. 5. The General Assembly shall provide for the organization of cities, towns, vil- lages by general laws, and restrict their power of taxation, assessment, borrowing money, contracting debts and loaning their credit, so as to prevent the abuse of such power. ' Referred to Committee on Corporations. Mr. W. MILLER. I desire to offer a resolution, and have it referred to the Com- mittee on Circuit Courts. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: The Committee on Circuit Courts is di- rected to inquire into the advisability of so constructing the system of Circuit Courts in this Commonwealth, that the number of such Courts should hereafter be sufiicient to enable each county to hold at least four terms of Court in each year, and thereby insure to litigants a prompt trial in all con- troversies, and guaranteeing, too, that crim- inals will be speedily tried. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. BECKNER. I have a resolution which I desire to have read and referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: " Resolved, That no divorce shall be grant- ed until a jury has, under direction of the Court, found in favor thereof. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. BURNAM. I would like, if it can be done without inconvenience, to have called up a resolution that was passed the other day, which was ofi’ered by the gentle- man from Fayette county. There was a report made by the gentleman from Boyd 9. short time ago, fixing the time when the various Committees of the House should meet, which, I think, in the resolution offered by the Delegate from Fayette, were known as the General Committees. RESOLUTIONS. 17 Thursday,] J OHNSTON— BURNAM—FORRESTER. [September 25 . In order that the House may understand when the General Committees shall meet, and on whose suggestion, I would be very glad to have the Clerk search for that reso- lution and have it again read to the House. Mr. JOHNSTON. The amendment called for by the Delegate from Madison, is in the printed copy of the Rules, pages 3, 4 and 5. The PRESIDENT pro tem. It appears to the President pro tem, that the Rules published do not reach the case, Mr. BURNAM. I will not trouble the House. My attention has been called by the Delegate from Scott to what I want. Mr. BLACKBURN. I desire to intro- duce a resolution, and have it referred to the Committee on Executive Oflicers for the State at Large. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk as follows : A Secretary of State shall be chosen at every election for Governor in the same manner, and to continue in office for the same time, He shall keep a fair register and attest all official acts of the Gov- ernor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes, and vouchers relative thereto, before either house of the General Assembly, and shall perform such other duties as may be re- quired of him by law, and appoint his own clerk. Referred to Committee of Executive Ofli- cres for the State at Large. Mr. FORRESTER. I desire to intro- duce a resolution, and have it referred to the Committee on “General Provisions.” The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk as follows: Resolved, That all members of the Gen- eral Assembly, and all oflicers created by the Constitution, the Legislature or a mu- nicipal corporation, before they enter upon the execution of the duties of their respect- ive offices, and all members of the bar, be- fore they enter upon the practice of their profession, shall take the following oath or affirmation: I do solemnly swear I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State, and be faithful and true to the Common- wealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully execute, to the best of my abilities, the office of according to law; and I do further solemnly swear or aflirm, that since the adoption of the present Constitu- tion, I being a citizen of this State, have not faught a duel with deadly weapons within this State, nor out of it, with a citi- zen of this State, nor have I sent nor ac- cepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons with a citizen of this State, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, or aided or assisted anyperson thus offending; nor have I given or ac- cepted a bribe of money, property or any thing of value, directly or indirectly, to influence the vote of any person, nor given or caused to be given, received, or prom- ised to give or receive, any money, prop- erty or any thing of value to aid in the election or defeat of candidate for an office created by the Constitution or laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, so help me God. _Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I move that the Convention do now adjourn. The motion, being put to the House, was carried. The Convention thereupon adjourned. @ nnvenfiun guard. ‘member of it. "Committee, but under the resolution intro- duced by the Delegate from Lewis, which ‘called together the Chairmen of the differ- -ent Committees to make a schedule for their meetings, I made a report from the -——IKENTUCKY——- _ ,- CCDNSLL‘I'I' u LL'lCDNAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1 .1 FRANKFORT, SEPTEMBER 26, 1890. [No. 15 F riday,] MOORE—GRAHAM—MCHENRY. [September 26 . The Convention opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Blayney. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. Mr. FIELD. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Pendleton. _ The PRESIDENT. Without objection, ‘ the leave will be granted. Mr. FIELD. I also ask leave of absence 'for the Delegate from Bullitt. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the leave is granted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. According to the minutes, I am referred to as one of the Committee on Schedule. I do not belong to that Committee, and have never been a Imade no report from that Chairmen, under their direction, to this Convention, fixing and arranging times of meetings of the different Committees. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Clerk will correct the Journal to con- form with the facts; and without further . objection, the Journal is approved. The first thing in order is the reception .of peti- tions; it there are no petitions,reports from Standing Committees. Mr. GRAHAM. I have a report from the Committee on Printing and Accounts. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the report. Report'read, as follows: FRANKFORT, September 26, 1890. Hon, C’. M. Clay, J72, President of the Constitutional Convention: On yesterday the following resolution was passed: Resolved, That the matter of proper paging of the printed Convention Record be referred to the Committee on Printing and Accounts, wlth instructions to cause the same to be paged consectively from the beginning, so that it may hereafter be prop- erly indexed. Upon inquiring into the matter, the Committee is of opinion that this is im- ' practicable. The daily proceedings come to the Convention with a heading. and each day’s proceedings begin a page. In the one thousand copies to be bound, these headings will all be omitted, and each day’s proceedings will follow immediately the close of the precedin gs day’s record, so that the page of the daily proceedings, if num- bered consecutively, would run far in ex- cess of the bound volume to which the index will be made. SAM’L GRAHAM, E. E.“ KIRWAN, J. M. FORGY, J. E. QUICKSALL, WM. BERKELE. Mr. MoHENRY. Upon that subject I would like to know from the Committee, or the Clerk, or somebody, certain matters. I was at the printing office this morning, and the Printer does not understand that he has any order to print any number of copies of the proceedings of this Convention. He is doing the printing, three thousand copies a day, and he has sent some of them out by 2 PRINTING. quently in the middle of an opinion. Friday,] McDERMo'rT—McHENRYéMAcKoY. [September 26 , ‘mail; but he says he has received no order, and has no information’ or any communi- cation from this House on the subject whatever. I understand from the Dele- gate from McCracken, who was Chairman of the Special Committee on Printing and Accounts, that a resolution was passed and reported from that Committee directing three thousand copies to be printed daily. Mr. MODERMOTT. I think it was four thousand. Mr. MGHENRY. I want to know what particular order we must make, so that he will go to printing these extra copies. I am ordering thirty copies of them sent out daily. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is in- formed that such an order was made. Mr, McHEN RY. ' How will we ever get the Clerk and Public Printer together, so that they can come to an understanding ? g I move that the Clerk send a‘ copy of that resolution to the Printer. The ‘PRESIDEN T. The Chair has al- ready directed the Clerk to send the Print- er a copy of the original resolution. Mr. MCDERMOTT. The resolution was printed by the Printer in the proceed- ings. Mr. MACKOY. It may be that the re- port made by the Committee on Printing and accounts is correct. I am not a practi- cal printer, but it seems to me singular that the course required by the resolution, which was referred on yesterday to the Committee on Printing and Accounts can not be adopted. It is a matter of observation with me that serials are published in that manner. Law reports are, and I know of one or two instances, at least, where serials of reports of opinions are publlshed as they come from the courts, and they stop fre~ It does not seem important to me that there should be a heading to it, or that each :day’s supply should terminate at the end of I the previous dayZs work. I can not see how it would be difiicult to print it so that' persons receiving copies sent to them by Delegates to this Convention might, if they so choose, have their copies bound, and, when the index is made, it would not. only apply to the printed volume, but to these daily proceedings. In other words, the proceedings, as printed daily, should be the samein every respect as they appear in the printed volume, so that the index made for the printed volumes may be used also for this daily supply. It is possible that there are insuperable objections, but my observation is that it would not be impossi- ble to do as suggested by the resolution. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Com mit- tee. The Secretary will please read the report of the Committee again. This was done. Mr. MACKOY. I can not see why it is important to publish the heading, and that seems to be the difiiculty they are laboring under. Therefore,I move that this matter be referred back to the Com-- ‘mittee on Printing and Accounts, with instructions to carry out the resolution adopted yesterday. ' Mr. QUICKSALL. As a member of‘ that Committee, I took it upon myself to confer with the Printer, and he tells me, other members of the Committee being pres- ent, that it will be entirely impracticable, if not impossible, and place a very heavy expense on us to carry out this resolution, as each day’s proceedings will not close exactly at the end of the page; and if they were numbered consecutively, there would be blank pages in here. Now, these blank pages are still counted and paid for. That was the reason why we reported as we _did. ‘ Mr. MACKOY. There are one or two modes in which this might be done; either the heading might be omitted or left as it is. It would not make an unsightly volume, and the additional expense would be the blank paper left at‘ the end of each day’s report. This cost would not be a PRINTING. 3 Friday,] YOUNG—PETTIT—PUGH. [September 26. large amount, probably not more than $100 or $200, and that would he a small amount when you consider the advantages and the object in printing. This is not to gratify the Convention, but to enable per- sons in the State, our constituents, to see what has been done here, and preserve a record of the proceedings for their future use. Mr. YOUNG. I am surprised to hear that the Committee see any thing imprac- ticable in paging the reports. As the gen- tleman from Kenton has suggested, sup- pose we lost half a page daily, in one hun- dred days it would only be fifty pages of blank matter. We do not pay for pages, we pay for printed matter. We pay for the paper only, if there is no printing on it. The chief value of 3,000 copies is to send them out, and the people who get them will preserve them; and withput this consecutive paging it will be practically valueless. If they are to be sent out in hotch-potch fashion, ' without an index, they might as well not have them. As far as I am concerned. I expect ‘to keep one of the copies laid on my table and have it bound, so that I will have my own book which I used during the session; but with- out consecutive paging, a large part of the printing is useless. It would entail a cost of only $100. A DELEGATE. Not $10. Mr. YOUNG. If it would not take $10, what is the use of talking about expense? Mr. PETTIT. I am in favor of the motion to recommit to the Committee, but I speak with some knowledge of the print-- ing business; and I say that it is not as little expense as the gentleman from Lou- isville might suppose. If there are sixteen pages, and then it runs over on the seven- teenth, it is not simply the odd page that you have to pay. for, but there are sixteen blank pages intervening between to-day’s proceedings and to-morrow’s proceedings; and when such a volume is presented by the Printer, it would not be worth sending M out by any one. I favor the adoption of the gentleman’s motion to recommit, so as to see if something can not be done by which the object would be accomplished; but in the present mode it will make a very unsightly volume. The PRESIDENT. The question is to recommit the report of the Committee on Printing and Accounts. And the vote being taken thereon, it was declared carried. Mr. PUGH. I desire to offer a resolu- tion. The Reading Clerk thereupon read said resolution, which is as follows: Resolved, That the Secretary of this Con- vention be, and he is hereby, instructed to furnish the Printer, as promptly as practi- cable, duly attested copies of all orders of this body in relation to printing and printed matter. 2. Be it further resolved, That the Com-_ mittee on Printing and Accounts be re- quested to report to this Convention con- cerning the arrangement, it any, that has been perfected with the Public Printer relating to the printing of the Daily Journal as kept by the Secretary. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will de- cide that resolution in order now. The question is on the adoption of the resolu- tion. - And the vote being taken thereon, it was declared to have been adopted. The PRESIDENT. Are there any more reports of Standing Committees. Mr. BRONSTON. The Committee on Crimes, Punishment and Criminal Pre- cadure has had under consideration a resolution offered by the Delegate from Louisville, that punishment by lash for offenses against the laws of the Common- wealth should he prohibited. The Com- mittee, after considering carefully the matter, have instructed me to report to this Convention that, in the opinion of that Committee, no such provision shall be added to the present Constitution. Report read. The PRESIDENT. The question is on 4 REFORMATORY FOR THE YOUNG. Friday,] BECKNER—BRONSTON—PUGH. [September 26 , the adoption of the report of the Com- mittee. Mr. BECK NER. I move that the con- sideration of the report be made a special order for next Wednesday athll o’clock. And the vote being taken thereon, it was declared to have been carried. Mr. BRONSTON. The same Commit- tee had under consideration resolution No. 108, offered by the Delegate from Jeffer- son, with reference to the infliction of the death penalty upon criminals inside the walls of the Penitentiary nearest the county where said criminal was tried and convicted. The Committee, after careful consideration, instruct me to report to the Conventioon that, in‘the opinion of that Committee, no such provision should be add (1 to the Constitution. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Commit- tee. And the vote being taken thereon, it was declared to have been adopted. Mr. BRONSTON. The same Committee has had under consideration a resolution of- fered by the Delegate from Lewis county, with reference to the establishment by this Convention a reformatory institution for the correction and proper training of all persons under sixteen years of age. The Committee, after carefully considering the subject presented by said resolution, are of the unanimous opinion that such an institution should be established, but were equally unanimous of the opinion that it was within the province of the Leg- islature, and not of this body, to undertake to establish an institution, andjherefore di- rect me to report that such ought not to be incorporated in the Constitution. Report read. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Commit- tee. ‘ ‘ Mr. PUGH. I move that that report be postponed, and made a special order for Wednesday next at 11 o clock. The PRESIDENT. There is already one special order for 11 o clock. Mr. PUGH. Then say Thursday at ll o’clock. Mr. BRONSTON. I" do not want, in any sense of the word, to appear as deny- ing to any gentleman the right to discuss a proposition before this Convention. If it be the purpose of the Delegate to discuss the matter, I have no objection; but as a Delegate upon this floor, and as the spokes- man of that Committee, I have been im- pressed with the idea that the time has come when we must do something; and upon a matter of this kind, as to whether or not this Convention should undertake to incorporate into the Constitution the necessary details of an institution of this character, it seems to me can be determined and discussed now as well as a week from to-day, and I would be very glad to hear from the Delegates on this floor a full expression of views upon this proposition as to whether or not we have assembled to frame a code of statute laws or to make a short, concise organic law, out of which ‘these powers will be extended to the Legislature of Kentucky. Mr. PUGH. I am sure I have due def- erence for the opinions of the Committee as enunciated by my distinguished friend from the county of Fayette. I also have some deference for the crying wants of this Commonwealth in regard to the question under consideration. I think it is a ques- tion of such importance that there ought at least to be a clause incorporated in the Constitution of the State of Kentucky directory to the Legislature, and requiring that some action be taken in regard to this matter. I therefore wish that this question receive due consideration, and at the time appointed, if needs be, to give a full ex- pression of my views to my colleagues on this floor. I believe there is not one within the sound of my voice but'wh'o has felt it REFORMATORY FOR THE YOUNG. 5 Friday,] BECKHAM—BRONSTON. [September 26 . was a burning shame to the Commonwealth of Kentucky that there has not been any reformatory institution established, looking to the reformation of youthful criminals in our borders. Such a provision has been embodied in the Constitutions of other States, and it should be inserted in ours. And if we fail to give attention to that matter, we will go home censured by our constituency as derelict to an important duty. The request I make is certainly very reasonable. I am not prepared at present to give expression of my views on the subject, or to tender to this Convention such information as I would hope to offer on maturer investigation. At the proper time I shall furnish some citations of au- thority of what other States "have done. The nature and scope of my resolution have been manifestly misunderstood by the Committee, and possibly by others. I am by no means in favor of embodying in the Constitution such details as properly apper- tain to statutory legislation. That is not my purpose at all. I simply want to on- graft in that instrument one clear cut di- rectory clause, showing that it is the sense of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, de- clared in its highest law, its organic law, that such action should be taken by the Legislature, which has thus far failed to make adequate provision, regardless of ' every appeal that has come from the peo- ple of the State, who have not been insen- sible to the increasing necessities for such an institution. That is the nature of the request I make, and that is the only desire I have in the matter; and I believe there are others here who would like to enter into a fair and full considera- tion of the proposition, and I therefore move its postponement until the time fixed. The PRESIDENT. This motion does not open up the main question for debate, but only the advisability of making the order of reference. Mr. BECKHAM. As a member of the Committee that had this matter under con- sideration, I desire to say that the Commit- tee gave it such consideration as we felt the subject deserved. The Committee, as was stated by our Chairman, was of opin- ion that such an institution ought to be‘ established in Kentucky, yet we were decidedly of the opinion that it was a matter wholly within the province of the Legislature. The Committee, as a part of this Convention, felt that this Convention was met here for- the purpose not of estab- lishing institutions or of tearing down - institutions, but as the makers of organic law; that we were here for the purpose of marking out and defining the powers of the three departments of the State Gov- ernment, and of placing proper limitations upon them. That after this Convention had done that, and made some general pro.- vison for the purpose of putting it into execution, we shall have discharged our whole duty to the people. That was the view of the Committee, and it is my indi- vidual view; and when we have done that, we shall have done our duty. This Con- vention is against the crime of larceny, but we need not give expression to our opinion about that. This Convention is in favor of establishing a reformatory for young criminals, but we need not give ex- pression to it because we are about to establish a department of government which will take charge of that matter. Notwithstanding these are the views of the Committee, I will say it is not my purpose to stifle this question on the floor; and therefore I have no objection, and shall make none, to the motion of the gentleman to postpone consideration of the matter until next Thursday. The PRESIDENT. It is moved and seconded that the consideration ofv the report read he made a special order for next Thursday at 11 o’clock. Mr. BRONSTON. Possibly I did not make myself clearly understood. If the gentleman desires to postpone ion the purpose of discussing the question, I have 6 RESCLUTIONS. Friday] PUGH~LASSING—CARROLL. [September 26 . no objection whatever to that postpone- ment. I do not wish to appear at all as stifling discussion on any subject. Mr. PUGH. I suppose that that would be presumed from the very fact that a motion of that kind would be made. I know of no other object that could have been in view, or no other object which could be assigned to such a motion. If the gentleman has any thing in view himself, I should be glad to hear it. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the postponement until next Thursday, and make it a special order. The vote being taken upon the said motion, it was declared carried. The PRESIDENT. Are there any re- ports from Standing Committees? If not, resolutions and motions are now in order. Mr. LASSING. I have a resolution to offer. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the reslllution offered by Mr. Lassing, which is as follows: Resolved, That taxation should be for the legitimate purpose of government only, and for such expenditures as may be neces- sary to conduct the same; therefore, -Resolved, That no county of this State now in existence, or which may hereafter be created, shall ever loan its credit, or incur any indebtedness, or pay any money by taxation or otherwise in aid of the con- struction or maintenance of any railroad, turnpike road, or for any other purpose whatever, than for necessary building for county purposes, for the erection and main: tenance of infirmaries, and for such pur- poses as humanity and civilization may require, and for the necessary support of the machinery of county and State gov- ernment. Mr. CARROLL. I havea resolution to offer. The Reading Clerk then read Mr. Car- roll’s resolution, ' as follows: Resolved, That the Auditor of State be requested to write to each Circuit Court clerk in the State, and inquire of him the number of cases, civil and criminal, pend- ing in the Court or Courts of which he is clerk, in the last twelve months, in which the jury failed to agree upon a verdict. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution of the Dele- gate from Henry. And the vote being taken thereon, the resolution was declared to have been adopted. Mr. MAY. 1 have a resolution to offer. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the resolution offered by Mr. May, as follows: Resolved, In the event that any of the State or county oflicers are abolished by this Convention, that the present incum- bent of said ofiices be allowed to serve out the time for which they were elected. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. - Mr. MACKOY. Here are two resolu- tions. The long one I ask to have referred to the Committee on the Legislative De- partment without reading, and the shorter one I ask to be read and referred to the same Committee. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will please report the resolution. The Reading Clerk thereupon reported the resolution designated by Mr. Mackoy, which is as follows: Resolved, That section 36 of article 2 of the present Constitution of the State of Kentucky be so amended that the General Assembly shall be required, when the seat of Government is permanently fixed. to contract a debt on behalf of the Common- wealth of $2,500 000, the proceeds thereof to be applied solely in the erection of a State Capitol, the same to be erected under the supervision and control of five Com- missioners, to be appointed by the Gov- ernor, with the advice and consent of the Senate: Provided, however, That if the city of Frankfort shall be selected as the permanent seat of government, then the State Capitol shall be built upon the tract of land now occupied by the Feeble-minded Institute, and the present Capitol square, and the building thereon, shall be used for such purposes in connection with the State Government as may be prescribed by law. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. MILLER, I call for the reading of RESOLUTIONS. 7 .affix K Friday,] AYRES—JAMES—BECKNER. [September 26 . the first resolution of the Delegate from Covington. The Reading Clerk thereupon read said resolution, which is as ‘follows : Resolved, That it is expedient to incorpo- rate in the Constitution to be framed by this Convention the following provisions, which are to be found in the Constitution of Missouri: ‘ 1. That no bill shall be considered for final passage until the same has been re- *ported upon by a Committee and printed, for the use of the members. 2 No bill shall become a law unless on its final passage the vote be taken by yeas and nays, the names of the members voting , for and against the same be entered on the Journal, and a majority of the members elected to each House be. recorded thereon ‘as voting in its favor. 3. No bill shall become a law until the same shall have been signed by the pre- siding officer of each of the two Houses, in open session; and before such oflicer shall his signature to any bill, he shall suspend all other business, de- clare that such bill will now be made, and that, if no objections be made, he will sign the same to the end that it may become a law. The bill shall then be read at length and if no objections be made, he shall, in presence of the House,in open session, and before any other business is entertained, a-flix his signature, which fact shall be noted on the Journal, and th - bill immediately sent to the other House. When it reaches the other House, the presiding officer thereof shall immediately suspend all other busi- ness, announce the reception of the bill, and the same proceedings shall thereupon be observed in every respect as in the House in which it was first signed. If, in either House, any member shall object that any substitution, omission or insertion has occurred, so that the bill proposed to be signed is not the same in substance and form as when considered and passed by the House, or that .any particular clause of the Constitution has been violated in its .passage, such objection should be passed upon by the House; and, if sustained, the presiding ofiicer shall withhold his signa- 7ture; but if such objection shall not be sustained, then any five members may embody the same over their signatures, in a written protest, under oath, against the signing of the bill. Said protest, when ~ofi’ered in the House, shall be noted upon he Journal, and the original shall be an- nexed to the bill, to be considered by the Governor in connection therewith. 4. No new bill shall be introduced into either the Senate or House of Representa- tives during the last three days of a session of the General Assembly. ' Mr. AYRES. I offer a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Ayres, which is as follows: Resolved, That the ofiice of County School Superintendent should be discon- tinued, and that the duties of said office should, under the new Constitution, devolve upon the County Clerk. Referred to Committee on Education. Mr. J AMES. I offer two resolutions. The Reading Clerk read the two resolu- tions offered by Mr. James, as follows: WHEREAS, Attorneys at law are made > collecting ofiicers for their clients without bond or security, and are given liens upon judgments without the amount being fixed, leaving it to the attorney to fix the amount himself, if he obtains possession of the fund; therefore, be it Resolved, That the Committee on Circuit Courts be required to prepare and "report a section to the Constitution bringing attorneys at law to a more strict accounta- bility, and if given a lien upon judgments, that the amounts be fixed by the court upon notice and evidence, and that it shall be a felony if any attorney at law collect any money or property for his client, and fails to account for and pay the same to his client as he may direct. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. _ WHEREAS, Many corporations, engaged in miningv and other business, settle with and pay their employes by giving them “ checks ” upon their commissaries; there- fore, be it ' Resolved, That the Committee on Cor- porations be required to prepare and re-, port a section to the Constitution to prohib- it the above recited practice, and to require corporations to pay their employes in money, or the circulating medium of the country. Referred to Committee on Corporations. Mr. BECKNER ofiered the following resolution: WHEREAS, Under the present system, litigation is so expensive that many per- RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] _ sons are deterred from asserting their- rights; and whereas, a uniform rate for postage has demonstrated the practicability of the system of uniformity in charges without regard to the service performed; . now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Committee on Cir- cuit Courts be, and it is hereby, directed to inquire into and report as to the feasibility of a system by which a certain fixed sum shall be paid at the institution ot each civil action, that will cover all fees or charges in the course of prosecuting same. Referred to Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. SWAN G0. I offer a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, 1. All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax, and shall be levied and collected under general laws; but the General As- sembly may, by general laws, exempt from taxation public property used for public purposes, actual places of religious worship, places of burial not used or held for private or corporate profit, and institutions of purely public charity. 2. All laws exempting property from taxation, other than the property above enumerated, shall be void. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. J. H. MOORE. tion. The Reading Clerk thereupon read Mr. J. H. Moore’s resolution, which is as fol- lows: I offer a resolu- Resolved, That in respect to corporations, the following clause be inserted in the Con- stitution: Counties, citie=, towns and territorial districts may subscribe to the capital stock of railroads, turnpikes, slack- water navigation, bridges, gas, electric lights or water companies, in sums which, at no time, shall exceed five per cent. of the value of its property, as assessed for State revenue purposes, for the year pre- ceding the subscription : Provided, however, That any such subscription made shall not be binding until the company receiving it shall have completed its works, and the same shall be in full operation: And pro- vided further, That all such subscriptions to the same company shall be of equal dig- ni'ty, and shall constitute a lien on the SWANGO—MOORE—OLARDY. [September 26 , property-and tranchise of such company, and shall be paid interest, and share equally in the dividends of such company, the same as the most favored lien-holder or creditor of such company. Referred to Committee on Corporations. MLZCLARDY. I desire to offer some resolutio.is,and,'by request of the gentleman from Webster, I desire permission to with- draw from the Committee on Corporations resolution No. 114, which refers to local taxation, and have it referred to the Com- mittee on Revenue and Taxation. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the request? The Chair hears none, and such change will be made. Re— port the resolutions offered by the Delegate from Christian. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the first resolution offered by Mr. Clardy,‘ which was as follows : 1. The fiscal year shall commence on the -——-day of in each year, unless otherwise provided by law. 2. The Legislature shall provide by law for an annual tax, including other re- sources, sufficient to defray the estimated expenses of the State Government for each fiscal year. 3. All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial- limits of‘ the authority levying the tax, and shall belevied and collected under general laws, which shall prescribe such regula- tions as shall secure a just valuation for taxation of all property, real and person- al, whether of individuals or corporations. 4. The property, real and personal, of the State, counties, cities and towns, and other municipal corporations, used exclu- sively for public purposes, public libraries, lots with the ‘buildings thereon, if said buildings are used solely and exclusively for religious worship, for schools, or for strictly charitable purposes, also some- times not used or held for private or cor-- porate profit, shallbe exempt from taxation. 5. All laws exempting from taxation property other than that hereinbefore mentioned shall be void. Referred to Committee on‘ Revenue and Taxation. " The PRESIDENT. There is a special- RESOLUTIONS. . . - a Friday,] CLARDY—RAMSEY—HARRIS. 4_4 [September 26. order‘for this hour, which the Secretary will please report. The Reading Clerk announced that the special order was the consideration of the report of the special committee on the arrangement of Committee meetings. The PRESIDENT. Read the report, Mr. Seztretary. The Reading Clerk read the schedule of- fered on yesterday by Mr. L. T. Moore. And the question being taken upon the adoption of said report, it was decided in the affirmative, and said report was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Motions and reso- lutions are now in order. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Clardy’s second resolution, which is as follows: Resolved, That the following restrictions, or some similar protective provisions, snould be inserted in the new Constitution, Viz; 1. Any association or corporation, or thev lessees or managers thereof organized for the purpose, or any individuals, shall have the right to construct and maintain lines of telegraph without this State, and to connect the same with other lines; and' the Legislature shall, by general laws of uni- form operation provide reasonable regula- tions to give full efiect to this section. No telegraph company shall consolidate with or hold a controlling interest in the stock or bonds of any other telegraph company owning or having the control of a competing line, or acquire, by purchase or otherwise, any other competing line of telegraph. 2. It any railroad, telegraph, express or other corporation organized under the laws of this State shall consolidate, by sale or otherwise, with any railroad, telegraph, express or other corporation organized under the laws of any other State or of the United States, the same shall not thereby become a foreign corporation; but the Courts of this State shall retain jurisdiction over that part of the corporate property within the limits of the State in all matters which may arise as if said consolidation had not taken place. 8. It shall be unlawful for any person, company or corporation to require of its servants or employee, as a condition of their employment or otherwise, any con-. tract or agreement whereby such person, company or corporation shall be released or discharged from liability or responsi- bility on account of personal injuries. received by such servants or employee while in the service of such‘person, com- pany or corporation by reason of the‘ negligence of such person, company or corporation, or the agents or employee thereof, and such contracts shall be absoe lutely null and void. 4. N o railroad or other transportation. company in existence at the time ‘of the adoption of this Constitution shall have the benefit of any future legislation without. first filing in the ofi‘lce of the Secretary of State an acceptance of the provisions of this Constitution in binding form. Referred to Committee on Corporations. Mr. RAMSEY, offered the followii g res- olutions: Resolved, That the following provision shall continue in and form a part of the Bill of Rights to such Constitution as may- be formed by this body, viz: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in this State, except as a punish-l ment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” Referred to Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the Grand Jury in each county, at least once a. year, to inve-tigate the official acts of all ofiicers having charge of public funds, and report the result of their investigations, in writing, to the Court. Referred to Courts. Resolved, That the General Assembly- shall provide by law for the proper ventil- ation of mines, the construction of escape-- ments, shafts and such other appliances as may be necessary to protect the health and, secure the safety of the workmen therein, and shall prohibit the employment in the mines of children under twelve years of age. Committtee on Circuit. Referred to Committee on General Pro- visions. Mr. HARRIS offered the following reso - lution: WHEREAS, There exists in this State a great variety of town and city charters 10 . RESOLUTIONS. Friday] MILLER—Hose. conferring different powers, and imposing a variety of different burdens; and where- as, thejudicial interpretation ofone, does not necessarily throw any light on the other; and whereas, this variety is the fruitful source of much trouble and litigation; therefore, be it Resolved, That it is expedient and prop- er that there should be a section in the Constitution authorizing the Legislature to provide, by general laws, for the organiza- tion and classification of municipal corpo- rations, and providing that the number of ‘such classes shall not exceed four (4), and that the powers of each class shall be de- fined by general laws, so that no corpora- tions shall have any powers. or be subject to any restrictions, other than all corpora- tions of the same class; and that cities and towns now existing under special charters may abandon such charters, and organize under the general laws of the State. Referred to the Committee on Munici- palities. Mr. W. H. MILLER ofi‘ered the follow- ing resolution. Resolved, 1. That the towns and cities of this State should be classified, and every town or city of the same class should be governed by the same general laws. No town or city should have a separate legis- lative charter, but should be organized under the orders of the Courts of Justice or other proper tribunals. 1. All cities with population each of 100,000 or more, should be cities of the first class. f 2. Cities of a le=s population each than 100,000, but with a population each of 40,000 or more, should be cities of the second class. 3. Cities of less popu‘ation each than 40,000, but with 15,000 or more, should be cities of the third class. 4. Cities of less population each than 15,000, but with 5,000 or more, should be cities of the fourth class. 5. Towns or cities with less population each than 5,000, but more than 1,500, should be cities of the fifth class. 6. Towns with less population each than 1,500 should be of the sixth class. Resolved. 2. That no city of the first class should be permitted to contract so as to at any one time owe debts, bonds or any liability whatever, which in the aggre- gate shall exceed a sum which would be in a, excess of the one-fifteenth of the value of the taxable property of such city. 2. N 0 city of the second class should be permitted to have such indebtedness as before named in excess of an amount equal to one~twentieth of the aggregate value of its taxable property. 3. The indebtedness of cities of the third class should be limited to one-twenty-fifth ; of the fourth class, to one-thirtieth; of the fifth class, to one-thirty-fiftb, and of the sixth class, to one-fortieth, in like manner as aforesaid. Resolved, 3. That the highest rate of tax- ' ation authorized to be imposed by munici- palities, classified as aforesaid, should be as follows upon each $100 of the assessed property, to wit: First class, 150 cents; second class, 130 cents; third class, 100 cents; fourth class, 80 cents; fifth class, 60 cents; sixth class, 40 cents. Resolved, 4. That no county should be permitted to contract liabilities which, in the aggregate, will be in excess of the one- fortieth part of the whole amount of its taxable property; and the highest rate of ad valorem tax authorized to be imposed by any county should not exceed 50 cents on each $100; and except for the payment of bonded indebtedness now existing, should not exceed 25 cents on each $100. Resolved, 5. That the revenues of munic- ipalities should be expended only for the purposes of the proper maintenance, and for the proper support of their government, and the carrying out of the purposes for which they are cre-ited; and all municipal- ities should be prohibited from appripri- ating any money for any work of public improvement beyond the Courts of its territorial boundary and authority, and from taking stock in any incorporated company, except such as are organized for the conduct of such business as municipali- ties are allo wed to engage in, in conducting their government and carrying out the purposes of their creation. Referred to Committee on Municipalities. Mr. HOGG offered the following resolu- tion. Resolved, That the Legislature shall pro- vide, by suitablelegislation, for the renting or leasing out the Penitentiary or State prisons to the highest bidder, for a term of years, after making the necessary rules and regulations to govern the same, and making necessary arrangements providing for and treatment of the convicts, and that said [September 26 . RESOLUTIONS. ’ 11 Friday,] Hoco—Bnnn'rs. [September 26 , convicts shall not be worked outside of the prison walls. Mr. HOGG. I ask that the resolution be referred to the Committee on the Legis- lative Department. Mr. BRONSTON. I ask that that reso- lution be referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishment and Criminal Proce- dure, because that Committee has that matter under consideration, and it is about ready to report on it. The PRESIDENT. ' You mean the first resolution ? Mr. BRONSTON. Yes, sir. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Lexington moves that the first resolution oflered by Mr. Hogg, be referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. Mr. HOGG. I accept that reference. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from 0wsley accept that reference, so without objection, such reference is ordered. The other resolutions ofl’ered by Mr. Hogg, were read, as follows : Resolved, That the Governor shall have power to remit, after conviction, all for- fe‘tures, fines and penalties, and grant re- prie res and pardonsffexcept in case of im- peachment, upon such'condition and with such restriction as may seem proper, sub-_ ject to such regulations as may be provided by law; and he shall communicate to the Legislature at each session thereof, each case of reprieve, remission of penalty, or pardon granted, stating the name of the convict, the crime of which he was con- victed, the sentence and its date of reprieve, remission of fine or pardon, and the-con- dition, if any, upon which the same was granted. Referred to Committee on Executive Department. Mr. BRENTS offered the following reso- lution : Resolved, That the Auditor of Public Accounts be requested to furnish this Convention with the following informa— tion, viz: ' 1. The total amount paid Assessors for their services for the year ending June 80, 1890, and the total value of the taxable property listed by them for that year. 2. The total amount paid Sherifis as their commissions for collecting taxes for the year ending June 30, 1890, and the total amount of taxes collected by them for that year- 3, The total amount paid Trustees of the Jury Fund for their services for the year ending June 30, 1890. 4. The total amount paid Circuit and County Clerks as commissions or per cent. for collecting fines, forfeitures, licenses and special taxes for the year ending June 30, 1890. Mr. BRENTS. I wish to give some reasons why I offer that resolution. Under our present system, we have quite a num- ber of financial oflicers in each county. TheISherifi" collects the revenue and county tax; the Circuit and County Clerks collect fines, forfeitures, licenses and special taxes; the Trustee of the JuryFund is authorized to collect taxes, and there are, too, many fi- nancial ofiicers for each county. Well, the Sheriff reports to the Auditor and the Auditor sees that he pays over to the State ' all the taxes collected by him; but the Clerks and the Trustees of the Fund and other oflicers make their reports on the first day of the Circuit Courts; and pay over the amounts collected by them; and there is no way, no plan, by which an in- vestigation can be had, or to ascertain whether they have reported in full the amount collected by them or not. I have introduced a resolution proposing that the office of County Treasurer be created by this Convention, and that he be the finan- cial oificer of the county. N ow this reso- lution asks for information from the Au- ditor. I also propose further that the of- fice of Assessor be abolished, and that the Justices of the Peace be called upon to do that work, And now this resolution calls upon the Auditor for information; calls upon him to report to this Convention as to the amount paid to the iAssessors for their services; the amount paid to the Sheriff for collecting the taxes; the amount paid to County Clerks and Circuit Clerks 12 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] BoUR-L‘ANn—YoUNe. [September 26. for collecting fines, forfeitures and special taxes, and the amount paid to the Trus- tee of the Jury Fund for his services, in order that the members of ‘this Convention may see whether or not it would be better to have only one financial officer for a county- whether’ or not it would be cheaper and better for the State and for the respective counties. I ask the Con- vention to adopt that resolution. And the question being taken thereon, the resolution was adopted. Mr. BOURLAND introduced the fol- lowing resolution : WHEREAS, A public office isa public trust, and a public officer is a public ser- vant; and whereas, we have the very best authority for declaring that we can not at the same time serve two masters; there- fore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the Constitution should contain a clause prohibiting an ofiicer or attorney of any railroad or otherprivate corporation from holding the oflice of Representative in either branch of the Legislature of Kentucky so long as they remain in the service of the said corpora- tion as an oflicer or attorney. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. YOUNG. I desire to offer a resolu- tion, and ask that it be referred to the Committee on Railways. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Young’s resolution, which is as follows: ' All railroad, transfer companies, belt lines and bridge companies, over which railway tracks are laid, organized under the laws of Kentucky, or operating any railroad, transfer company, belt line or bridge company, or controlling or oper- ating the same, shall receive, transfer, deliver, move, transport, load or unload all the freight coming to or going from any railroad transfer company, belt line or switch on the same for a uniform charge, and without any discrimination, delay, preference, drawback or rebate in favor of any shipper, person or corporation, and shall receive, deliver, accept and translport freight for all railway, transfer,‘ belt line or bridge companies at any point where thereis a physical connection between the tracks of said company, and no rail- way, transfer, belt line or bridge- company shall make any exclusive contract or agreement, with any individual . or corporation, for the receipt, transfer, delivery, handling, transportation of any freight or for the conduct of any business as a common carrier, and such, railroad trans-- for company, or belt line or bridge com-- pany shall receive, load, unload, transport, haul, carry, deliver and handle freight of the same class for all persons, corporations, associations from and to the same points, upon the same terms, in the same manner and for the same charge, and all railroad companies, transfer compenies, belt line and bridge companies shall allow the tracks of each other to unite and intersect at any point where physical connection is reasonable or possible. And any corpora- tion organized under the laws of this State wilfully violating the provisions of this clause, shall forfeit its charter, and rights, and any foreign corporation wilfully vio- lating the provisions ‘of this clause shall thereby forfeit its right to do business in this State. The President vacated the Chair, and called Mr. Bronston to preside during his _ absence. Mr. JONSON. I move that we do now adjourn. " The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Clerk informs me there is nothing in the Orders of the Day. Is there any second to the motion ‘2 Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to amend that by moving to adjourn till Monday at 11 o’clock. Mr. MAY. I move to amend that by making it Tuesday. There are several members here who would like to -go home who can not make it unless they are given more time than that. I move to make it Tuesday at 11 o’clock. Mr. HARRIS. I want to ask leave of absense for the gentleman from Camp- bell. The PRESIDENT pro tem. If there is no objection, the leave is granted.‘ The question will first be upon the adoption of the proposition to adjourn until Tuesday at 11 o’clock. RESOLUTIONS. 13 ' .Friday,] PETTIT—BIRKHEAD—MONTGOMERY. [September 26. And the question being taken thereon, said motion was lost. The PRESIDENT pro-tem. The ques- . tion now is upon the motion to adjourn till Monday at 11 o’clock. Mr. PETTIT. And on that I demand the yeas and nays. Mr. BIRKHEAD. for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The See- retary will call the roll-call, those in favor ‘of adjourning until Monday at 11 o’clock will signify by saying :aye, and those op- posed no. ' And the vote being taken thereon, re- sulted as follows: ' I second the call nus—29. Askew J. F. Hines, Thomas H. vAuxier, A. J. James, A. D. Bennett, B. F. Kirwan, E. E. Berkele, Wm. Lassing, L. W. Bronston, C. J. Mackoy, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Burnam, Curtis F. 'Carroll, John D. McDermott, E. J. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Clay, C. M., Jr. Phelps, Zack ‘Cox, H. Sachs, Morris A English, Sam. E. Swango, G. B. Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Funk, J. T. Washington, George 'Goebel, William Young, B. H. .Hendrick, W. J. runs—46. .Ayres, W. W. Hopkins, F. A. Beckham, J. C. Jonson, J ep. C. Beckner, W. M. Kennedy, Hanson Birkhead, B. T. Lewis, J. W. Blackburn, James Martin, W. H. Blackwell, Joseph May, John S. Bourland, H. R. , McElroy, W. J. Brents, J. A. MeHenry, H, D. Bullitt, W. G. Miller. Will Clardy, John D. Miller, W. H. Coke, J. Guthrie. Moore, J. H. DeHaven, S. E. Muir, J. W. Doris, W. F. Nunn, T. J. Durbin, Charles Petrie, H. G. Edrington, W. J. Pettit, Thos. S. Farmer, H. H’. Phelps, John L. Field, W. W. Pugh, Sam’l J. Forrester, J. G. Quicksall, J. E. Graham, Samuel Ramsey, W. R. Hanks, Thos. H. Rodes, Robert Harris, Geo. C. Smith, H. H. /. Hogg, S. P. Holloway, J. W. West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery ABSENT——25. Allen, C. T. Hines, J. S. Allen, M. K. Jacobs, R. P. Amos, D. C. Johnston, P. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Beckner, W. M. Lewis, W. W. Boles, S. H. O’Hara, R. H. Brown, J. S. Parsons, Robert T. Brummal, J. M. Smith, W. Scott Buckner, S. B. Spalding, I. A. Chambers, G. D. Williams, L. P. V. DeHaven, S. E. Wood, ,J. M. Elmore, T. J. Woolfolk, J. F. Glenn, Dudley A. Mr. PETTIT. _Mr. President, the gen- tleman from Fulton and Hickman, Mr. Brumal, is sick at home, and asks leave of absence. ‘ The PRESIDE N T pro tem. Without objection the leave is granted. The ques- tion now is upon the motion to adjourn. Mr. MoHENRY. Mr. President, I want to move the reconsideration of a vote We took to-day. The PRESIDENT pro tem. What is the motion. Mr. McHENRY. I move to reconsider the vote by which this whipping-post re- port made this morning was made a special order for Thursday. My object is to make it a special order for t'o-morrow. The gen- tlemen seem to think we won’t have any thing to do. I think a good many gentle- men know that it will take up some valua- ble time to speak upon that subject. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair permitted the gentleman ‘to state the motion for information. Of course it is out of order, as the motion to adjourn is before the Convention. Mr. MoHEN RY. I thought a motion to reconsider was always in order. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair is not of that opinion. The question is upon the motion to adjourn until Monday morning, at 10 o’clock. Mr. McELROY. Mr. President, has not that been just voted down ? 14 RESOLUTIONS. Eriday,] FARMER—MCELROY. 4 a [September 26. The PRESIDENT pro tem. No, sir; the motion that was voted down was to adjourn till Monday, at 11. Mr. FARMER. I rise to a point of order. Is not all debate precluded on a motion to adjourn? The PRESIDENT pro tem. It is not debatable, but it is not being debated. Mr. ‘McELROY. I call for the ayes and noes on the motion to adjourn. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Is there any second to the call for the ayes and noes? Mr. DURBIN. I second it. The PRESIDENTpro tem. The Secre- tary will proceed with the call of the roll. And the vote being taken thereon, it resulted as follows: _ YEAS—30. Askew, J. F. James, A. D. Auxier, A. J. Johnston, P. P. Bennett, B. F. Kirwan. E. E. Berkele, Wm. Knott, J. Proctor Bronston, C. J. Lassing, L. W. Buchanan, Nathan Mackoy, W. H. Buckner, S. B. McDermott, E. J. Burnam, Curtis F. Montgomery, J. F. Carroll, John D. Phelps, Zack. Cox. H. Sachs, Morris A. Forgy, J. M. Smith, H. H, Funk, J. T. Swango, G. B. Goebel, William Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. Trusdell, .George Washington, George Young, Bennett H. NAYS—50. Allen, C. T. Hopkins, F. A. Amos. D. C. Jonson, Jep. C. Ayres, W . W. Kennedy, Hanson Beckham, J. C. Lewis, W. W. Beckner, W. M. Martin, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. May. John S. Blackburn, James McElroy, W. J. Blackwell, Joseph McHenry, H. D. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will Brents, J. A. Miller, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, J. H. Clardy, John D. Moore, Laban T., Clay, C. M., Jr. Muir, J. W Coke. J. Guthrie Nunn, T J DeHaven, S. E. ‘ Petrie, H. G. Doris, W. F. Pettit, Thos. S. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Farmer, H. H. Phelps,.John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. ‘E. ‘tion is out of order. a Forrester, J. G. Ramsey, ‘W. R. Graham, Samuel Rodes, Robert Hanks, Thos. H. Spalding, I. A. Harris Geo. C. West, J. F. Hogg. S. P. Whitaker, Emery Holloway, J. W. Wood, J. M. [ABsEN'r—ZO. Allen, M. K. Glenn, Dudley A. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines,J. S. Boles, S. H. Jacobs, R. P. Bronston, C. J, Lewis, J. W. Brown, J. S. O’Hara, R. H. Brummal, J. M. Parsons, Rob’t T. Chambers. G. D. Smith, W. Scott Elmore, T. J. Straus, F. P. English, Sam. E. Williams, L. P. V. Field, W. W. Woolfolk, J. F. Mr. MAY. Mr. President, if it is in order, I wish to move that on the adjourn- ment of this Convention to-morrow that it be till Wednesday next at 11 o’clock. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The mo- There is a motion before the House for an adjournment, Mr. HENDRICK. I should like to amend that motion by moving that we ad— journ until Tuesday next at 10 o’clock. The PRESIDENT pro team... The ques- tion is upon the motion to adjourn till Tuesday at 10 oclock. Mr. JONSON. Mr. President, I be- lieve that we have just voted that proposi- tion down once or twice. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I would like to- amend the amendment by saying Monday, at. 10 o’clock. The PRESIDENT pro tem. That has. just been voted upon. Mr. RODES. I think the Committee _on Preamble and Bill of Rights will be- able to make a report on Monday, and then the work can begin in earnest, and we can set up the frame-work of our Constitution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair heard the gentleman for the infor- mation of the House, although, in his his opinion, it is out of order to discussa motion to adjourn. ‘ RESOLUTIONS. ] 5 Friday,] J OHNSTON—M cELRoYff [September 26, Mr. JOHNSTON. I move that we ad- journ till Monday, at 12 o’clock. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The ques- tion is first upon the motion to adjourn till Tuesday at 10 o’clock. Mr. M oELROY. Upon that, Mr. Speak- er, I call the ayes and nays. Mr. DURBIN. I second the call. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Secre- tary will call the roll. And the vote being taken on the said motion, it resulted as follows : YEAS—25. Askew, J. F. James, A. D. Bennett, B. F. Johnston, P. P. Berkele, Wm. Kirwan, E. E. Buchanan, Nathan Knott, J. Proctor Burnam, Curtis F, Lassing, L. W. Carroll, John D. Mackoy, W. H. Cox, H. McDermott, E. J. English, Sam. E. Phelps, Zack Forgy, J. M. Sachs, Morris A. Goebel, William Swango, G. B. Hendrick, W. J.‘_ Hines, Thomas H. Washington, George Young, Bennett H. Hogg, S. P. mars—54. Allen, C. T. Holloway, J. W. Amos, D. C. Hopkins, F. A. Auxier, A. J. Jonson, Jep. C. Ayres, W. W. Kennedy, Hanson Beckham, J. G. Lewis, W. W. Beckner, W. M. Martin, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. Mar, John S. McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Brents, J. A. Miller, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Moore, J. H. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, Laban T. Clardy, John D. Muir, J. W. Coke, J. Guthrie Nunn, T. J. DeHaven, S. E. Petrie, H. G. Doris, W. F Durbin, Charles Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Edrington, W. J. Pugh, Sam’l J. Farmer, H. H. Quicksall, J. E. Field, W. W. Ramsey, W. R. Forrester, J. G. Rodes, Robert Funk, J. T. Smith, H. H. Graham, Samuel Spalding, I. A. Hanks, Thos. H. West, J. F. Harris, Geo. C. Whitaker, Emery ABSENT—21. Allen, M. K. O’Hara, R. H. Applegate, Leslie T. Parsons, Rob’t T. Boles, S. H. Smith, W. Scott Brown, J. S. Straus, F. P. BrummaL J. M. Trusdell, George Chambers, G. D. Twyman, I. W. Elmore, T. J. Williams, L. P.V. Glenn, Dudley A. Wood, J. M. Hines, J. S. Woolfolk, J. F. Jacobs, R. P. Mr. President Clay. Lewis, J. W. 1 Mr. McELROY. Mr. President, I wish to ask leave of absence for the gentleman from Boone. Mr. ENGLISH. I call the ayes and noes. (Laughter.) ' The PRESIDENT pro tem. If there is no objection, the leave will be granted. Mr. BRENTS. I move that the Con- _ vention now adjourn until to-morrow morn- in at 10 o’clock- The PRESIDENT pro tem. I will state that the m tion is now pending upon the _ proposition to adjourn, as amended by the gentleman from Fayette, to Monday at 12 o’clock. Mr. MCELROY. Ayes and noes. Mr. DURBIN. I second the call. The PRRESIDENT pro tem... The Secretary will please call the roll. I will just state to the Delegate (Mr. McElroy), that the reason the Chair did not recognize him sooner was because, under the rules, he must address the Chair as Mr President, and not simply announce “ayes and noes.” That was the reason why I thought he was a little late. And the vote being taken upon said mo- tion, it resulted as follows : ' ’ YEAS—26. Askew, J. F. Hendrick. W. J. Auxier, A. J. Hines, Thomas H. Bennett, B. F. James, A. D. Berkele, Wm. Johnston, P. P. Buchanan, Nathan Kirwan. E. E. Buckner, S. B, Knott, J. Proctor Burnam, Curtis F. Mackoy, W. H. Carroll, John D. Coke. J. Guthrie English, Sam. E. Forgy, J , M. Funk, J. T. ,. McDermott, E. J. Montgomery, J. F. 'Phelps, Zack Sachs, Morris A. Swango, G. B. 16 RESOLUTIONS. ‘Friday,] ADJOURNMENT. [September 26. Goebel, William Forrester, J. G. Graham, Samuel Young, Bennett H. NAYS—51. » Allen, C. T. Hopkinali‘. A. Amos, D. C Jonson, J ep. C. Ayres, W. W. Kennedy, Hanson Beckham, J. C. Lewis, W. W. Beckner, W. M. Martin, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. May, J onn S. Blackburn, James McElroy, W. J. Blackwell, Joseph McHenrv, H. I). Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Brents, J. A. .Miller, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. Bullitt, W. G. _ Moore, Laban T. Clardy, John D. Muir, J. W. Clay, C. M‘., Jr. N unn, T. J. 'Cox, H. Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. E. Pettit, Thos. S. Doris, W. F. Phelps, John L. Durbin, Charles Pugh, Sam’l J. Farmer, H. H. Quicksall J. E. Field, W. W. Ramsey, W . R. Rodes, Robert Smith, W. Scott ‘Hanks, Thos. H. Spalding, I. A. Harris, Geo. C. West, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Whitaker,Emery Holloway, J. W. ABSENT—23. _ Allen, M. K. Lewis, J. W. Applegate,‘ Leslie T. O’Hara, R. H. Boles, S. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Brown, J .- S. Smith, W. Scott Brummal, J. M. Straus, F. P. Chambers, G. D. Trusdell, George Edrington, W. J. Twyman, I. W. Elmore, T. J. Washington, George Glenn, Dudley A. Williams, L.P.V. Hines, J. S. Wood, J. M. Jacobs, R. P. Woolfolk, J. F. Lassing, L. W. The PRESIDENT pro tem The ques- now is upon the motion to adjourn til1 to-morrow at 10 o’clock. And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the aflirmative. generation guard. ‘ Saturday,] —-KENTUCKY——- OCDNS'I'ITU'I‘ICDNAL CCDN'V-EN’I‘ION- Vol. 1. FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 27, 1890. No.16 FIELD—HINES—BECKHAM. [September 27 . The Convention was opened with pray- er by Rev. Mr. Blayney. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are in or- der. Mr. FIELD. Mr. President, Iask leave of absence for the gentleman from Boyd. The PRESIDENT. If there are no ob- jections, and the Chair hears none, such leave will be granted. Mr. T. H. HINES. Mr. President, I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Covington, Mr. Mackoy. The PRESIDENT. The Chair bears no objection, and such leave is granted. Mr. BECKHAM. Mr. President, I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Anderson, The PRESIDENT. Without objection, :such leave is granted. Reports from Stand- ing Committees are now in order. Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, on be- half of the Committee on Municipalities, I beg leave to present a report with reference ‘to the formation of new counties. The PRESIDENT. Read the report, Mr. Secretary. The Reading Clerk read the report ofier- ed by Mr. Young, which is as follows: Report of the Committee on Jlfunicipalities. SE0. 1. No new county shall be formed or established by the General Assembly which will reduce the county or counties, or either of them, from which it shall be taken, to less contents than four hundred square miles, nor shall any county be form- -ed- of less contents; nor shall any line thereof pass within less than ten miles of any county seat of the county or counties proposed to be divided. SEC. 2. No county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, without submitting the question to a vote of the people of the county, nor unless the major- ity of all the legal voters of the county_ voting on the question shall vote for the same. SEO. 3. There shall be no territory stricken from any county unless a majority of the voters living in such territory shall petition for such division. But the portion so stricken off and added to another coun- ty, or formed in whole or in part into a new county, shall be holden for and obliged to pay its proportion of the bonded indebt- edness of the county from which it has been taken. Mr. STRAUS. an amendment. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Straus amendment, which is as follows: Mr. President, I offer Provided, That nothing contained herein shall prevent the Legislature from abolish- ing any county or counties. Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, this is a subject upon which I think there is rea- sonable unanimity among the Delegates. We have not yet disposed of any business, and we have been here nearly three weeks. I think we can take this question up and get through with it within an hour. With that view in mind, I move that this report be made a special order for to-day at elev- en o’clock. The PRESIDENT. Is there a second to the motion ? 2 FORMATION OF NEW COUNTIES. Saturday,] WHITAKER—MCHENRY. [September 27 . Mr. H. H. SMITH. I second it. Mr. WHITAKER. If I am in order, I would like to say that I am in favor of drawing an expression from the mem- bers of this Convention, in some form. towards making this Constitution. We have, by a system of evolution, thrown out every resolution that has been ofiered here, and there have been many on every subject, and if those resolutions are to be reported back singly to the Convention and either adopted or rejected, we are just where we were when we started, and we haveno Constitution, nor no article or chapter or section of the Constitution yet made. If some gentleman will draw a resolution that will bring that question up, I would thank him. It seems to me that the object the Delegates to this Conven- tion had in forming Committees was, that each Committee should have the resolutions bearing upon certain subjects referred to that Committee, and so on, embracing every subject in the old Constitution, or that can be put in the new one; that that Committee should examine, and. I may say, that no resolution upon any subject, proba- bly would be acceptable to this body, or to the peple, 1f formulated in the Constitu- tion ; but from the mass of ideas contained in the resolutions referred to the Commit- tees. that they should form a chapter, or a portion of the Constitution, as the judg- ment of the Committee dictated ought to become a part of the Constitution itself. I see no other way in which we can arrive at the object for which we came here. Any other mode would be, that every reso- lution passed will find a place in the hands of the Clerk and upon the Clerk's table, without any efiort to organize the mat- ter, or formulate it into a shape upon which we can act as a body. I propose that the‘Committees formulate from the ideas contained in the resolutions that por- tion of the Constitution, and report it, and ask that it be embodied in the Constitution, and then it can come up in Committee of the Whole and be read, line by line and sentence by sentence, for the approval of the Committee of the Whole ;"and in that way we can approach, at least, towards making a Constitution; and until that thing is done, we might just as well stay in our rooms, in my judgment. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that the only question that is debat- able is the motion to dispose of the report. Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. President, I ap- preciate what has been said by the Dele- gate from Mason. All these resolutions which have been offered and referred to the Committees are being considered by the- Committees, and those resolutions are val- uahle to the Committees in order to enable them to come to aconclusion, and to report the particular article in the Constitution, for the action of the Convention, on that branch of the subject which is referred to the different Committees. I take it for- granted that the Committees are at work. Some of them are at work; but then we ought not do this thing very hastily. It takes the Committees some time to read these resolutions. They are not bound by any of them. The Committee will, of course, give due consideration to those questions bearing upon the particular sub- ject upon which they are finally to make a report for a special article in the'Constiiu- tion. Now, Itake it for granted, sir, that perhaps next week, or, maybe, not until the- week after, we shall have some article re». ported, which is the deliberate opinion and report of a Committee, after they have re- fiected upon it, and I'do not think that the Committees should be hastened in any way. I think they appreciate the importance of the subject, and we want mature work. We want the best opinion of the Committees, and I take it for granted that, in most instances, the repor's of the Commit- tees, as they all ought tov be, will be referred to the Committee of the Whole, and fully discussed, and I think most of them will pass by FORMATION OF NEW COUNTIES. 3 Saturday,] McHENRY—Yourre. [September 27 . the approbation of a large majority of the Convention I rose specially to ob- ject to the consideration of the report from the Committee on Municipalities. I think it is a pretty serious matter. not much m'ore'than a quorum here to-day, and now we are going to take up this very serious matter as to the formation of new counties. I do not know really whether I am in favor of the report made. I hear it, and it strikes me favorably in one view, but then in another it strikes me that we ought to go slow, for there are many local- ities in the State of Kentucky that are looking forward to the time when they will have anew county, and by adopting that report, as presented by the distinguished Chairman of the Committee on Munici- palities, you will find that in many locali- ties in Kentucky there will be thousands of votes cast against this Constitution, _ when it is submitted to the people, simply because that provision in it bars them from ever having a new county in the particular neighborhood where they reside, and we will throw an immense weight against the Constitution ; for that reason, I move, if I am in order, and I believe I am, that the motion of the gentleman be printed, and made a special order for some day next week, I do not care what it is. I move to have it printed and recommitted. Mr. YOUNG. There is no objection on the part of the Committee, if there is to be any extended discussion of it, to this report being printed and the matter hav- ing ample time for consideration. It struck me as being one of the questions about which there was practical unanimity. There is one thing certain, and that is, that we do not want any more counties. I believe I voice the sentiment of every Delegate upon this floor when I say, that with one hundred and nineteen counties, seventy-six of which pay less into the State Treasury than they draw out, we do not want any more counties. But if these gentlemen desire to discussnthe We have _ matter, I have no objection. The Com- mittee thought that it was a matter which might be gotten through with to-day. Some time we have got to discuss these things, and I do not agree with the gentle- man from Mason in wanting every clause reported before we discuss any part of the work of that Committee. We have a Committee, the Committee on Divisions, Titles and Arrangements, who will ar- range tne proper articles and various sec- tions of the Constitution; and if we are to wait until each Committee has done its full work and then refers it to this Con-. vention, it would be impossible for the Convention to get through with its work. Thrre are some general propositions which we wish to insert in the organic law which require less discussion than others. Those should be discussed before the Convention, from time to time, and settled, and leave their arrangement in the Constitution to this Committee, No. 20, which was organ- ized for that purpose. I therefore accept the suggestion of the gentleman from Ohio, that this be made a special order for sorr e day next week. The PRESIDENT. The suggestion of the gentleman from Ohio was to have it recommitted to the Committee. Mr. YOUNG. We do not want it back. Mr. McHENRY. I move that it be referred to the Committee, with leave to report at that hour. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. Mr. President, there is an amendment ofiered to the orig- inal report from the Committee on Munic- ipalities this morning. The presumption‘ is, that if the motion made by the gentle— man frtm Ohio'prevailed, that the amend- ment will go with it. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, all amendments can be printed along with the report. Mr. MCHENRY. I suggest that it be printed with all the amendments. Mr. ,1. w. LEWIS. Any article that is - 4 FORMATION OF NEW COUNTIES. fi Saturday,] to become a part of the supreme and funda- mental law of the State, is certainly a matter of the greatest importance,and worthy of all the time, consideration and deliberation that can be given to it. The matter sug- gested and embodied in the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Bullitt and Spencer, presents serious questions for the consideration of this body—the ques- tion as to whether the legislative depart- ment of the government shall have the power to abolish a county without the consent of the people of that county, and add it to another county or counties, and without the consent of those counties. Many of the counties in this Common- wealth are burdened with immense debts and liabilities, and serious complications exist and have grown out of that fact. Mr. STRAUS. Mr. President, is it in order to discuss the question ? The PRESIDENT. The motion to re- commit is not debatable. The motion to print and re-comrnit admits of very slight debate, and not at all on the merits. Mr. LEWIS. I was only suggesting matters that might arise upon the consider- ation of the amendment, and it was not my purpose to discuss the amendmentatall; and the reasons that led me to favor the motion of the distinguished Delegate from Ohio, to have the report printed and made a special order for next Tuesday. I was about to suggest that those were serious questions, this question of debt and liabili- ty, and the consequences growing out of it, existingin many counties of the State at this time, and whether the county or counties to which they should be added, if abolish- ed, had no right to be heard, or to act upon those matters by which they are so serious- 1 y affected. Mr. STRAUS. order. Mr.‘ LEWIS. That is all I have to say. Mr. BULLITT. 'I have an amend- ment. I insist on my point of STRAUS—LEVVIS—BRONSTON. [September ‘27 . Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. President, I rise to a point of order. The PRESIDENT. Please state your point. '7 Mr. BRONSTON. I have not the print‘ ed rules before me, but I am perfectly clear in my recollection that the gentle- man from Henry introduced an amend- ment which required that all amendments proposed to the Constitution, before they could be considered by the House, were to be printed and lie on the table one day. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resolution offered by the Delegate from Henry, as indicated by the Delegate from Lexington. It is impos- sible for the Chair to decide upon the ques- tion of order, unless the resolution offered by the Delegate from Henry is read. The Chair is not acquainted with the contents of the resolution, and will have to have the resolution in order to decide. The Chair suggests to the Delegate from Lexington that his purpose would be accomplished by the passage of the motion offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. McHenry) and accepted by the gentleman from Louisville; and the Chair will proceed, with the con- ' sent of the Delegate, he waiving his point of order. Mr. BRONSTON. For the present I do not insist upon it. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will put the vote upon the motion of the Delegate, from Ohio, which is to print the report, and recommit it to the Committee, with instructions to report at 11 o’clock next Tuesday. Mr. STRAUS. Does that carry the amendments with it. ? The PRESIDENT. And all amend- ments. Mr. KENNEDY. I offer an amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. The amendment of the gentleman from Nicholas will go with the report, and also the amendment offered by the Delegate from McCracken. Th FORMATION OF NEW COUNTIES. Saturday,] YOUNG—BECKN Err—BURNAM. [September 27, Chair would suggest that there is already a special order for 11 o’clock, Tuesday. Mr. YOUNG. Make it Wednesday or Thursday, then. The PRESIDENT. The Chair then would put the motion this way, that the motion made by the Delegate from Ohio, as understood by the Chair, is” this: That the report, with the accompanying. amend- ments (the Delegates will send up their amendments), be printed and recommitted to the Committee on Municipalities, with instructions to that Committee to report at 11 o’clock next Wednesday. And thequestion being taken upon said motion, it was adopted. Mr. BECKNE R. There is a special order for Wednesday at 11 o’clock. ‘ Mr. YOUNG. 1 move now that this provision be printed, together with all amendments. and that it be recommitted, with leave to call up the report next Tues- day at 12 o’clock. The PRESIDENT. The question is this: That the report of the Committee, with accompanying amendments, be print- ed and recommitted to the Committee on Municipalities, with leave to that Commit- tee to report next Tuesday at 11 o’clock. And the question being taken upon said motion, it was adopted. Mr. BURNAM. ‘ I am requested by the .Committee in the contested election case of McChord vs. Lewis to ask of the House the privilege to allow them to sit during the sessions of the Convention. The PRESIDENT. The‘ Committee appointed in the contested election case of McChord against Lewis ask permission to sit during the sessions of the Convention. ~ Is there any objection to that request? The Chair hears none, and such granted. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, are mo- tions in order? I present the following amendment to the rules. 1 simply ask that leave is into the orders of the day, to be called up at any time. The PRESIDENT. _Please report the resolution. ' The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Pettit, which is as follows: Committee of the l/V/eole House. 1. In forming a Committee of the Whole House, the President shall leave his chair, after appointing a Chairman to pre- side, who shall, in case of disturbance or disorderly conduct in the'galleries or lob- by, have power to cause the same to be cleared. 2. Whenever this Committee finds itself without a quorum, the Chairman shall cause the roll to be called; thereupon the Committee shall rise, and ‘the Chairman shall report the names of the absentees to the Convention, which shall be entered on the Journal ; but if,fon such acall, a quoi um shall appear. the Committee shall there- upon resume its sitting without reporting _the fact to the Convention. 3. In this Committee, business on the calendar shall be taken up in regular or- der, as reported therein. 4. When generaldebate is closed by order of the Convention, any Delegate shall be allowed five minutes debate on any amend- ment he may ofier, after which the mem- ber who shall first obtain the floor shall be allowed to speak five minutes in opposition to it, and there shall be no further debate thereon; but the same privilege of debate shall be allowed in favor of or against any amendment that may be offered to an amendment; and no amendment shall be withdrawn by the mover thereof unless by unanimous consent. ‘5. The rules of proceedings in the Con- vention shall be observed in Committee of the Whole, so far as they may be appli- cable. - The PRESIDENT. Resolutions are now in order. Mr. T. H. HINES. I have a resolution which I would like to have read. Mr. PETTIT. Has any disposition been made of my resolution? The PRESIDENT. It lies over one day under the rules. Under the rules all amendments to the rules lie over one day it be read, and that it be printed and fall , before being considered. RESOLUTION S. Saturday,] McHnxnr—Joxsox—Sxcns. [September 27 , Mr. McHENRY. I was simply going to make a motion that the Committee on Rules will have a meeting next Monday, and there are various matters referred to us which we will consider then. I move that we suspend the rules, so far as this res- olution is concerned, and have it referred to that Committee. _ The PRESIDENT. In order to pre- vent confusion, will the gentleman sus_ pend his motion until the resolution offered by the .Delegate from Franklin is disposed of? Then the Chair will receive your motion. The Reading Clerk read the resolution ofiered by Mr. T. H. Hines, which is as follows: Resolved, That the resolutions offered and referred to the several Committees are to be consided only as suggestions or advi- sory to the Committee, and that it is the province of the respective Committees to. formulate therefrom and report, in appro- priate sections, to the Convention, such alterations of or additions to the present Constitution as they may deem proper. Mr. JONSON. Mr. President, I offer a substitute, The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the substitute. The Reading Clerk read Mr. J onson’s substitute, which is as follows: WHEREAS. A great number of resolutions have been presented to this Convention, and referred to appropriate Committees for consideration; and whereas, many dif- ferences of opinion are presented by the said resolutions, and great labor will be imposed upon the Committees of this Con- vention by requiring them to report spe- cially upon each of said resolutions; there- fore, in order to facilitate the business of the Convention, Be it resolved. That the several Com- mittees to whom said resolutions have been referredbe, and they are hereby, directed, after careful consideration of said resolu- tions, to make their report or reports in writing, in which they shall formulate into articles and sections such part or parts of all of said resolutions so referred to them as they shall recommend for in- sertlon into the Constitution; and further, that they formulate into articles and sec- tions such other suggestions as to them shall be proper as parts of this Constitution. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the substitute in lieu of the original resolution. Mr. BRONSTON. I move to refer both to the Committee on Rules. And the question being taken upon said motion, it was adopted, and the resolution and substitute so referred. Mr. McHENRY. I make the motion now, sir. that the resolution offered by the Delegate from Daveiss be referred to the 3 Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. It is moved and seconded that the rules be suspended, and that the resolution offered by the Delegate from Daveiss be taken up and referred to Q the Committee on Rules. . x. ____'Lx ._._____—.—_. ._ And the question being taken upon said motion, it was adopted. Mr. SACHS. Mr. President, I have a res ~lution here calling for a change in the militia law of the State, which I ask to have referred to the Committee on Militia. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Sachs’ res- olution, which is as follows: Resolution that section 1 of article 7, concerning the militia, be omitted, and in its stead the following be inserted, viz: 1 All able-bodied male inhabitants of this State between the ages of eighteen and forty-five Ycfil‘S, who are citizens of the United States or have declared their inten-' tion to become such citizens, shall be liable to military duty in the militia of this State, except such persons as now are, or here- after may be, exempted by the laws of this State or the United States: Provided, That those who belong to religious societies whose tenets forbid them to carry arms, shall not be compelled to do so, but shall pay an equivalent for personal services. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I offer this res olution, and move its adoption. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. W. H. Miller, which is as follows : RESOLUTIONS. 7 curred in this direction. wt .Saturdayi] MILLER—PETTIT—W’Asnixe'rox. [September 27. The Committee on Printing is hereby in structed to contract with the Printer to fur- nish to each Delegate of this Convention, every other day, fift y stamped packages con- taining the printed reports ofthe proceedings and debates, each package to contain the proceedings and debates of two days, in- :stead of one day, as directed by the resolu- . tion heretofore adopted. 2. Said Committee will contract for the printing of five thousand copies of the re- ports, instead of three thousand as hereto- fore directed. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The resolution which I offer requires no more expendi- ture than that which we have already in- By this means we will save each week 3560 in postage, and that $60 in postage, in my opinion, will {pay for the additional 2,000 copies of the ‘report. The effect of the adoption of this ‘resolution will be that we will have a much wider distribution of the proceedings of this Convention, and I think it will operate beneficially, and I think it should be adopt- ed now, so that provision may be made for printing the additional 2,000 copies called -for by the resolution. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, I move you‘ that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Printing. There is where the original report came from, and it seems to me ought to be so referred. Mr. BRONSTON. I second the mo- tion. And the question being taken on said motion, it was adopted, and the resolution -so referred. Mr. WASHINGTON introduced the Ifollowi n g resolution : Resolved, That no report of a Committee relative to any matter which it is proposed ~to incorporate in the Constitution to be framed by this Convention, shall, without (unanimous consent, be acted upon, for adoption or rejection, on the day such re- port may be presented, but shall'be made a special orded for some day thereafter, not less than two, as the Convention may order. . The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption :of the resolution just read. Mr. BRONSTON. I move to refer it to the Committee on Rules. And the question being taken upon said motion, it was decided in the afiirmative. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will lay before the Convention a communication from the Auditor, which the Secretary will please read. The : communication was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: September 26, 1890. Hon. 0. M. Clay, Jr., President Constitu- tional Convention: SIR; In obedience of the resolution of your honorable body, hearing date Septem- ber 19th, directing me to furnish the Con- vention with “ an itemized statement of ac- count showing how much money has been expended by the State of Kentucky on convicts during the past six (6) years, in- cluding cost of. guards and militia furnished for protection of lessees in the use of con- victs, and also the amount paid by the lessees to the State for the hire of the convicts,” I have the honor to submit the following : There has been paid by the State for all purposes connected with the Penitentiary at Frankfort, for the time indicated, $140,- 545.63, This includes all the necessary re- pairs to building, machinery, heating appa- ratus, etc., owned by the State, expendi- tures for sanitary and ventilating purposes, and the salaries of all officials, including guards. It also covers the expense of a period of six (6) months, viz: From Oc- tober 2, 1884, to April 1, 1885, when the labor of the prison was not leased, and its entire cost was borne by the Szate, reslut- ing in a not less of many thousand dollars On March 6th, 1888, the Executive, on information given to him by an ofiicer of the State that mob violence was threatened to the convicts employed, under the author- ity of an act of the Legislature, approved May 10, 1884, in the coal mines at Green- wood, Ky., issued a proclamation ordering 8 CON VICT LABOR. \ Saturday,] JONSON—BRONSTON. [September 27. into active service certain companies of State Guards to maintain peace, to protect the lives and property of citizens of the State, and to enforce law and order. The cost of such service by said militia was $9,333.68. There has been paid to the State by the lessees, during the period cov- ered by the inquiry, $102,691.98 The cost of the Eddyville prison, as shown by aggregate legislative appropriations to the first of July last, has been $451,511.97. This is not presented in an itemized form, since the whole expenditure has been made under and by virtue of specific legislative appropriations. By an act of the Legisla- ture, approved the 30th of April, 1888, $60,000 was appropriated to rebuild the work-shop at the Frankfort Penitentiary’ destroyed by fire in 1887, which has been expended in accordance with the provis- ions of the act. By an act approved Feb- ruary 18th, 1890, $12,000 was appropriated to enlarge the dining-room, build and equip a suitable kitchen, etc., at the same prison; but up to the first of July, 1890 but little of this has been expended. Reference is respectfully made to the accompanying papers, setting out in de- tail the expenditures upon the prison at Frankfort herein alluded to. I have the honor to remain Your obedient servant, L. C. NORMAN, Auditor. The PRESIDENT. What will the Convention do with the communication '2 Mr. BRONSTON. I move that it be referred ,to the Committee on Crimes, Pun- ishments and Criminal Procedure. Mr. JONSON. I move to amend, that the report for information be printed, 125 copies, and referred to said Committee. The PRESIDENT. ‘Does the Delegate from Lexington accept the amendment sug- gested by the Delegate from McLean? Mr. BRONSTON. I do. The motion as amended being put to the House, was carried, and the resolution so referred. ThePRESIDENT. The Chair will lay before the Convention the following- communication from the Secretary of State. The communication was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows : OFFICE SECRETARY OF STATE, ' FnANKFoRT, Sept. 26, 1890. } Hon. C. IVI. Clay, Pres-ident Constitutional Convention .- SIR: In compliance with a resolution of the Constitutional Convention, I have the’ honor to transmit herewith copies of con- racts with present lessees of convicts, as- follows: 1. Copy of contract dated October 2, 1888, with Mason & Foard Company, for- labor of convicts that may be confined in the Branch Penitentiary at Eddyville, made by the Governor, under and in pursu- ance of the act of the Legislature approved May 4, 1888, marked “A.” 2. Copy of contract dated April 1, 1889, with Mason & Foard Company, for labor of convicts in Kentucky Penitentiary at Frankfort, marked “ B.” Also copies of contracts with past lessees of convicts, as follows: 1. Copy of contract dated April 27, 1885,. with Mason & Foard Company, marked “0.” 2. Copy of contract dated September, 1882, with C. R. Mason 8: Co.. marked “D.” 8. Copy of contact dated June 8, 1880, with Warner, Tabler 8: Co., marked “ E.” 4. Copy of contract dated August 11,. 1880, with William Jones, marked “ F.” Very respectfully. GEO. M. ADAMS, Secretary of State. A. Copy contract with M'ason é‘ Found 00772-4 pany, October 2, 1888,f01' convict labor at Branch Penitentiary at Eddyville, under- Act of May 4, 1888. This contract entered into ‘this second day of October, 1888, by and between the- CONVICT LABOR. 9‘ Saturday,] REsPoNsE OF SECRETARY OF STATE. [September , State of Kentucky, party of the first part and the Mason & Foard Company, and H. P. Mason, S. B. Mason, Jo. F. Foard, S. D. Gooch, W. F. Dandridge, Wm. Morrow, W. M. Duncan, Charles E. Hoge and John King, principal sureties herein, and John Echols, their surety, party of the second part, witnesseth: - That for the consideration, and upon the conditions hereinafter mentioned, the par- ties of the second part agree that they will, in a skillful, substantial and workmanlike manner, with all requisite labor, tools, ma— chinery, appliances and materials, make and execute for the party of the first part the following‘ work, to wit: 1st. They will complete the Eddyville Prison, including all buildings, Work and appurtenances embraced in the written proposition of Jordan & Clark, having es- pecial reference to their recapitulation thereof with attached schedule; and in ad- dition thereto, the administration building and cell-houses Nos. 1 and 2, according to the modified plans and specifications pre- pared therefor by McDonald Bros., archi- tects, all of said work to be done in exact accordance with said plans and specifica~ tions, under the inspection and supervision of the Commissioner appointed by the Governor of the Commonwealth of Ken- _ tucky, with power and authority as pro- vided in the act of the General Assembly, approved May 4th, 1888, and said work to be done and ompleted with all reasonable haste and diligence. 2d. They agree to furnish the necessary boilers and engines as permanent fixtures required by the specifications when the prison is completed, and to acquit the State of all expense in completing the prison and equipping it with the necessary machinery for the constant employment of the convicts during the term of this lease; the said machinery, except the engine and boilers to be the property of the Mason & Foard Company, and to be removed by them at the expiration of the lease, if the conditions of this contract shall have been faithfully performed. . They further agree to construct a railroad. of standard gauge from the Eddyville de- pot to the rear of the prison. They further agree to assume all existing- contracts entered into with other parties for the heating and ventilation, for the iron work, for the'roofing, for the plumbing and the water-works, payments thereon to be made as set out .below. It is further understood that the party: of the first part reserved the right to mod-v ify the details of the work, and to leave out any portion that may be deemei neces- sary to keep the expendituresowithin the limits of the apprpriation, with the further- understanding that the cost will be in- creased or diminished in proportion to the increase or diminution of the amount of work. As the consideration for the undertaking “ and agreement, the party of the. first part will pay to the party of the second part the sum of one hundred and twenty-six thou-' sand dollars ($126,000) in monthly install.- ments, ba=ed upon estimates, less 15 per cent. of the finished work; said fifteen per- cent. reserved to be paid when the whole work is completed; and they further sell, as‘ sign and transfer to the party of the second part, the plant now belonging to the State at Edddville, and also lease the labor of four hundred and eighteen (418) convicts, more or less, the same varying with the general condition existing and applicable under the law, to be confined in the Eddy- ville prison when the same is completed, to- the party of the second part, for the period of ten (10) years from the date of this con-- tract; said lessees agreeing that they will at all times, during the continuation of their said lease, furnish good and suflicient food and clothing, beds, bedding, medicine and medical attention, to all convicts in said Penitentiary, and further agreeingto faith- fully conform to all rules and regulations which may be prescribed by the Commis~ 10 ‘ CONVICT LABOR. Saturday,] REnPoNsE or SECRETARY or STATE. [September 27 _ sioners of the Sinking Fund, respecting the labor, diet, clothing and safe-keeping of the convicts, and touching the discipline, sanita- tion, police, and other matters relating to ‘the management of the prison, such as said ‘Commissioners are authorized by law to make; and that ' upon the expiration of the term of any convict, or their liberation by pardon, they will fur- nish such convict with a new suit of ser- viceable clothing, and transportation (not transferable) at the lowest rates to the county from which such convict shall have been sent, and five dollars ($5) in money. That if any convict shall escape while in their employ, the lessees shall pay there- ward and expenses prescribed by law for their capture and return to the Peniten- tiary. The party of the second part further agrees to pay into the Treasury, at the end 10f each month, a sum equal to the pay then due of all ofiicers and guards that may be necessary to be appointed by the Commis- sioners of the Sinking Fund as provided by law, and that they will acquit the State of all expense in the maintainence and op- 'eration of said prison, and for the faithful performance of all their agreements and undertakings, the parties of the second part, with their sureties, jointly and sev- crally, bind themselves to the Common- wealth of Kentucky in the sum of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150- 000), to idemnify said Commonwealth against all costs and damages that may ac- crue from a breach of any stipulation here- u contained, should any occur. Witness our hand this second day of 00- tober, in the year of our Lord one thou- sand eight hundred and eighty-eight. S. B. BUCKNER, Governor. MAsoN & FoARn COMPANY. By CHAS. E. HOGE, President, C-HAs. E. HOGE, (surety), H. P. MAsoN, (surety), W. F. DANDRIDGE, (surety), W. M. DUNCAN. (surety), WILLIAM Moanow, (surety), J o. F, FoARI), security. S. B. MAsoN, (surety), S. D. GoocH, (surety), JOHN KING, (security), J OHN EcHoLs, (surety). MEMORANDUM. WHEREAS, There is a clause under the second head of the contract above-mention- ed, referring to the Mason & Foard Com- pany assuming all existing contracts entered into with other parties for the heating and ventilation, for the iron work, for the roofing, for the plumbing and the water-works, payments thereon to be set out below, which is a little ambiguous. Therefore, the following understanding is bad between the Governor of the Com- monwealth of Kentucky and the Mason & Foard Company, which is as follows: That the assumption of these contracts by the Mason & Foard Company mean that they (the Mason & Foard Company) assume to carry out these contracts at the prices and upon the terms and conditions upon which these bids are made to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, and that the payments are to be made in accordance with this contract, and that the amounts paid out upon these contracts are in addi- tion to the $126,000 hereby bid by the Mason & Foard Company for the comple- tion of the Eddyville prison, with the stipulations herein mentioned and made a part of this contract; and that the $126,000 named, is for the purpose of finishing all the buildings according to the revised plans of the architect, and that especial reference s made to the recapatulation thereof with attached schedule, and in addition, the Mason and Foard Company undertakes to finish cell-houses Nos. 1 and 2 according to the plans of the architect, except in so far as they may be modified by the Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Witnesseth the signatures of the Gover- nor of the Commonwealth aforesaid, and CCNVICT LABOR. 11 1 Saturday,] of the Mason & Foard Company, and the day andyear first above written. S. B. BUCKNEB, Governor, Mason 8: FOARD COMPANY, By CHA‘s. E. Hoes, President, WILLIAM MORROW, (security). B. ‘Copy of Contract with Zlfason ti Foaxrd Com- pany, April 1. 1889, for Convict Labor in Kentucky Penitentiary at Frankfort. THIS ARTICLE OF AGREEMENT WITNEssETH : That the Commonwealth of Kentucky has let and hired to the Mason & Foard Company the labor of the convicts who are now. or may be in the Kentucky Peniten- tisry at Frankfort, and also the right to the free use of all the shops, machinery, fixtures, etc., in, and connected with the said Penitentiary, for the period of four (4) years from the first day of April, 1889, for the consideration. and upon the terms, conditions and limitations hereinafter set out, for the faithful observance and per- formance of which said company as prin- cipal, and the undersigned, H. P. Mason, S. B. Mason, Jo. F. Foard, S. D. Gooch, W. F. Dandridge, Wm. Morrow, Wm. M. Duncan, Charles E. Hoge and John King, as principal sureti’es, and John Echols as their surety, hereby bind themselves, joint- ly and severally, to said Commonwealth in such sum or sums, not exceeding one hun- dred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000), as may be suflicient to indemnify the said Commonwealth against all costs and dam- ages that may accrue from a breach of any stipulation herein contained, should any such occur. It is agreed by said contractors, the Mason & Foard Company, and the said parties, sureties aforesaid: ; 1st. That for said labor, said contractors shall pay into the the Treasury of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, on the last day of each month, a sum equal to the monthly pay of all oificers and guards of the Penitentiary then due, so that the said Commonwealth shall be kept aquit of all RESPONSE OF SECRETARY or STATE. [September 27. charge or expense on any such account during the continuation of this contract. 2d. That said contractors shall, at all times during the continuance of thislease, furnish sufficient and proper food, clothing, bedding,medicines and medlcal attendance to all convicts in ‘said Penitentiary, and in all respects treat them humanely, and pro- vide for them as comfortably, both in sick- ness and in health, as may be consistent with good order and discipline, acquitting the Commonwealth of all charge on any such account. 3d. The said contractors shall faithfully conform to all rules and regulations which may be prescribed by the Commission- ers of the Sinking fund respecting the labor, diet and clothing and safe-keepingv of the convicts, and touching the discipline, sanitation, police and other matters relating to the convicts, ofiicers and guards, such as said Commissioners are by law authorized to make; but the said contractors are not to be required to pay for increased compen- sation, or for additional guards, unless an increase of guards is deemed necessary by the Board of Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, and no increaseis to be made except by order of the said Board. Upon the ex- piration of the term of any convict, or his or her pardon, the said contractor or lessee will furnish such convict a new suit of ser- viceable clothing and transportation (not transferable) at the lowest rates to the county from which such convict was sent to the Penitentiary, and will pay the re- wards and expenses prescribed by law for the capture and return of any escaped con- vict. 4th. Said contractor or lessee shall, when required by the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, furnish, free of charge to the Commonwealth, any number of un- skilled convict laborers, not exceeding ten (10) at any one time, that may be needed for work about the public buildings or grounds belonging to the Commonwealth at the seat of government. 12 CON VICT LABOR. Saturday,] REsroNsE 0F SECRETARY OF STATE. [September 27 , 5th. This contract is to be construed in harmony with the existing contract i or the completion and leasing of the prison at Ed- dyville, and as soon as said Eddyville pris- on'is sufficiently completed to do away with the necessity of working. any of the con- victs outside of the prison walls, all con- victs shall be returned to one or the other of these prisons, as provided by law; but until said Eddyville prison is so far com- pleted as to do away with such necessity, the said contractor and lessee is to have the right to continue to work convicts outside of the prison walls as provided for by the terms of its last preceding contract of lease, and to the extent and in the number ' authorized by existing laws. 6th. The said contractor and lessee agrees to waive all claims in law, equity or good conscience it may have to compensa- tion or damages by reason of the burning of the work-shops on January 15, 1887, and the consequent want of room and facil- ities for utilizing the prison labor underits former lease. 7th. Said contractor and lessee also agrees to pay all rents for the water sup- ply, except for fire-plugs, and to save the State acquit of all expense on such ac- count. 8th. The said contractor and lessee 1S to have, and is hereby given the right, at its option, to extend this contract of leasing for the additional term of four years (4) from and after the first day of April, 1893, provided it shall give to the Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners, or to the then prison management, notice of its in- tention to make such extension on or be-_ fore the 31st day of December; 1892. Witness our hands this first day of April, 1889. . S. B. BUCKNER, Chairman Board Sinking Fund Com’rs, MAsoN & FoARD COMPANY, By CHAs. E. HoeE, President, CHAs. E. HoeE (security) H. P. MAsoN (security), W. F. DANDRIDGE (surety), WM. Monnow (surety), W. M. DUNCAN, (surety), J o. F. FOARD (surety), S. D. GoooH (surety), S. B. MAsoN (surety), JOHN KING, J No. EcHoLs. [SeaL] MAsoN 62; FoARD Co. C. Copy contract with Illa-son rj' Eon/rd Com- pany, April, 27, 1885. KNOW ALL MEN BY THEsE PRESENTS. That the Commonwealth of Kentucky has let and hired to the Mason and Foard Company the labor of the convicts who are now or may be in the Kentucky Pen-v itentiary for the period of four years from the first day of April, 1885, for the con sidera- tion and upon theterms,conditions and limit- ations hereinafter mentioned for the faithful observance and performance of which said company and the undersigned, H. P. Mason, S. B. Mason, Jo. F. Foard, S. D. Gooch, W. F. Dandridge, Wm. Morrow, W. M. Duncan, Chas. E. Hoge and John King as principal, and Wm. H. Hendrick and John Echols as their sureties, hereby bind themselves, their successors, heirs, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, to said Commonwealth, in such sum or sums as may be sufiicient to indem- nify said Commonwealth against all costs and damages that may accrue from a breach of any stipulation herein contained, should any such occur. It is agreed by said contractors, the Mason and Foard Company, and the other principals hereto, and also their sureties: 1st. That for said labor said contractors shall pay into the Treasury of the said Com- mon wealth the sum of $8,333.33 annually’ in equal quarterly installments, on the last day of June, September, December and March; and also, on the last day of each month, a sum equal to the pay of all GONVICT LABOR. 18 Saturday,] RESPONSE or SECRETARY OF STATE. officers, guards and inspectors of the Pen- itentiary then due, so that said Common- wealth shall be kept acquit of all_charge or expense on any such account during the continuation of their contract: Provided, They shall not be required to pay for in- creased compensation, or for additional inspectors or guards, unless made necessary by the demands or interests of the lessee. 2d. That said contractors shall, at all times during the continuation of their said contract, furnish sutficient and proper food and clothing, beds and bedding, medicines and medical attendance, to all convicts in said Penitentiary, except to those who may be withdrawn from their employment for work on the new prison while thus with- drawn, and in all respects treat them as humanely, and provide for them as com- 'fortably, both in sickness and in health, as may be consistent with good dlscipline, acquitting the Cammonwealth of any and all charge or expense on any such account. 3d. That said contractors shall faithfully vconform to all rules and regulations which may be prescribed by the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund respecting the labor, ‘diet, clothing and safe-keeping of the con- victs and touching the discipline, sanita- tion, police and other matters relating to the convicts, ofiicers and guards, such as ‘said Oommissionersa re authorized by law to make; and that up )D the expiration of the term of any convict, or his or her liberation .upon pardon,they will furnish such convict with a new suit of serviceble clothing and ‘transportation (not transferable) at the lowest rates to the county from which such convict shall have been sent. ‘ 4th, That said contractors shall not em- ploy, or permit to be employed, upon any public work outside of the walls of the Penitentiary, any convict who shall have been convicted of murder, arson, rape, or attempted rape, or who shall have a longer period than five years to serve, but may em- ploy all other male convicts able to perform :such labor upon public works in Kentucky, such as the construction and improvement of railroads, canals, water-ways, levees and mining: Provided, That the convicts thus employed shall not be worked within the corporate limits of any city or town, nor quartered, unless engaged in mining,‘ within two miles thereof, nor within one- fourth of a mile of a private residence, unless by the written consent of the resi- dent 5th. That said contractors shall, when the same can be spared from the Peniten- tiary, furnish, free of charge to the Com- monwaalth, any number of unskilled laborers, not exceeding ten at any one time, that may be needed for work about any of the public buildings or grounds be- longing to the Commonwealth at the seat of government. 6th. That if any convict shall escape while in their employ, said contractors shall pay the reward and expenses pre- scribed by law for his or her capture and return to the Penitentiary. 7th. It is understood that none of the convicts who are now employed upon the Branch Penitentiary are to be considered as embraced in this contract while with- drawn for that purpose; and that the Com- missioners of the Sinking Fund reserve the right, upon giving the said contractors sixty days’ notice in writing, to withdraw from said contractors such additional num- ber of able-bodied male convicts as may be profitably worked upon said Branch Penitentiary, in which event the said con- tractors are to be released from their obligation to pay the annual sum here- inbefore stipulated in proportion to the additional number so withdrawn; and it is further- understood and agreed,‘ that whenever there shall be provided sufficient rooms and accommodations for them within the walls of the Penitentiary at Frank- I fort, or any Branch Penitentiary that may be erected, the Commissioners of the Sink- ing Fund may require the return to the Penitentiary all convicts employed out- [September 27 14 CONVICT LABOR. ,Saturdayg] REsPONsE OF SECRFTARY OF STATE. [September 27' side, upon giving six months’ notice, in writing, to the said contractors. Witness our hand this twenty-seventh , day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-five. MAsoN dz FOARD COMPANY, By CHAS. E. HOGE, President. H. P. MASON, S. D. GoooH, CHAS. E. HOGE, JOHN KING, WILLIAM MORROW, W. M. DUNCAN, J o. F. FOARD, W. F. DANDRIDGE, JNO. EoHoLs (surety,) W. H. HENDRICK (surety). Witness as to signature of C. E. Hoge, H. P. Mason, S. D. Gooch and John King: G. G. GOOOH. Witness: W. H. HATCH. Witness: CON. F. KREBS as to Echols- Witness, as to W. H. Hendrick: WM. J. HENDRICK. D. Copy Of Contract with (l. R. llfason Q" (70., September -—, 1882. , We, the undersigned lessees and con- tractors, G. R. Mason, H. P. Mason, W. F Dandridge and Chas. E. Huge, composing the firm of O. R. Mason & 00., and Wm. H. Hendrick and John Means. their sure- ties, do hereby contract for, hire and lease from the Commissionors of the Sinking Fund of the State of Kentucky, for the termof two years from the first day of Oc- tober, 1882, all of the convict labor of the Kentucky Penitentiary, including both such as may be worked inside and such as may be worked outside of the walls of the prison, upon the following terms and con- ditions: For the six hundred convicts au- thorized by law to be leased and worked within the walls of the prison, we agree and promise to pay to said Oom- missioners the sum of eighteen thousand dollars per year, due and payable in equal quarterlyinstallments from the beginning of this lease; and we bind and obligate ourselves to feed, clothe and furnish all necessary medicines to female convicts, and all diseased and disabled male convicts as- must ofnecessity remain in the prison, both such as are in the Penitentiary now and such as may be sentthere during the continuance of this lease; and we further bind our- selves to furnish, during the term of this lease, food and clothing, including proper bedding and medicine necessary for the health and comfort of the convicts, and to. defray all the running expenses of the in- stitution, except the pay of guards and of- ficers, and to faithfully conform to all of' the rules and regulations prescribed by the said Commissioners of the Sinking Fund for the diet, clothing and safe-keep- ing of the convicts, and to conlorn to such rules and regulations as they may estab- lish touching all sanitary and police mat- ters; and upon the termination of a sen- tence of a convict, or his liberation by par. don, to furnish such convict with a new suit of serviceable clothing and transporta- tion (not transferable) _at the lowest rate, to the county ‘from which the convict was sent. It is further agreed that we will idemni- fy and pay to the State“ all legal rewards of- fered or paid for the capture and return of such convicts as we may take outside of the walls of the prison. We further bind and obligate ourselves to conform to and obey all rules and regulations consistent with the law that may be prescribed by said Commissioners, and to observe and obey all the requirements of the laws under which this lease and contract is made. For the convict labor to be worked and leased outside of the walls of the prison. we hereby covenant and agree with said Commissioners to. pay, during the term of this lease. the sum of fifty dollars per year for each convict over and above the said six hundred leased inside of the walls of the prison, the same to be paid quarterly from ‘ CON VICT LABOR. 15 Saturday,] RESPONSE OF SECRETARY OF STATE. [September 27. the beginning of this lease, in equal in- stallments; and, in addition thereto, we bind ourselves to pay to said Commission- ers, in like installments, the sum of twenty- one hundred and ninety dollars per year during the continuance of this lease; and we further bind ‘ourselves to use said con- victs within the State of Kentucky, and only on such public works as we, under the law, are authorized to use them on; we bin d ourselves to properly feed, clothe and securely guard them, and to furnish them medicine and medical attention, and in all respects to treat them humanely, both in sickness and in health, and to provide for them as comfortably as may be consistent with good discipline. We further bind ourselves to observe and abide by such rules and regulations as said Commission- ers may prescribe, concerning the labor, discipline and management of said con- victs, and in all respects to conform to the requirements of the law relating to and regulating the subject-matter of this con- tract. It is understood, in relation to the said convicts above the number of six hundred that are leased to work outside of the walls of the prison, that we are to have a rebate on the price agreed for-each convict for every working day that he may be sick and fails to work, in the same ratio to the agreed price as the time he is sick bears to the whole year. It is further understood that we are to have the privilege of using on our public works outside of the prison all con- victs not prohibited by law from leaving the walls of the prison; and it is further agreed that we are to have the right, by giving four months’ written notice before the termination of this lease to said Com- missionersito continue the same through an- other term of two years, and such notice, when given, shall bind us in all of the obli- gations, conditions and stipulations of this contract for and during the said two years the same is so continued. Witness our hands this - day of Sep~ temher, 1882. C. R. MASON, H. P. MAsoN, W. F. DANDRIDGE, CHAs. E. HooE, W. H. HENDRICK, JOHN MEANS, E. Copy of Contract with IVa'rnei', Table/r ti‘ C0, June 8, 1880. We, the undersigned contractors, War- ner, Tabler & Co., and J. T. Megibben. D. L. Duncan and D. G. Crudup, their sure- ties, have this day contracted for and leased from the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund of the State of Ken- tucky, for the term of two years, the labor of three hundred convicts, to be used in the State hf Kentucky on public workss, such as is authorized by law; and we further agree that said number may at any time be reduced by said Com- missioners so as to embrace only the sur- plus labor in the Penitentiary above the number of five hundred and fifty convicts t and we hereby covenant and agree with said Commissioners to pay for said con- victs, during the term of this lease, the sum of fifty dollars per year for each‘ convict, the same to be paid quarter- ly, in" equal installments; and, in addi- tion thereto, we obligate ourselves to- pay said Commissioners in like install~ ments; the sum of $1,095 per year, or- in lieu thereof such sum as they may pay to an inspector, to be appointed by them, not to exceed three dollars per day. We further bind and obligate ourselves to- properly ‘feed, clothe and securely guard: said convicts during the continuance of this lease. and to furnish them medicine and medical attention, and in all respects.- to treat them humanely, both in sickness- and in health, and to provide for them as comfortably as may be consistent with. good discipline. Wefurther bind ourselves. 16 CONVICT LABOR. Saturday] to observe and abide by such rules and reg- ulations as may be prescribed by said Com- missioners concerning the labor, discipline and management of said convicts, and in all respects to conform to the requirements of the law relating to and regulating the subject-matter of this contract. It is further understood that we are to have a rebate on the price agreed for each convict for every working day that he may be sick, in the same ratio to the agreed price as the time he is sick bears to the whole year. This June 8, 1880. WARNER, TABLER 85 Co., EvAN T. WARNER. JoHN H. TABLER, T. J. MEGIBBEN, By GRANT GREEN, Attorney in fact. D. L. DUNCAN, By GRANT GREEN, Attorney in fact. D. G. CRUnUP, By GRANT GREEN, Attorney in fact. F. of Contract with l-Vill-iani Jones, August 11, 1880, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS : Copy That heretofore, to wit, on the 4th day of August, 1880, William Jones, as princi- pal, and D. M. Bowen, G. W. Craddock, S. L. Thomason, W. T. B. South and John Bowen and J. W. Jones, as his sureties, made and executed to the Commonwealth of Kentucky a bond for the sum of $100,- 500, being the amount of a bid that day made for the convict labor of the Ken- tucky Penitentiary, the same to take effect from the 1st day of August, 1880, and to continue for the term of four years, said sum to be due and payable, in equal annu- :al installments, from the said 1st day of August, 1880. Said bid was then increased to the sum of $101,500 by said Jones, pay- able in like installments; and the same was indorsed on said bond by the said Jones, with the assent and approval of his said sureties, and thus indorsed, said bond, with the bid accompanying, was delivered to REsPoNsE OF SECRETARY OF STATE. [September 2 7 the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund for their acceptance and approval. Said bond contained the further stipulation. that if said bid should be accepted, then the said Jones and his sureties as aforesaid would make and execute any other addi- tional bond which the Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners make the same conform to the require- ments of the law, and to carry out in good faith the contract between said Commis- sioners and said Jones in relation to leasing the conviet labor of the Kentucky Peni- tentiary. Now we, the said Wm. Jones, with the aforesaid securities and suchlothers as sign this bond and contract, do hereby covenant and agree to and with the Com- missioners of the Sinking Fund of the State of Kentucky, for the leasing and hire of the convict labor of the Kentucky Penitentiary to the number of 600 con- victs, for the term of four years, from the 1st day of August, 1880, upon the follow- ing terms, limitations and conditions: We bind and obligate ourselves to pay to said Commissioners for the hire of said convict labor, for the term of four years, from the 1st day of August, 1880, the sum of $101,- 500 the same due and payable in equal annual installments of twenty-five thousand three hundred and seventy-five dollars, due respectively on the 1st. day of August, 1881, the 1st day of August, 1882, the 1st day of August, 1883, and the 1st day of August, 1884. Said convicts are to be worked inside of the walls of the prison, and said number may vary from six hun- dred as many as fifty, either above or below that number, and such variation in num- ber shall in nowise affect the contract or impair this obligation.- We further bind and obligate ourselves to feed, clothe and keep and furnish all necessary medicines to female convicts, and all diseased and dis- abled male convicts as must of necessity remain in the prison, both such as are in the Penitentiary at the time of the execu- tion of this contract and such as may be sent might require to' CON VICT LABOR. 1'7 Saturday,] there during its continuance. And we further bind ourselves to furnish, during the full term of this lease, food, clothing, including proper bedding and medicine, necessary for the health and comfort of the convicts, and to defray all the running ex- penses of the institutinn, except the pay of guards and oflicers, and to faithfully con- form to all the rules and regulations pre- scribed by the Commissioners of the Sink- ing Fund for the diet, clothing and safe- keeping of the convicts, and to conform to such rules and regulations as may be estab- lished by said Commissioners touching all sanitary and police matters; and upon the termination of the sentence of a convict, or his liberation by pardon, to furnish each convict with a new suit of serviceable clothing and transportation, not transfer- able, at the lowest rates, to the county from which the convict was sent. It is further agreed that we will indemnify and pay to the State all legal rewards offered or paid for the capture and return of such convicts as we may take outside of the walls of the prison. It is further under- stood that there is not at present the num- ber of five hundred and fifty convicts in said Penitentiary, but it is agreed that this contract shall not be affected, or this obli- gation impaired, by reason of that fact: Provided, however, That after the 1st day of October, 1880, it is understood that we are to have a rebate on the contract price of.10 cents per day on such number as is lacking to make up said five hundred and fifty convicts. We further bind and obli- gate ourselves to conform to and obey all rules and ‘regulations consistent with the law that may be prescribed by the Com- missioners of the Sinking Fund, and to ob- serve and obey all the requirements of the laws under which‘ this leasing and con- tract is made; and we further bind and obligate ourselves to said Com mission- , ers and the Commonwealth of Kentucky , in the penal sum of twenty-five thousand dollars, conditioned upon the faithful per- Rrxsronsn or SECRETARY or STATE. [September 27 formance of each and every stipulation and agreement contained herein. Witness our hands, this 11th day of August, 1880. ‘ WILLIAM JONES, J. H. BOWEN, D. M. BOWEN, W. T. B. SMITH, J. W. JONES, C. WABSEN, . S. V.‘ PENCIL‘, S. L. THOMASON, G. W. Caannocx, E. W. AYRES. STATE or KENTTCKY, OFFICE AUDITOR PuBLrc ACCOUNTS, . FRANKFORT, September 26,1890. Hon. 0. M. Clay, President Constitutional Convention : ‘ SIR: In obedience to the resolution of your honorable body, hearing date Septem- ber 19th, directing me to furnish the Con- vention with “ an itemized statement of ac- count showing how much money has been expended by the State of Kentucky on convicts during the past six (6) years, in- cluding costs of guards and militia furnish- ed for protection of lessees in the use of convicts, and also the amount paid by the lessees to the State for the hire of the con- victs,” I have the honor to submit the fol lowing: There has been paid by the State'for all purposes connected with the Penitentiary at Frankfort for the time indicated $140,- 545.63. This includes all necessary repairs‘ to buildings, machinery, heating apparatus, etc., owned by the State, expend-- itures, for sanitary and ventilating pur- poses, and the salaries of all oflicials, in- cluding guards. It also covers the expense of a period of six months, viz., from Oc- tober 2,1884, to April 1, 1885, when the labor of the prison was not leased, and its entire cost was borne by the State, resulting in a net loss of many thousand dollars. On March 6, 1886, the Executive, on in- formation given to him by an ofiicer of ' 18 CO‘NVICT LABOR. Saturday,] the State that mob violence was threat- ened to the convicts employed, under the authority of an act of the Legislature ap- proved May 10, 1884, in the coal mines at Greenwood, Kentucky, issued a proclama- tion Ordering into active service certain companies of State Guards to maintain peace, to protect the lives and property of citizens of the State, and to enforce law and order. The cost of such service by said militia was $9,333.68. There has been paid to the State by the lessees, during the period covered by the inquiry, $102,691.98. The cost of the Eddyville prison, as shown by aggregate legislative appropria- tions to the first of July last, has been $451,511.97. This not presented in item- ized‘form, since the whobe expenditure has been made under and by virtue of specific legistive appropriations. By an act of the Legislature approved the 30th of April, 1888, $60,000 was ap- propriated to rebuild the work-shop at the Frankfort Penitentiary destroyed by fire in 1887, which has been expended in ac- cordance with the provisionsof the act. By an act approved February 18th, 1890, $12,0000 was appropriated to enlarge the dining-room, build and equip a suitable kitchen, &c., at the same prison; but up to the first of July, 1890, but little of this sum has been expended. Reference is respectfully made to the ac- companying papers, setting out in detail the expenditures upon the prison at Frank- fort herein alluded to. 1- have the honor to remain, Your obedient servant, L. C. NORMAN, Auditor. Expenses Kentucky Penitentiary for Sin: Years Ending June 30th, 1890. W. T. B. South, etc., pay.roll. $1,286 66 W. T. B. South, etc., pay-roll, 1,300 00 W. T. B. South, account . . . 75 00 J. W. South . . . . . . . . . 200 00 E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . 1,326 66 RESPONSE OF AUDITOR. T. F. Marrs . . . . . . . . . Wm. Fleming. . . . . . . . Jno.]i‘. Church. . . . . . . . G.C.Shaw.. . . . . . T.F.Marrs. . . . . . R. A. Briggs . . . . . . . . M. Buttemer . . . . . . . . Pat. Newman . . . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . S. I. M. Major . . . . . . . . Walker Stephens . . . . . . John O. Driscoll. . . . . . . Crutcher & Stephens . . . L. & N. Railroad . . . . . . S. A. Thomas. . . . . . . R. B. J ilson . . . . . . . . . T. F. Marrs . . . . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, account freight. Collins & Tobin . . . . . . . Jno. D. Woods . . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, account . . E. H. Taylor, etc.,pay-roll . . E. H. Taylor, account . . . . Collins & Tobin . . . . . . . McDonald Bros. . . . . Crutcher&Stephens. . . . . E. Hensley & Son. . . McLean 85 Murray . . . . . . Enquirer Company . . . . . Vance, Cox and others. . . . 'J. L. B. White, etc. . . . . J. L. B. White, etc. . . . . Telephone Exchange Co. . . T. J. Congleton, etc. . . . . W. E. & B, S. Bosworth . . . H. C. Middleton . . . . . . . McDonalddzBro. . . . . .. A. T.Stedman, etc . . . . . . Warren 8: 00., etc . . . . . . Courier-Journal . . . . . . . H. C. Middleton . . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . Collins & Tobin . . . . . . '- E. Hensley & Son . . . . . . H. F. Veisman & Co. . . . . McDonald Bros. . . . . W. S. Dehoney, etc. . . . . . Major, Johnston & Barrett , . 38 14 116 12 113 13 213 34 300 17 124 1,366 531 338 100 10 155 132 32 181 113 171 51 2,209 414 945 100 2,883 852 101 1,430 1 ,325 490 250 1,349 150 167 September 27. 20 05 21 81 93 00 98 07 10 97 66 53 0'0 11 00 75 46 00 CQNVHHTLABOR. 19 Saturday,] RESPONSE 01~ AUDITOR. [September 27. P. L. Gibson, etc . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, E. Power, etc. J. M. Wakefield . . . . . l O O I O Q T. J , Congleton & Bro. . . . Joseph Griffith & Son . . . . H. C. Middleton, etc. . . . . J. E. Bulger . . . . . . . J. P. Babbitt, etc . . . . . W. H. Averill . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll}, Miles 85 Son, etc . . . . . . H. C. Middleton . . . . . An‘Zeiger Co . . . . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll , . G. W. McAlpin & 00.. . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll , . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll , . E. H.Taylor, etc., pay-roll , . John T. Buckley, accounts . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll , . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll , . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll , . T. J. Congleton 85 Bro. . . . E. Power Rodman 86 Bro. I s Q \ O Q E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . Telephone Exchange Co. E. Hensley 85 Son , . . . . W. T. B. South, etc., pay-roll, E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll , W.H. Averill , . . . . . . Daniel Gober . . . . . . . . \-"v E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-r01 . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll , . E. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . JohnCox&Co.. . . . . . . J .T. Buckley, accounts . . . L. F. Mann. . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, . Wakefield & Choate . . . . . Hegan Bros . . . E. L. Banta . . . Banta & Cox . . . . . . . E. Power . . . . . . . . . E. Power . . . I Q I I I I 0 C. E. Collins & Bro. . . . . . C. E. Collins 85 Bro . . . . 275 45 1,326 66 631 37 299 43 436 62 179 42 1,225 53 160 00 673 09 164 33 2,326 67 767 96 749 66 97 50 1,326 66 202 73 1,326 66 1,345 32 1,347 76 1o 45 1,326 66 1,326 66 1,226,66 5 42 5 05 7 77 1,366 66 51 00 250 09 1,326 66 1,326 66 5 66 24 05 1,326 66 1,343 33 1,366 67 13 00 356 32 315 45 1,866 66 75 66 41 72 26 66 23 50 45 06 13 3O 3 46 16 80 E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, E. Power. . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, E. H. Taylor, accounts. . . E. H. Taylor, etc., {my-roll. JohnD. Woods. . . . R. K. McClure . . . . . . Q T. J. Congleton & Bro. . . . E.T. King. . . . . E. Power . . . . . . . . . E. Power . . . . . . . . . E. HensleydzSon . . . . . . King &Cornell.. . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc,, pay-roll. Western Argus. . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . King 85 Cornell. . . . . . Ira Julian, etc . . . . . . . King & Cornell. . . . . W. H. Cornell. . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, King &Cornell. . . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . E.Zoller&Co. . . . . . . . Courier-Journal. . . . . . Bradley ck Gilbert Co . . . . Tafel Bros. . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . Anzeiger Co . . . . . . . Western Argus. . . . . . . . Mason &Foard Co . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . W.H. Averill. . . . . . . George A. Lewis . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, E. H. Taylor, accounts . . . . Courier-Journal . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, E. H. Taylor, accounts. . . E. H. Taylor, pay-roll . . . . E. H. Taylor, accounts. . . Lane & Bodley Co. . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, Lane&Bodley Co.. . . . Western Argus . . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll, E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . O 1,466 66 68 65 1,406 66 62 25 1,466 67 17 66 4 56 10 03 600 66 5 20 49 46 1,000 00 366 66 1,466 66 2 50 1,466 66 335 66 166 66 631 00 46 92 1,466 66 119 00 1,466 66 16 00 32 00 9 06 2 46 1,466‘66 1,466 66 16 60 2 50 2,446 66 1,466 66 3 66 2 56 1,466 66 156 66 16 56 1,446 66 600 66 1,446 66 566 00 3,566 66 1,437 61 v1,237 75 2 56 1,446 66 1,446 66 2O CONVICT LABOR. Saturday,] RESPONSE 01~ AUDITOR. [September 27 Bradley & Gilbert Co. . . . . E. H. Taylor, accounts. Anzieger Co . . . . . . . . . Louisville Press Go . . . . . . .J. Clark, accounts. . . . . . H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . . H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . . H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . . H. Taylor, accounts. . . . . Hensley & Son . . . . . . . H Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . . D. DeJarnett . . . . . . . Enquirer Co . . . . . . . . . Frankfort Water Company. . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . Capital Printing Co. . . Courier-Journal . . . . . . . Anzeiger.... .. E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . Norwood &Stephens . . . . Lane & Bodley Co . . . . . . P. Corbett . . . . . . . . . E. H. Taylor, accounts. . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . Lane 86 Bodley Co . . . . . . E, H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . C.J.Clark. . ' ' . . . . . E. H. Taylor, accounts . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay roll, . Frankfort Water Co. . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . E. H. Taylor, accounts. . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . E. H. Taylor, accounts. . . - Wm. K1rkup 86 Son. . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll. . C. J. Clark . . . . . . . . . . H. Taylor, accounts . . . . WEHSPJHHMG E E- H. Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . E H. Taylor, accounts . . . . Frankfort Water 00.. . . . . E Taylor, accounts . . . . E Taylor, etc., pay-roll . . E Taylor, accounts . . . . M. P. Bolan, accounts . . . . E. H. Taylor, etc.,pay-roll . . Gray & Church, account cell doors . . . . . . . . . . . . H. . H. H. 39 s00 28 35 1,000 1,446 1,446 1,446 600 153 1,446 10 64 586 1,446 10 214 1,444 549 2,500 451 600 1,446 2,614 1,446 1,000 1,000 1,446 75 1,446 3,000 1,446 600 1,000 1,446 266 900 1,446 750 75 750 1,446 500 80 _OO 00 00 00 66 66 66 00 75 66 00 ()0 6 6 00 66 OO 00 90 00 60 81 66 00 00 66 00 66 00 66 00 00 66 88 00 66 00 00 00 66 00 500 00 1 ,446 2,420 00, 66 M. P. Bolan, accounts . . . . 500 00 M. P. Bolan, pay-roll. . . . . 1,446 00 Frankfort Water 00.. . . . . 205 27 Wm. Kirkup &Son, ventilator 1,000 00 M. P. Bolan, accounts.. . . . 500 00 M. P. Bolan,accounts . . . . 1,000 00 M. P. Bolan, pay-roll . . . 1,532 16 Enquirer 00., ad. bids. . . . 121 60 Courier Journal Co., ad. bids . 111 00 Wm. Kirkup dz Son, account . 200 00 M. P. Bolan, etc, pay-roll. . . 1,826 66 Total . . . . . . . . . . $140,545 68 Total amount expended on Ken- tucky Penitentiary, . . . . $140,545 63 Total amount expended on Branch Penitentiary. . . . Amount expended‘ sending- militia to Greenwood. . . . . Total amount received from les— sees . 4 . . 102,691 98 The PRESIDENT. What will the Convention do with the communication ‘2 Mr. H. H. SMITH. I move that it,like- wise be printed and referred to th eCommit- tee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. The motion being seconded, was put to the House and carried, and the resolution so referred. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will lay before the Convention the following com- munication from the Public Printer. The communication was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Hon. C’. M. Clay, Jr., President Constitu— tional Convention FRANKFORT, KY., Sept. 27, 1890. MY DEAR SIR: In view of the real and apparent complication relative to the print- ing of the Convention, I respectfully sub- wit that, since my election as Cfficial Printer, I lave been compelled to proceed without ofiicial instruction as to the wishes of the body, over which you preside. After being elected, I continually urged that instructions and copy be furnished 451,511 97 9,333 68 I O O I 0 0 ~ 0 PRINTING. 21 Saturday,] SACHS—PUGH. [September 27. me, but it was only on the 19th inst. that the stenographer’s report of the first day’s proceedings was delivered to me. These were speedily put into type, and promptly laid upon the desks of the Delegates. Since that time, several resolutions relative to the printing have been reported, but an oliicial copy of no single one thereof, which had been‘ adopted, was furnished me until ‘yesterday, when I was directed to wrap twenty-five copies for each member of the daily debates. I have been informed that a resolution was adopted requiring that I explain the delay ‘accompanying the printing. This resolution I have never seen, nor have I explained, or been asked to explain, the subject, matter thereof. I am gratified, how- ever, to learn that the Committee reported to the Convention that I was in no manner responsible for the delay. Immediately after the order was made to proceed with the printing of the debates, I begun the purchase of the necessary material at my own private expense, and not that of the State, for the execution of the work. The bills for this will amount to a sum between $1,000 and $l,500. This is mentioned sim- ply that the Convention may know that I have not been insensible to the onerous and important duties it has imposed upon me. I am ready to execute the orders of the Convention, but cannot do so until they are made known to me. If the Auditor or other State ofiicial be directed by your honorable body to perform a certain duty, a certified copy of the reso- lution making the demand is furnished that oflicer. I respectfully ask that a like courtesy be extended to me, in order that I may not only be promptly notified of your wishes, but with'equal promptness may ex- ecute them. I see no other manner in which my duty and desire to faithfully carry out my obligations to the State can be arrived at. Up to this moment, 'I am in receipt of but one ofiicial order to do any thing, and have proceeded, with that one exception, entirely upon hearsay and a general sense of what was the proper thing to do. This is irregular, unjust to me and to the State, which you and I desire to faithfully serve. I respectfully request that the Secretary of the Convention be directed to promptly iurnish me with certified copies of all past and future orders relative to the printing for the Convention. Unless this be done, and that as soon as the orders are . made, I shall have no authority to proceed, and delays must necessarily result. Rela- tive to the Journals of the Convention, about the publication of which I am daily interrogated. I wish to say that no order to proceed with their printing has reached me, and work upon that important publi: cation has not yet begun. Until this order be made by competent authority, the regu- lations regarding all State work, which nec-\ essarily prevail in my office, will prevent its being put in hand. In other words, no State work of anycharacter is done by me, without the execution of an order by some person having authority to issue the same. Asking through you that the Convention take such steps as will clearly define its wishes and my duties, I have the honor to be, very respectfully yours, E. POLK JOHNSON. The PnEsIhENT. What will the Convention do with the communication? Mr SACHS. In view of the fact that we have a Committee on Printing and Ac- counts, and that this matter can be more satisfactorily arranged between this body and the Printer after consultation between that Committee and him, I move that the communication be referred to the Commit- tee on Printing. The motion being seconded, was put to the House and carried, and the communica- tion so referred. Mr. PUGH. In this connection, I would like to inquire what action has been taken by our Secretary in regard to the resolution 22 RESOLUTION S. Saturday,] PUGH—HINES—BRONSTON. offered yesterday concerning the matters reported by the Public Printer. The SECRETARY. I furnished the Committee on Printing and Accounts with a copy of your report yesterday. Mr. PUGH. The resolution directed you to furnish certified copies of all orders of the Convention in regard to Printing to the Public Printer. The SECRETARY. I can say this, that at the time the resolution was offered I was having a report of the Committee instructing the Public Printer what to do copied, and had a copy furnished. I do not recollect now of any thing else relating to the Public Printer that he has not been furnished with. Whenever resolutions have been offered and ordered printed, I have invariably furnished them to the Public Printer, sent by a boy 1 keep for that purpose. These reports have all ‘been printed and laid on the tables from day to day, according to my recollection. Mr. PUGH. You will pardon another inquiry. I am impressed with the belief that some confusion has arisen in regard to the duties of Committees. In the first place, there was a Committee appointed by the Chair to take some action in regard to the proceedings of this Convention and the printing thereof. I do not know, and do not know whether others on this floor are aware, whether that Committee has been finally discharged. ' The PRESIDENT. The Committee was discharged when it reported. The existence of a Special Committee expires when it makes its report. As soon as that Committee went out of existence all mat- ters in reference to printing were referred to the regular Standing Committee on Printing and Accounts. The SECRETARY. In reference to the report of the Special Committee, I did not furnish the Printer with a copy of it. The Printer was sitting here when the re- port was offered and adopted; and I was not called upon to furnish, and did not furnish to him a copy of it, bezause I did not think it was necessary. I do not know of anything else that has come up here before the body. I have tried to be very prompt in furnishing him copies of every thing relating to business of the State. The PRESIDENT. Motions and reso- lutions are in order. Mr. T. H. HINES. I offer a resolution and move its adoption. The resolution was read by the Read- ing Clerk, as follows»: Be it resolved, That John Thompson is authorized to draw daily the sum of $1.50 per day for his services in assisting Capt. Todd Hall in keeping the House cleanly and in order; and be it further Resolved, That Wyatt Beatty be allowed to draw daily the compensation allowed him for looking after the Back Capitol. Mr. BRONSTON. I move to refer that resolution to the Committee on Rules. I do not understand how many persons are employed. I am not a strict economist in that particular, but I understood Captain Todd Hall was to be an Assistant to the Sergeant- at-Arms. I am sure that under the resolu- tion of the Committee on Rules the Janitor or the Librarian was instructed to do something. I do not know whether this is his name; but to prevent confusion, let this go to the Committee on Rules. Mr. McHENRY. I think it is just as well to pass the resolution. I understand that that man needs the money, and there is no appropriation. The PRESIDENT. The motion to re- fer is not debatable. The motion of Mr. Bronston being sec- onded, was put to the House and carried. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I ask for informa- tion at this point. I intended to do so awhile ago. A resolution was adopted the other day directing a letter to be printed and laid upon the desk or table of each- Delegate, to be sent to the County Clerks of the various counties. It is necessary that that letter be printed immediately to get the information for the Committee on [September 27. RESOLUTIONS. 23 P Saturday,] MoNTooMERY—BUCHANAN—WEST. [September 27. Municipalities. or the proper Committee look after it. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I offer areso- lution, and ask that it be referred to the Committee on General Provisions. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the Constitution should contain such provisions as will at all times secure to the people of any county, d13- trict, city or town, the right, by popular vote, to prohibit the retailing of spirituous, vinous or malt liquors therein. Mr. BUCHANAN offered the following resolution: Resolved, That all the Judges of a Court of Record of this Commonwealth, who shall fail to attend and hold his Court at any term, and if there be a Judge pro tem. elected who shall hold said Court, the sal- ary allowed such pro tem. Judge shall be deducted out of the salary of the Judge who so fails to attend and hold his Court. - Mr. WEST. I offer a resolution, and ask that it be referred to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, The rate of taxation shall be equal and uniform throughout the State of Kentucky, and shall be levied upon such property as the General Assembly shall prescribe by law; but no poll-tax shall ex- ceed one dollar and fifty cents, to be levied for State or county purposes. Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. WEST. I ofi'er another resolution, and move its adoption. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That during the future sittings of this Convention, it shall not be in order for a Delegate to use the words “honor- able” or “ distinguished,” when speaking of a colleague. The question being taken upon the adoption of said resolution, the same was rejected. Mr. FORRESTER. I offered a resolu- tion, which I desire referred to the Com- mittee on Education. I ask that the Secretary ‘ The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as fo'lows: Resolved, 1. That there shall be aunitorm system of common schools in this Com‘ monwealth; that all the children between the ages of six and twenty years shall be entitled to the same number of months and days’ instruction in each school year. 2. That the public money appropriated - for the common schools of the several counties shall be distributed among the teachers thereof according to their qualifi- cations, in such manner as the Legislature shall direct. Referred to Committee on Education. Mr. DURBIN. I offer a resolution, which I desire referred to the Committee on Elections. The resoiution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That as so much bribery, fraud, and corruption is brought about by primary elections and conventions, that they be subject to the same laws and re- strictions that regular elections are. Mr. BENNETT. I ofler a resolution, which I desire referred to the Committee on Rules. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the Chairmen of the Stand- Committees shall notify each Delegate who has introduced any resolution, which has been referred to the different Committees for consideration, as to the time said reso- lution will be taken up for consideration by such Committee, so that said Delegate may have an opportunity to present his views touching the resolution in k,question to the Committee charged with its consideration. Referred to Committee on Rules. Mr. HARRIS. I ask leave of absence for the junior Delegate from Warren (Mr. Amos). The PRESIDENT. There being no objection, it will be granted. The Chair will appoint a Committee, provided for by resolution passed September 24th, which the Secretary will please report, and also the Committee. Resolved, That a Select Committee of seven Delegates be appointed by the Presi- 24 RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] SPALDING—SACHS—BRONSTON. [September 27. dent, whose dutv it shall be to inquire into the public debt of the Stale, and present to this Convention the best practical mode of preventing its increase; also, the best man- ner of liquidating the same by the time it shall become due. ‘ The Chair appoints the following as said Committee: Messrs. Wood, Edrington, McDermott, Bennett, J. C. Jonson, McEl- roy and Lassing. Mr. SPALDING. I move that we ad~ journ. I Mr. SACHS. I want to amend that by adding until 11 o’clock on Monday- Mr. SPALDIN I accept the amend- ment. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to amend that we adjourn to meet at 10 o’clock on Tuesday morning. I know that a motion to adjourn is not debatable, but I wish to suggest— The PRESIDENT. The simple motion to adjourn is not debatable, but a motion to adjourn until a time certain, permits of explanation. ' Mr. BRONSTON. The suggestion I want to make is this: We have printed the proceedings of the Convention only up to the close of the first week. We ought to give the Printer an opportunity to catch up, because we commence the dis- cussion of special orders next week, and we would like to know the next day what has occurred the day before; and there is no special business for Monday. There are, however, two special orders for Tuesday, and there is nothing in the Orders of the Day for Monday. Mr. MCELROY. I think I gather from the Chairman of the Committee on ,Pre- amble and Bill of Rights that he will, per- haps, be ready to report on Monday. I am opposed to adjourning, and opposed to this method of adjourning and losing half our time. We have come here to do busi- ness. If we are not going to stay here and do the business, We had better adjourn for one or two months and wait until we get ready to commence to work and then come back. I am opposed to the adjourn- ment, and call for the yeas and nays upon the motion. ‘ Mr. MAY. I rise for information. I would like to know on what question the yeas and nays will be taken. ‘The PRESIDENT. The question will be first upon the motion to adjourn for the longest time, which is until Tuesday at 10 o’clock. - Mr. SPALDING. I am not in favor of wasting the time of the Convention, and vote uniformly against adjournment for a long period; but just now, it seems to me, that no serious inconvenience would occur by a protracted adjournment. The Printer is certainly behind. We just had a com- munication from him, and he is behind probably a week or more. I believe it would iacilitate the business of the Conven- ‘tion to have the proceedings that have transpired printed and laid before us, to- gether with the special orders. A good many special orders have been referred to the Printer to be printed, and they are not before the Convention. We are doing nothing new but receiving resolutions. We have not done any thing except that, and cannot, and will not do any thing else for some days to come. There is another con- sideration. If these adjournments are to be had so as to accommodate gentlemen who live near the Capital, it is but fair that if we can do it without inconveniencing or retarding the work before us, that those who live a little more remote should have an opportunity to go home and see their families. I cannot get home, for 1nstance, without being on the way one night, and a great many other gentlemen are in the same condition and worse. Later on in the session, when special orders are made for certain days, it maybe inconvenient to adjourn; ‘but now, I do not think it will be improper to have a temp arary adjourn- ment until Wednesday, in order to give the members time to go home and see their families. I think it is only fair and RESOLUTIONS. 25 Saturday,] HOPKINS—QUICKSALL—BENNETT. September 27. right, especially as it will not retard the business. Mr. HOPKINS. It is a very manifest that a great portion of the work of this Convention is to be done in Committees, and by the rule adopted on yesterday, there are six Committees that are to meet on Monday. An adjournment of this House till Tuesday would take some of those Committees, it not a majority of them, from thls place, and of course leave the rest of us who are so unfortunately situated as not to be able to reach home within three or four days, with nothing to do. We _ would have to stay here and be idle all the ‘time. We have come here to work. We are ready to work, and we hope that those members who live so close as to be able to go home on Saturday, will be willing to yield at least some of their privileges and stay and help us to do this work. Mr. MCHENRY. This Convention is not idle. We are doing work. If we ad- journ until Tuesday or Wednesday there will be no Com mittee1meetin g until that time. I have no objection to adjourning until 11 o’clock Monday morning, to let gentlemen who have gone away return in time for the opening of the session. Most of those who want to go home have already gone. I think we ought to stay here and let our Committees meet. I do not know that there is any work to prepare for Monday or not. We have had an important session to-day. We have been finding out some- thing about the Public Printer. There seems to be some misunderstanding be- tween the Public Printer and the Clerk.‘ That has been made known to us. Let us stay here and do some‘ business every day, and let the Committees be at work. I hope this Convention will not adjourn ever be- yond Monday. If any gentleman wants to go home, let him go home, I have been away once or twice myself, and went with- out leave. ' Mr. QUICKSALL. 1 would suggest that if we adjourn until Tuesday or Wed- nesday, it will probably debar your Print- ing Committee of the power of working any upon matters that are of very great importance to this Convention at the pres- ent time. The Chairman of the Commit- tee has been absent at home these two days. ,We are, therefore, somewhat in the dark in regard to the printing. I under- stand there is a batch of documents that has been sent to the Chairmen that the other members of the Committee have not had the opportunity of examining, and am' informed by different members upon this floor thatthe Printer isin the dark asxto what is required at his hands in regard to this matter. We expect the Chairman here Mon day, and if we meet here on Monday or Tuesday, we will, in all probability, be able to get a report from the Committee on Printing, and take some decisive action in regard to what this Convention desires to have done in the printing business. We find that the Printer has received only one order from our Secretary in regard to the printing, according to the statements he has made; and we find also that the J our- nal of this House has not been ordered to be printed, neither has this House taken any action in regard to whether they will print the Journal or leave it unprinted. During these days I think we mi'gnt be- able to take some action in regard to this important matter, and thereby make some progress in the work of this Convention. ‘Mr. BENNETT. It occurs to me that the gentleman on the Committee on Print- ing wants work. He can work. It is very apparent that there is no quorum now. I think an adjournment till next Wednes- day would give these gentlemen away from here a chance to get back, so we can do something. We have been here three days, and have not filled up our full time‘. I am in favor of a substitute to adjourn until Wednesday. Probably by that time we will be able to do something. Mr. RODES. I have been a regular at- tendant on the meetings of this body ever 26 ' RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] since it met, and I have asked no favors and made no speeches. But I would like to say now that my Committee on Pream- ble and Bill of Rights have had several meetings. We will undoubtedly be prepared to make a report upon Monday. This is a very important Committee, and this will be a very important part of the Constitu- tion. I have not asked any favors of the House in regard to going home, but 1 will be compelled to go home in the course of a week or two to attend the sessions of my Court. I cannot go twice. If we adjourn until Wednesday, I cannot go now. It is unjust to some members on this floor, who desire to remain here and do their duty, and who desire to labor like men ordinarily do in their common avocations. I think it may be regarded as the truth, beyond all doubt, that whenever this House adjourns, then the Committees disband. Like an army breaking ranks, they lose all sense of order, and become demoralized and per- fectly unfit for duty. For these reasons, I do not see why we cannot go on regularly, from day to day, and attend to business as it may be called up. This way of intermitting rights and duties, being too irregular, is ' not according to the Proverbs, nor accord- ing to the rules by which I live. I hope ‘that the House will proceed to discharge its business regularly, like men do in the ordinary discharge of business, and in the manner that farmers and merchants and others conduct their business. Mr. AUXIER. I want to say one word. Work in the Committee rooms depends a ,great deal upon the proper organization of -.this House, and as long as this body is as- -.semb1ed from day to day, and meets at its regular hours, then the several Committees, after the adjournments, go to their rooms and work. The amount of work done in this Convention does not depend on the length of time that we are assembled here in the Committee of the Whole; but, as the Delegate from Warren has well said, AUXIER—SPALDIXG—J oNsoN. [September 27. bands, there is no getting the Committees together, and this House will not do any work as long as we are adjourning for over a day at a time. I insist that this body ought to meet here Monday morning at 10 or 11 o’clock, and that would bring all the Committees together, and we can go on with the-work. We came here to work. That is our purpose, and unless we con- tinue at it just as we would at our advocations at home, we will not do much. I insist that we adjourn only until Mon- day. Mr. SPALDING. My venerable and distinguished friend from the county of Warren says it demoralizes men to go' home. I had a different view of that. I thought it would demoralize them to stay away from their homes; at least, that has always been according to my ideas of piety and virtue. The argument when we adjourn over every thing goes to pieces proves too much. It goes too far ; if that is the fact we ought not to ad- journ over Sunday. We ought to come back here Sunday morning just like any other day. People have to make fires and cook on Sunday. If it is going to de- moralize this Convention to go home, I do not see why we should not meet here Sun- day and go to work. The fact is farmers do take recreation, look after their stock, etc.; I am a farmer myself; there is no doubt about that. (Laughton) I take recreation, andI do not know of any other farmer who does not. They take Saturday evenings to go to town; I have known some lawyers who go off and take recrea- tion, and a'good many other gentlemen. Even the preachers take recreation in the summer, and I do not think that we are violating the ordinary course of business so very much when we are doing nothing, to adjourn and go to our homes. Mr. J ONSON. I have been somewhat entertained by what has been said here this morning. I read somewhere a good Whenever the House adjourns and dis- , while ago about an ofl‘ice they had ina RESOLUTIONS. 27 Saturday,] J ONSON—SMITH. foreign country that they called the cir- cumlocution office, and the chief qualifica- tion of the representatives and members of that oflice was to find out how not to do it. It looks like we are making alittle progress down that line this morning. I do not know but what our clerks and printers have made some advance on that line or some of them, some where. I believe that the morality of going home to a man’s family is good. I do not know, however, that we are here considering the subject specially of morals. I believe that the construction intended to be placed upon the word “de- moralized,” by the Delegate from Warren, was not properly taken by the Delegate from Union. I believe that the intend- ment by the use of the word was " disor- ganized,” rather than g “demoralized.” Having had some experience, more as a sol- dier than as a Legislator, I fully concur with the gentleman from Warren that it is a matter of demoralization to disperse. A compact body, well in hand, is the glory of the soldier and the general. You are occu- pying something of that position, being our Generallssimo, in acertain sense. I believe ‘that while details are dry and annoying, yet, in consideration of the fact that they have to be met, they have to be gone through with. Like the gentleman who was out on a kissing expedition once, kiss- ing all the pretty girls; when he came to .an ugly one, shut his eyes, like a deter- mined soldier, and said he would grin and bear it. So we should shut our eyes and go at this thing and stay here. (Laughten) I am opposed to any adjournments. I :am here to stay. I am not like some of these gentlemen in the Blue-grasss and other favorite portions of Kentucky. Our county has not been afflicted with railroads, and. I can not go home on one of the cursed institutions, We have vigorously protested down there against the building of railroads, and we are en- joying the benefits of it. (Laughton) The fact is, we are out in the cold down in Mc- Lean, and I am not disposed to encourage these gentlemen, who are more favorably situated, in getting away from here. Mr. H. H. SMITH. ' I want to say this, that no doubt the people of the State are much obliged for the information disbursed upon the matter of corn, morals, 850., in this Convention to-day, but there are more important matters, I think; there ought to be a Committee on Ar- bitration appointed between the Re- porter, Secretary of the Convention and the Public Printer, before this Convention adjourns. I move that a Committee be appointed. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman’s motion is out of order. The question is on the motion to adjourn until Wednes- day. ' Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to amend by adjourning till Wednesday morning. Mr. BRONSTON. ' I regret very much indeed— The PRESIDENT. I hardly think a second speech on the motion to adjourn is in order. Mr. BRONSTON. I want to apologize to the Convention for having forced such remarkable ,disclosures as we have had here this morning. If it be true that these gentlemen are in favor of working and kissing pretty girls, I desire to withdraw the motion to adjourn until Tuesday, and give them an opportunity to continue that good work. The PRESIDENT. The question is first upon the motion of the Delegate on the right, that when we adjourn, we adjourn till Wednesday. Mr. MCHENRY. I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. DURBIN. I second the motion. Mr. McHENRY. I will withdraw the call for the yeas and nays, and. take a di- vision. On the division, the motion was declared lost. ‘ The PRESIDENT. The question re- curs on the motion made by the Delegate from Ohio, that we adjourn to meet Mon- day at 11 o’clock. The question being put on the motion to adjourn till Monday at 11 o’clock, it was declared carried, and the Convention ad- journed. [September 27. generation guard. ‘ ~——KENTUCKY-—- CONSTITUTIONAL CO'NVENTION- Vol. 1. FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 29, 1890. No. 17 Monday,] RODES—MCHENRY—ALLEN. [September 29 , The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Darsie. The Journal of Saturday’s proceedings was read and approved. ' The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order will be the reception of petitions. Are there any-petitions‘? If there are no petitions, reports from Standing Com- mittees are next in order. Mr. RODES. I am directed by the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights to make a report from that Com- mittee, and ask permission of the house that 125 copies of that report be printed, and the matter referred to the Committee of the Whole, and made the order of the day for to-morrow at lllo’clock, and continue . from that time on until disposed of. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is in- formed there is a special order to-morrow for 11 o’clock. Mr. BECKNER. I would suggest that it be set for Thursday at 11 o’clock. The PRESIDENT. There is a special order for Thursday at 11 o’clock. Mr. BECKNER. Make it Friday. Mr. RODES. I do not see any occasion for postponing this thing until Wednesday, Thursday, or any other day. You cannot conclude it to-morrow, but it will be on hand several days. It will take some time for the members to express themselves; but in all events we can consider it to-morrow sufficiently to hear the statement of its contents; and in that way get the matter before the Convention. Mr. McHENBY. I want to offer an amendment to the motion of the gentleman from Warren. I move that the Bill of Rights of the present Constitution be printed along with the committee’s report in alternate sections, or on facing pages, which can be done easily, and we will then have both before us. . Mr. L. T. MOORE. I would like to ask the gentleman from Ohio the necessity of printing the Bill of Rights of the present Constitution. We-have it before us in the rules, and there is no necessity of printing it. Mr. ALLEN. I rose simply to refer the gentleman from Ohio to the fact to which his attention has been called by the gentle- man from Boyd; and another objection to doing that, I would say, is this—that the Preamble and Bill of Rights, as reported this morning from the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights, is changed somewhat in form. While all the old ideas and thought are retained, they are rearranged, and that is one ob- jection to printing them side by side or one following the other, section by section, as I caught the idea of the gentleman from Ohio. If he desires to print the 01d Bill of Rights as it stands, on a separate piece of paper, I should have no objection to that at all. The Chairman of the Committee, the gentleman from Warren, asks that that bill be made a special order for to-morrow at eleven o’clock. One reason which prompted him to ask for that day was something which he modestly refrained from mentioning, but which I shall. He will be compelled to go home to attend his court very soon, prob- ably next week, and he desires that this 2 BILL OF RIGHTS. Monday] REPORT or COMMITTEE. [September 29. matter be discussed as much as possible in the Committee of the Whole before he leaves. Mr. McHENRY. I call for the reading of the report. a The PRESIDENT. The reading of the report is called for; butbefore the Secretary reads the report, the Chairzwould like to have read, for information of the Conven- tion, the resolution offered by the gentle- man from Henry, and adopted last Thurs- day or Friday. While the Secretary is hunting up that resolution, the Clerk will read the report of the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the report of the Committee on Preambie and Bill of Rights, which is as follows: Preamble. We, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which we enjoy, in order to secure to our- selves and to succeeding generations the continuation of these blessings, do ordain and establish this Constitution. Bill of Rights. ARTICLE 1. That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recog- nized and established, WE DECLARE— 1. All men are by nature free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable. rights; among which may be reckoned, 1. [The right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; 2. The right of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience; 3. The right of seeking and pursuing their safety and happiness; 4. The right of freely com- municating their thoughts and Opinions; 5. The right of acquiring and protect-. ing property; 6. The right of assembling together in a peaceable manner for their common good, and of applying to those invested with the power of govern- ment for redress of grievances, or other proper purposes, by petition, address or ' remonstrance; 7. The right to bear arms in defense of themselves, their families and of the State, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, subject to the power of the General Assem- bly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed arms. 2. No man or set of men are entitled to separated, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in con- sideration of public services. 3. All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. ‘For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper. 4. No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry against his consent; no human authority Ought, in ‘any case whatever, to control or .interfere with the rights of conscience; and no prefer- ences shall ever be given by law to any religious societies, denominations or modes of worship. But the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations; excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the good Order, peace or safety of the State; or opposed to the civil authority thereof. The civil rights, privi- leges and capacities of any person shall in nowisc be diminished or enlarged on ac- count Of his religion. 5. All elections shall be free and equal. 6. The ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, subject to such modifica— tions as may be authorized by this Consti- tution. 7. Printing presses shall be free to every person who undertakes to examine the pro- ceedings of the General Assembly, or any BILL or RIGHTS. V 3 Monday, ] REPORT 013 COMMITTEE. [September 29 branch of government, and no law shall ever be made to restrain the right thereof. 8. In prosecutions for the publication of papers investigating the official conduct of ofiicers or persons in a public capacity, or where the matter published is proper for public information, the truth thereof may ‘be given in evidence; and in all indict- ments or trials for libel, the jury shall have the right, both in civil and criminal cases, to determine the facts, under the di- rection of the Court as to the law, as in other cases; and it shall be a sufficient de- fense in any case, that the matter published was true and was published with good intent. 9. The people shall be secured in their persons, houses, papers and possessions from unreasonable search and seizure; and no warrant shall issue to search any place or seize any person or thing, without describ- ing them as nearly as may be, nor without probable cause supported by oath or affirm- ation. 10. In all criminal prosecutions, the ac- cused bath a right: 1. To be heard by himself and counsel; 2. To demand the nature and the cause of the accusation against him; 3. To meet the witnesses face to face; 4. To have compulsory pro- cess for obtaining witnesses in his favor; 5. In prosecutions by indict- ment or information, to have a speedy public trial in the county wherein the al- leged offense was committed by an impar— tial jury thereof,’ on which trial he shall not be compelled to'testify against him- self; nor shall he be deprived of his life, liberty or property, except by the judg- ment of his peers or by the law of the land: Provided, That in cases of trial by jury the General Assembly may authorize the Court to cause a jury to be sum- moned and impaneled to try the case, from any adjacent county or counties, or from other counties conveniently near the place of trial, whenever the Court may be satis- fied that a fair and impartial jury cannot be procured in the county where the trial is had, and make an order to that effect. Provided further, The General Assembly may provide by law for a change of venue in favor of the defendant in such prosecu- tions. 11. No person for an indictable offense shall he proceeded against criminally by information, except in such cases as do not amount to felony, and except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service in time of war or public danger, or by leave of Court for oppression or misdemeanor in oifices. 12. N 0 person shall for the same offense be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of himself or his representatives, and with- out just compensation being previously made to him in money, or paid into Court subject to the order of the owner thereof. And no special tax against the owner of such property shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the property so taken; nor shall any person be deprived of his property without due pro- cess of law. 13. All Courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done him in hislands, goods, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and right and _ justice administered without sale, denial, or delay. . 14. N 0 power of suspending laws shall be exercised, unless by the General Assembly or its authority. 15. All prisoners shall be bailable by suffi- cient securities, unless for capital offenses, when the proof is evident or the presump- tion great; and the privilege of the writ of habeds corpus shall not be suspended un less when, in cases of rebellion or nvasio the public safety may require it. 16. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel pun- ishments inflicted. 17 . The person of a debtor, where there is 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Monday,] KNOTT—MCHENRY—ASKEW. [September 29, not strong presumption of fraud, shall not be continued in prison after delivering up his estate for the benefit of his creditors in such manner as shall be prescribed by law. 18. No era post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, nor a law 'making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises, or immuni- tics, shall be passed by the General Assem- bly. 19. N 0 person shall be attainted of trea- son or felony by the General Assembly, and no attainder shall work corruption of blood, nor, except during the life of the offender, forfeiture of estate to the Com- monwealth. . 20. The estates of such persons as shall destroy their own lives shall descend or vest as in cases of natural death; and if any person shall be killed by casualty, there shall be no forfeiture by reason thereof. 21. No standing army shall, in time of peace, be maintained without the consent of the General Assembly; and the military shall, in all cases, and at all times, be in strict subordination to the civil power; nor shall any soldier, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the con- sent of the owner, nor in time of War but in a manner prescribed by law. 22. The General Assembly shall not grant any title of nobility or hereditary dis- tinction, nor create any office, the appoint- ment to which shall be for a longer time than a term of years. 23. Emigrationfrom the State shall not be prohibited. , 24. Slavery and involuntary servitude in this State are forbidden, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. - 25. No armed person or bodies‘of men shall be brought into this State for the preservation of the peace or the suppres- sion of domestic violence, except upon the application of the General Assembly, or of the Governor when the Assembly may‘ not I be‘ in session. 26. Lotteries and gift enterprises are for- hidden, and no privileges shall be granted for such purposes, and none shall be exer- cised; and no schemes for similar purposes shall be allowed. The General Assembly shall enforce this section by proper penal- ties. All lottery privileges or charters heretofore granted are revoked. 27. No perpetuities of estate shall he al- lowed except for charitable purposes, and the General Assembly shall pass all proper laws in regard to the same. 28. To guard against transgression of the high powers which we have delegated, WE DECLARE, that every thing in this article is excepted out of the general power of gov- ernment, and shall forever remain invio- late; and that all laws contrary hereto or contrary to this Constitution shall be void. Mr. KNOTT. I ask to submit the fol- lowing amendment, and that it be printed. ' The PRESIDENT. Report the amend- ment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of Mr. Knott’s, which is as follows: ~ That all men are endowed by their Crea- tor with equal rights to life, liberty, prop- erty and the pursuit of happiness; that in the social compact they engage to hold these rights subject to just and impartial laws, under which each shall be entitled to equal protection and equal privileges, and shall be equally liable to the duties and re— sponsibilities thereby imposed. It is there- fore ordained that arbitrary power over none of these rights shall ever be exercised in this Commonwealth; that no privilege, immunity, exoneration or exemption shall be granted to any man or set of men that all others under - like circumstances may not fully exercise and enjoy; and that no public emolument shall be allowed to any one except in consideration of public ser- vice, the performance of which shall be re- quired by law. 'Mr. MeHEN RY. In hearing the report read, see that my amendment will not be of any particular advantage-to the gen— tlemen of the Convention, and. I shall, therefore, withdraw it, as the arrangement is so different. Mr. ASKEW. I have had no time to BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Monday,] PETTIT—RoDEs—CoKE. [September 29. reduce my amendment to writing, but I move to amend as ‘follows: That the Pre- amble of the present Constitution be the Preamble for this Constitution, and that the Bill of Rights of the present Constitu— tion be the Bill of Rights of this Constitu— tion, save the third section. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate will put his amendment in writing. Mr. PETTIT. I am sure that the Chairman of the Committee will not ob- ject to unanimous consent being given for the purpose of letting this amendment, offered by the gentleman from Marion and the gentleman from Scott, go along with the report for the consideration of this body; but the only question, it seems to me, at this time, is upon the motlon made by the gentleman who has made this report, that is, that one hundred and twenty- five copies shall be printed in bill form for the use of the Delegates; secondly, that it shall be referred to the Committee of the Whole, and thirdly, that it be made a special order for to-morrow at eleven o’clock, and from day to day thereafter until disposed of. Just one word in that be- half. This is the first Committee that has made a report. It is the Committee that ought first to have made a report, and that being the case, is not this Committee en- titled to the privileges they ask? As far as other special orders that may have been made, this, under parliamentary precedent, will have no effect. Those orders will take precedence of this, and yet the object to be attained is, that after these special orders will have passed away, that this then has the privileges of the floor, and is entitled to be heard until it is finally disposed of. This, I believe, is all that has been asked. by the Chairman of this Committee; it is nothing but what we conceive, as a Com- mittee, ought to be allowed us by this Con- vention. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will order the reading of the resolution in re- gard to proceeding on reports of Com- mittee. The resolution of Mr. Carroll, adopted on September 20, was read, as follows: Resolved, That before any provision of the proposed new Constitution, adopted by a Standing Committee, is acted upon by the Convention, or a Committee of the Whole, one hundred and twenty-five copies thereof shall be printed by order of the Committee and distributed among the members of the Convention. The PRESIDENT. The amendments are sent up by unanimous consent, and if there is no objection, will accompany the report of the Committee. Mr. BECKNER. I have an amend- ment which I desire to go into the report. Mr. RODES. We prefer these amend- ,ments should not come in now. There ‘will be ample opportunity and time to dis- cuss them when they come before the Committee of the Whole. Mr. COKE. I move that the report of the Committee be made a special order for Friday instead. of Tuesday, and from day to day thereafter until disposed of. This is as important a matter as will come be- fore this body, as important as any report of any Committee, and although the Com- mittee that has made the report has inves- tigated the matter and are thoroughly pre- pared themselves to act, the other mem bers of this Convention have not had the same opportunity. Now, the proposition is to make a special order for_to-morrow, and none of us will have the opportunity of reading and examining this report to see whether We have any amendments to make by that time; but this report will be printed and laid upon our desks, and be- tween that and Friday we will have oppor- tunity-to examine it and find out if there is any objection that we may have to it, and to ofl'er'such amendment or amendments as we see proper, when the ‘time has come, and we have studied it properly. The PRESIDENT. The question is first l on the amendment of the Delegate from 6 RESOLUTIONS. Monday,] BBONSTON—SMITH—BECKNER—WEST. [September 29. Ohio county; that it be printed and refer- red to the Committee of the Whole, and made a special order for Friday at eleven o’clock. ‘ And the question being put, it was de- clarcd to have been carried. - The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent this amendment will be printed along with the report; is there any objection to having the amendment printed‘? Mr. BRONSTON. We have a good many here; I want all to go in or none. Mr. PETTIT. On behalf of the Com- mittee. I object to all except those two already allowed. Mr, H. H. SMITH. From the fact that va- rious members of this Convention desire to offer amendments to the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, it is no more than reasonable and just to all the members that some one should object to the printing of the amendments now offered until the day for the consideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, when all amendments or substitutes can be offered. I, therefore, ob- ject to the printing of any of the amend- ments now offered. The PRESIDENT. Reports from the Standing Committees are now in order. Rdports from Special Committees. If there are~ no reports from Standing or Special Committees, motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. BECKNER. Mr. President, I have a resolution. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Beckner’s resolution, which is as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Rail- roads be directed to inquire into the advisa- bility of requiring railroads or other ~cor- porations doing business in this State under charters granted in other States, or whose property that may be made subject to execution is covered by mortgage or other lien, to make a deposit of money or securi- ties with the Auditor of this State sufficient to secure the payment of damage resulting from the negligence of such company or Its employes. Referred to Committee on Railroads and Commerce. Mr. BRENTS. I ask indefinite leave of absence for the gentleman from Russell, Mr. J. L. Phelps. . The PRESIDENT. Is there objection? The Chair hears no objection, and such leave is granted. Mr. WEST introduced the following resolution : Resolved, Any amendment to this Con- stitution may be proposed in either House of the General Assembly, and if the same shall be voted for by two-thirds of all the members elected to each House, such pro- posed amendment, together with the yeas and nays of each house thereon, shall be entered in ‘full on the respective journals, and the Secretary of State shall cause the said amendment to be published in full in at least one newspaper in each county [if such there be) weekly for three ment is previous to the next general election for members of the General Assembly, and if in the General Assembly next afterwards chosen such proposed amend- ment shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each House, the Secretary of State shall again ‘ cause the same to pc published in the same manner aforesaid. The amendmen tshall be submitted to the qualified electors of the State for their approval or rejection, and if approved by a majority of the qualified electors of the State, shall become a part of the Constitution. 'Where more than one amendment is submitted at the same elec- tion, they shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote 011 each amendment separately. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate asks that that be referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. KENNEDY. It seems to me that the resolution just offered by the gentleman has reference to the future revision of the Constitution, and it seems to me that that should go to the Committee on Revision. I therefore move to change the reference to the Committee on Legislative Depart- ment, and refer it to the proper committee, which is the Committee on Revision. Mr. WEST. I accept that. The PRESIDENT. It is accepted by RESOLUTION S. 7 Monday,] MOORE—AUXIER—JOHNSTON. [September 22. the gentleman, and, without objection, such reference is ordered. There is no special order for to-day, nor is there any thing in the orders of the day. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, as there seems to be nothing in the orders of the day, and no special orders, and we have no further business to do, I move that we adjourn. And the question being taken upon said motion, it was decided in the aflirmative, and the Convention adjourned until to- morrow at 10 o’clock. g nnveniiun guard. ~-—- K E N T U C K Y _ CONSTITUTIONAL' CONVENTION- v01. 1. FRANKFURT, SEPTEMBER 30. 1890 N0. 18 Tuesday,] MCELROY—WHITAKERf-FORGY. [September 30. The Convention was called to order by vthe President at 10 o’clocka. M., and the proceedings were opened with prayer by ‘the Rev. Mr. Darsie. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read. Mr. McELROY. I understood the ‘Clerk to read the number of copies to be printed as 155. I think the motion of the Delegate from Warren was 125. The PRESIDENT. 125 was the correct number, and the Clerk will please correct the Journal in that respect. If there is no objection, the Journal will be considered as 1 approved. Petititions are now in order. Mr. WHITAKER. I have a petition which it is not necessary to read. I simply :ask that it be referred to ‘the appropriate Committee. The PRESIDENT. The rule requires :a Delegate offering a petition to make a brief statement of its contents, and that it may be then referred without reading. Mr. WHITAKER. The Farmers’ Al- liance and Labor Union of Mason county ask an investigation into the subject of taxation and other propositions. ‘ The petition was read, as follows: The Farmers and Labor’s Union of Helena at its meeting of September 27th, 1890, indorsed the following resolutions, and respectfully submit them to the Consti- tutional Convention of Kentucky for its consideration : > WHEREAS, The burden of taxation is so unequally divided between the farmers .and capitalist, and realizing that more potent means should be employed to equal- ize its assessment; therefore, be itE --‘ Resolved, 1. That all notes, mortgages or other‘ written evidences of indebtedness, be presented to the Assessor for assessment, and be annually stamped by him, and if not so presented and stamped, to become invalid. 2. That the last certified report of banks be taken by the Assessor as a basis of as- sessment. 8. That all lands used for public roads and passways be assessed against the com- pany or corporation owning or controlling said read or passway; also be it Resolved, 4. That we favor the adoption of the Australian ballot system, or some one similar, which will protect honest electors from being robbed by fraudulent voters. 5. That rolling stock of railroads be, and personal property, subject to execution for all stock killed or injured, and no appeal be granted beyond Circuit Courts for sums of two hundred dollors ($200) or less. 6. That the State establish a uniform system of text-books for schools, and fur- nish at a cost of publication and transpor- tation. 7. That Grand Juries be abolished, or theirjurisdiction be limited to higher crimes, and the number of jurymen be reduced to twelve. 8. That three-fourths of a Pet-it Jury of twelve men may render a lawful verdict. WM. LUTTRELL, Pres. F. & L. U. LUCIEN WELLS, Sec. F. 8: L. U. a; Referred to Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. FORGY. I have a petition from our county which I ask to be referred to the appropriate Committee. Mr. MCHENRY. of the petition. The PRESIDENT. The reading of the petition is called for, and the Secretary will report it. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the petition, as follows: I call for the reading 2 RESOLUTIONS. Tuesda_v,] PETTIT—JOHNSTON—MOORE. [September 30 . To the Honorable the Constitutional Con- ('onz:enz‘ion of .Kentucky/ .- WHEREAS, The rapid concentration of wealth in the hands of the few is a menace to free government and detrimental to the general public; therefore, your- under- signed petitioner respectfully asks that you give the Legislature authority to place a higher rate of taxation on the owner of large sums or amounts of property than on smaller ones. For instance: only tax the owner of $5,000 worth of property one-half mill to the dollar; the owner of $50,000, twomills, and so on, so that enormous accumulation of wealth would be a burden to the owner rather than an advantage. This would be in accord with the accepted theory, to tan luxuries higher than other things. “That can be a greater or more useless luxury than half a million dollars to the private citizen‘? I invoke your earnest attention to this matter. Yours respectfully, B. L. D. GUFFY, Morgantown, Ky, Sept. 26th, 1890. Mr. PETTIT. I have a petition from William Goodwin, of Daveiss county, in relation to lotteries, gambling, &c., and I desire it to be referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Misdemeanors. WHn‘EsvILLE, K12, Sept. 17th, 1890. Hon. Thomas S. Pettit.- I am very glad, so is all of the com- munity around VVhit-esville, to learn that you are opposed to lotteries. There is an- other species of gambling that is becoming as great, perhaps greater, than the lotteries, and that is pool-selling and book-making on horse races, and it is spreading all of the time. I would suggest that an article be put in the new Constitution that it shall be the duty of the Legislature to suppress all manner of gambling, including pool-selling and book-making on horse-racing, and to make them a felony. Let it also abolish all acts of the Legislature that now exist authorizing pool-selling, book-making or- betting on races. Do not let it to exist on the race track; if it exists there, it will exist- everywhere. Yours respectfully, . WILLIAM GooDwIN. The PRESIDENT. Are there any fur- ther petitions‘? If not, reports from Stand- ing Committees. Mr. JOHNSTON. to offer. Resolution read, as follows: I have a resolution Resolved, That the following be inserted in the Constitution in lieu of all other pro-- visions on the subject: All members of the General Assembly and public officers shall, before entering upon their duties, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation : I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Kentucky, and that I will faithfully .dis- charge my duties according to law. The PRESIDENT. What disposal do you wish of it? Mr. JOHNSTON. Referred to the Com- mittee on General Provisions. Mr. L. T. MOORE. The Committee on Circuit Courts has had under consideration Resolution 36, and directs me to report back the second clause, and ask that it be referred to the Committee on Bill of Rights. The second clause should be under the pro- vision and control of that Committee, and not under the control of the Committee on Circuit Courts. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec~ tion to the request of the Committee? The Chair hears none, and the request will be granted, and the second clause referred to will be referred to the Committee on Bill of Rights. ~ Mr. L.‘ T. MOORE. The same Commit- tee have had under consideration Resolu- tion 32, and direct me to report this back, and suggest that that part of it which re- fers to trials by jury in criminal cases, and the organization of Grand Juries, be re- REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES. ‘ 3 Tuesday,] MOORE—PHELPS—HOPKINS. [September 30 . ferred to the Committee on Crimes, Pun- ishments and Criminal Procedure. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the change of references? The Chair hears none, and the references are made. Mr. L. T. MOORE. The same Commit- tee has had under consideration Resolution 174, and ask that this be transferred to the Committee on Municipalities. The PRESIDENT. Is there an objec- tion to such change of reference? The Chair hears none, and the reference is made. Mr. L. T. MOORE. The same Com- mittee has had under consideration Resolu- tion 233, and direct me to report it to the‘ Convention with the request that it be re- ferred to the Committee on Crimes, Pun- ishm‘ents and Criminal Procedure. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection to such change of reference, and the change is made. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. The Committee on Executive and Ministerial Officers for Counties and Districts request me to return Resolution 254, introduced by the gentle- man from Adair, and ask that it be re- ferred to the Committee on County Courts. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to such request? The Chair hears none, and the Committee as indicated will‘ take charge of that resolution. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. Resolution 253 has been sent to our Committee, and they have instructed me to return it, and ask that it be sent to the Committee on Execu- tive and Ministerial Officers for the State at ‘Large. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the change‘? and such change is ordered. Mr. HOPKINS. The Committee on County Courts instruct me to report back to the Convention Resolution 57, fixing the term of office of the Clerk, and ask that it be referred to the Committee on Executive The Chair hears none,~ and Ministerial Officers for Counties and Districts. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the change of reference‘? The Chair hears none, and such change is or- dered. Mr. T. H. HINES. The Committee on Judicial Department and Court of Appeals have had referred to them Resolution 4, and direct me to report the resolution with the expression of opinion that it ought to pass with some modification made by the Com- mittee. There was also referred to that Committee Resolution 62, and I am directed to report it back to the Conven- tion with the suggestion that it be re- ferred to the appropriate Committee, which I presume would be the Committee on County Courts. The PRESIDENT. The first resolu- tion will be disposed of first. Report the first resolution. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the first resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the Clerk of the Court of Appeals be, and is hereby, requested to furnish to this Convention the number of appeals now pending in said court and in the Superior Court; also the date of the filing of each appeal, and the date when submitted. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. Upon avote being taken, the resolution was declared to have been adopted. The PRESIDENT. What was the re- quest of the Delegate from Franklin on the second resolution ‘? Mr. HINES. That it be referred to the Committee on County Courts. The question being put on the motion, it was declared to have been carried. The President. Reports from Standing Committees are in order. Mr. MCHENRY' The Committee on Rules have had under consideration a reso- lution offered by the Delegate from Frank- lin, and by the Delegate from McLean as a substitute. They direct me to report the fol- 4 RULES. Tuesday,] MoHENRY—STRAUs. [September 30 . lowing resolution, which they ask to be adopted by the House : The PRESIDENT. report the resolution. The resolution read, as follows: [ Resolverl, That the resolutions offered -1d referred to the several Committees are to e considered only as suggestive or advisory to the Committee, and that it is the province of the respective‘ Committees to formulate and report, in appropriate sections, to the Con- vention, such alterations of, or additions to, the present Constitution as they may deem proper, within their jurisdiction. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. The question being put, the resolution was declared to have been adopted. Mr. MOHENRY. The Committee have directed me to report some additional rules as standing rules of the Convention. The PRESIDENT. Report the rules. The Clerk thereupon read the resolution, which was as follows: Resolved, That the following shall be a standing rule of the Convention: That each section or paragraph of the report of a Committee which shall contain matters to be inserted in the Constitution, and which shall refer to a separate and independent subject, shall be treated as an independent proposition, subject to debate, amendment, postponement, committal, etc., and that all amendments to a report shall be considered in order, and if of the same degree, and otherwise parliamentary, shall be voted upon in the order of presentation. The above rule shall apply to both proceedings in the Convention and the Committee of the Whole, . THE PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. The question being put, it was declared to have been adopted. Mr. McHENRY'. The Committee has had under consideration some resolutions submitted by the Delegate from Newport, and probably some one else, and report the following standing rules : Resolution read as follows: The following shall be a standing rule of the Convention: . That all reports of Committees proposing The Secretary will sections of Constitution, shall immediately be open to the offering of amendments; and such reports and amendments shall not be considered until printed and laid on the tables of the Delegates. But other amendments may be offered at the appro- priate stage. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. Mr. STRAUS. I would like the Chair- man to explain the operation of that rule. Mr. MCHENRY. There was a resolu- tion offered by some Delegate directing that the Committee should fix a day for the con- sideration of reports of Standing Commit— tees where they had reported changes in the Constitution, and suggesting that the reports be not considered by the House until some days after the report was made. We thought that would be giving the Com- mittee too much power, and we did not adopt it in that form; but the Committee made that rulezthat has this efiect; that when there is an amendment, section or article to the Constitution which is a report from a Standing Committee, it shall not be immediately considered, or considered at all, until it should have been printed and laid on the desks of the members. Then it is in the province of the House to consider itim- mediately, if they see proper, or to fix a day for its consideration. We presume most of them will be ordered by the House to be considered in the Committee of the‘ Whole; and when they have been printed and laid on the desks of the members, it is in the power of the House to take such action as they see proper, and fix a day to consider them at that time. And the rule goes further: when a report is made from any Committee, any gentleman having an amendment to that report can have his amendment printed and laid on the desks of the members at the time the report is, i and then the Convention will be advised upon all the suggestions on that particular subject. The latter part of it is probably unnecessary; but for fear it might not be understood, we put the last two lines, say- ing, of course, when it comes to be con RULES. 5 Tuesday,] BLACKBURN—MCHENRY—SACHS. [September 30. sidered finally any other amendments may be considered by the Convention. Mr. BLACKBURN. Is not the effect of this to change one of our rule. Mr. MeHENRY. Yes, of course. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. The question being put, the resolution was adopted.’ _ Mr. MeHENRY. The Committee have had under consideration a resolution offered by the Delegate for Daveiss [M12 Pettit] and have adopted it substantially in his language. It simply provides for some matters concerning the powers of the Committee of the Whole, which was left out of our original report, and we deem it necessary to add them to the rules of the House. I am therefore directed to report this with the opinion of the Committee that it ought to pass. Mr. SACHS. I move that these new rules and changes be printed. The PRESIDENT. The resolution at the Clerk’s desk has not been adopted. The Clerk will report the resolutions. The resolution read, as follows: Covmn'ittee of the Whole House. 1. In forming a Committee of the Whole House, the President shall leave his chair, after appointing a Chairman to preside, who shall, in case of disturbance or dis- orderly conduct in the galleries or lobby, have power to cause the same to be cleared, 2. Whenever this Committee finds itself without a quorum, the Chairman shall cause the roll to be called; thereupon the Committee shall rise, and the Chairman shall report the names of the absenteees to the Convention, which shall be entered on the Journal; but if on such a call a quo- rum shall appear, the Committee shall there- upon resume its sitting without reporting the facts to the Convention. 3. In this Committee business on calen- dar shall be taken up in regular order as reported thereto. 4. When general debate is closed by the order of the Convention, any Delegate shall be allowed five minutes’ debate on any amendment he may offer, after which the member who shall first obtain the floor shall be allowed to speak five minutes in opposition to it, and there shall be no further debate thereon; but the same privilege of debate shall be allowed in favor of and against any amendment that may be offered to an amendment; and no amendment shall be withdrawn by the mover thereof unless by unanimous consent. 5. The rules of the proceedings in the Convention shall be observed in Com- mittee of Whole, so far as they may be applicable. Mr. MCHENRY. The explanation of that is, there is no provision giving power to the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to clear the galleries in case of dis- order. There is for the President of the Convention, but not for the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole. The other provision is in regard to debate, leaving it in the power of the House to rule down five- minute discussion ; but upon amendment, any gentleman has the right to explain the amendment by a five minutes’ speech. Mr. HENDRICK. That does not limit the original resolution. I Mr. MCHENRY. No, not at all. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution. The question being put, the resolution was adopted. Mr. McHENRY. I now move that these three rules, which have just been adopt- ed by this House, be printed by the Public Printer on leaflets, in the same style as the rules, and the same number that was or- dered for the number of rules. The idea is that they may be pasted in the little book we have of rules. They will be more convenient for the members. The question being put on the motion of the Delegate from Ohio, it was declared to have been carried. Mr. SACHS. I would like to inquire of i the Secretary whether or not there are changes or additions made in the printed rules as they now stand other than these. If so, I think they ought to be included. Mr. McHENRY. I think so too. I do not remember whether we have adopted any other rules since. 6 OFFICERS OF THE CONVENTION. . day for that. Tuesday,] M CHENEY—M GORE—BECKNER. [September 30 . The PRESIDENT. The Chair is under the impression no other rules have been adopted. ‘Mr. McHENRY. I will ask the Clerk whether there has been any others adopted. The SECRETARY. No, I think not. The question being put upon the motion, it was declared to have been carried. Mr. McHENRY. I will say that the Convention adopted a proposition which is in the nature of the rule offered by the Del- egate from Boyd. Mr. L. T. MOORE. That has been print- ed. Mr. PETTIT. But not in that form. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to having that report of the Chairman of the Committee printed in the same? Mr. McHENRY. The Committee have had various resolutions in regard to officers to this Convention and fixing their com- pensation, and we offer the following reso- lutions: Resolutions read, as follows: Resolved, That Capt. Todd Hall be al- lowed to draw four dollars per day, in full compensation for services as Janitor of this Convention, including all assistance. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. Mr. BECKNER. That provides that Captain Hall shall, out of that compensa- tion, pay all assistants. Making fires and cleaning halls is a considerable matter. He will be compelled to pay $1.50 to $2.00 a I move to strike out four dollars and make it five dollars. Mr. STRAUS. Will the Committee on Rules explain what they mean by assist- ants? ' I Mr. McHENRY. The subject was re- ferred to us. I do not know that we have made any official investigation. We thought $4 would be sufficient, which would give Captain Hall $2.50. We un- derstand he would have to pay $1.50 for a man to make the fires, and they fixed on that amount. That is a question, of course, for the Convention. Mr. STRAUS. Did the Committee on Rules investigate what assistants he had‘? Mr. McHENRY. One man was neces- sary. Mr. STRAUS. How much was he pay- ing that man? Mr. McHENRY. $1.50; it was under- stood that he could get an assistant for $1.50. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Clark, to strike out four and insert five. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. Mr. HARRIS. I move to strike out four and insert three. The question being put on the motion, it was declared to have been lost. The PRESIDENT. The question is now upon the passage of the resolution. The question being put, the resolution was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Read the next res- olution. Resolution read as follows: Resolved, That F. W. Cassel be allowed to draw two dollars per day in full for his services as principal Cloak-room Keeper, and that Bowman Adams be allowed to draw one dollar and fifty cents per day in full compensation for: his services as assist- ant Cloak-room Keeper. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. The question being put, the resolution was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Read the next reso- lution. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That Wyatt Beatty be allowed to draw $2 ‘per day in full for his servics as Keeper of the “Back Capitol.” Mr. BRONSTON. I move to strike out “two” and insert $1.50. The question being put on the motion, it was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT. The question recurs on the resolution as amended. INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. 7 day morning, promptly if they accept, and state number. Tuesday,] Mo H ENRY—MCDERMOTT—MCELROY. [September 30. Mr. MCHENRY. The Committee rec- ommend that the matter of fire at foot of .steps be left with the State Librarian. Report read, as follows: I [The Committee reports that it is unnec— -essary for the Convention to make any provision in regard to keeping a fire at the foot of the stairway, and recommend that the matter be left with State Librarian, with whom this Committee has had a con- ference on the subject. The question being put on the report, it was declared adopted. The PRESIDENT. Reports from .Standing Committees are in order. Mr. McDERMOTT. Before you go into that, I would like to have read a. com- munication addressed to me. ‘The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the communication. Communication read, as follows: Received at Frankfort, Ky. Dated Louisville, Ky., Sept. 30, 1890. To Hon. E. J. McDermott .- ,The Commercial Club extends through "you to the Delegates and oflicers of the Con- .stitutional Convention a cordial invitation to an informal lunch at the Galt House Thurs- from 11 to l. Advise F. N. HARTWELL, President. Mr. McDERMOTT. There will be a .series of parades and balls in Louisville on Wednesday and Thursday. These pageants are designed to advertise the city of Louis- ville. It is the metropolis of your State, .and you have a deep interest in its growth .and fame. On Thursday you have only one special order, and that may easily be postponed to another day. It seems to me it would be proper to accept the cordial in- vitation of the Commercial Club, and to spend a little time in seeing the city during its festivities. You should learn to know your metropolis well, and to know the opinions and feelings of its people. To visit us would be a kindly and graceful .act, and your constituents will not begrudge ou this indulgence. We havea fair and IF hospitable city. Its gates and the hearts of its people are open to you. Come and be merry with us. I move that we accept the invitation of the Commercial Club, and that when we adjourn on Wednesday at the usual hour, we adjourn to meet Friday morning at 11 o’clock. Mr. JONSON. I know it is good for children to go .to the circus, and it is some- time necessary for their mothers to go with them. I do not know but what I am in that boat about going. Some of these boys who are doing the writing for us have been trying to get me to vote for the ad- journment, and they have rather got my consent. I believe we ought to let_ the boys go. The old men do not care much about going. Mr. MCELROY. I It occurs to me that there are people here who are rather in- clined to burlesque. That is a mistake en- tirely. The idea of a deliberative body of this sort assembling together, and at the end of the week break up in some kind of frolic of this sort, occurs to me as very preposterous. I am aware of the fact that I will be written up in some paper; but that is all right, provided they stick to the facts. Some of the papers have said that I was at home a week, when I was only absent two days. I am here to-day, and willing to take the responsibility of oppos- ing this proposition. I think it is foreign to the purposes for which we have been sent here. The idea of a deliberative body of this sort breaking up every week or ev- ery two weeks. I was here one time when the Legislature broke up to go to Louis- ville to celebrate the completion of the bridge there. I was in opposition to that. They amended that proposition until it took in Cincinnati, Covington, Newport and Lexington. It took it all in. The people did not approve of such a thing as that. It is not right to engage in such business. We have not come here to go away taking sprees and frolics over 8 INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. Tuesday,] the State and enjoying ourselves in such manner as that, but have come here to transact business for the peo- ple of the State, and I insist that we ought to stay here and do that work; and if we are not ready now to engage in that work, we had better adjourn until cold weather, and then come back and go to work. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I trust that the Delegates of the Convention will bear in mind that the City of Louisville is prepared to make a very great outlay in endeavoring to show herself off on this occasion. They have raised thirty thousand dollars to show off the city to the State; not only to the Delegates of the Convention, but the prom- inent people throughout the State who are expected to be in attendance. Naturally enough the representatives of the City of Louisville will be obliged to attend during this occasion, and we are all anxious to take part in all the important matters to be con- sidered, and we would dislike to miss any thing. I trust the Delegates, even if they do not care about going, will extend to us the courtesy of an adjournment, so that we can go. We promise you a good time, and promise you to see Louisville with its Sunday clothes on. Mr. YOUNG. I simply desire to say this: The representations on Wednesday evening will probably be superior to any thing of the kind that will ever be seen in Kentucky. You are all familiar with the great book of Ben Hur. At an enormous expense this Club has secured and pre- pared representations and illustrations of the scenes in this great novel—confessed- 1y one of the greatest books of the present age or any age; and after the city of Louis- ville has done this, it seems to me it would not be so unfitting, even in so great a body as the Constitutional Convention, to go to the metropolis and meet the citizens of various portions of the State to see this great repre- sentation. I believe if the distinguished Delegate from Allen would go down and see these representatives in character he PHELPS—YOUNG———WHITAKER. [September 30.. would not feel that one day had been mis- spent. It is something which cannot be seen anywhere. trated before. It is something that will cost thousands of dollars; it is an education in itself. $5 a day, I feel now and then that I am entitled to a holiday. an event occurs in our State, people tender to the Convention their hos- pitality, it seems to me it would hardly be kind to refuse to accept the invitation. Mr. WHITAKER. The Delegate from McLean seems to think it might be possi-- ble to allow the boys to go, but the old men must stay; but I am like the girl who was making up the singing school, I want to be one of the boys on this occasion. And so far as the labors of the Convention are con-- cerned, I came from home yesterday, and while there some one said to me, “How are you getting along?” right. Don’t hurry in making the Consti» tution. make a good one, even if it takes six months, and we think it will take about that time. Stay there, so that you can make as perfect a one as possible.” believe we are going to lose by this ad- journment, and am, therefore, going to vote- for the resolution. Mr. WASHINGTON. In view of the very munificent compensation paid the members of the Convention, almost equal to that of the door-keeeper, I am in favor of doing all the work we possibly can, and I am so firmly impressed with this idea that I have been pretty hard at work since- I do not think I have- I have been here. missed an hour since we first met. How many hours the gentleman from Allen has- missed (he has some objection to this pro- ceeding) I do not know. I saw in the» papers that he has lost several hours more than I have. I am in favor of working- day and night, and I have been doing it; but I have discovered in the course of my- It never has been illus-- Although the State pays me- And when so great- and the‘ I said we had not done much of any thing yet, and they said “that is- Take all the time necesssary to I don’t. INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. ' .9 Tuesday,] very brief experience (‘for I am still one of the boys) that there is a limit to human en- durance. There is a limit to the strain which the human intellect will endure, and I think the time has arrived when I can stand, without any injury to my constitu- tion or the Constitution of the State of Ken- tucky, a little rest. I do not think it will hurt me one bit; on the contrary,I am pro- foundly impressed with the idea that both the quantity and quality of our work will be improved if we stop and take a little breath. N ow upon the question of boys, I must confess that I have been laboring un- der some misapprehension in regard to the gentleman who made that suggestion, in common with many other members of this Convention. I have supposed that he was one of the boys; but whether he is or not, I want it distinctly understood that I am, and I do not care whether you spell it with an “h” or not; you may call me one of the b-hoys, and with great emphasis. I am in favor of accepting this invitation. Nearly all of the business of this Convention at this time is done in Committee. We are now going through the empty form of meeting here every mornln g, introducing a resolution or so, and referring it to some Committee. Yesterday we sat forty-five minutes and then adjourned. I would like to see a little more of Louisville. As well said, she is the metropolis of the State of Kentucky, and I have no doubt, if we go down, we will see a royal good time. I hope my people will ratify my conduct in that re- spect. Ido not know whether they will or not. I think they will; but whether they do or not, I am willing to take the chances. I shall therefore vote to go to go to Louisville. Mr. FARMER. The gentleman said we need some recreation after the hard work we have done; but I think, for. the average man, this Convention has been all play. It is said all play and no work makes Jack a dull boy. So far as I am concerned. this has been all play to me. It k FARMER—BECKNER—KNOTT. [September 30 . seems to me it has now come to the situa- tion in which we can begin to do some- thing. We have work set out for Wed- nesday, Thursday and Friday, and it seems to me we ought not to interrupt our labors. We should look on the Convention more as a matter of business. We are employed by the State to do their business, and should not leave for any purpose. Those are my sentiments. I recollect many years ago the Legislature took a recess to attend the Ex- position at Atlanta, and I think it was very generally condemned by the people of the State. I think, in deference to public opinion, we ought not take this or any other recess of this character. Mr. BECKNER. Last week I found a number of gentlemen from my county in the city, and I asked them how the people at home were pleased with the action of the Convention. They said they were de- lighted that we had done nothing. They do not want any Constitution prematurely- formed, and hoped we would give due de-- liberation to every measure. I think our- time has been profitably spent in looking up authorities, trying to understand things, and I really believe this intermission will be profitable to go to the metropolis and min- gle with the intelligence and people there, and witness the representation of the scenes that occurred at the time of our Saviour, the greatest sympat-hizer with humanity. I shall, therefore, vote in favor of accept- ing the invitation. Mr. KNOTT. I would respectfully ask what is the special order for Thursday? Mr.’ MCDERMOTT. Nothing but the resolution to prevent punishment by the lash. Mr. BIRKHEAD. No, it is in regard. to a reformatory institution. Mr. KNOTT. I do not think there is any such emergency as demands great haste to consider that matter, but I do think, as a matter of common courtesy, we ought to ac- cept this polite invitation extended to us by the citizens of our metropolis to witness am 10 INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. Tuesday,] SACHS—A UXI ER—LEWVIS—BUCKNER. September 30. event which occurs but once a year, and probably never again, and to produce which they have gone to great trouble and expense. They have extended this invita- tion to us, not as a matter of favor to us, but as a mark of respect and honor,’ and I think it is the commonest courtesy that those of us who can attend should do so. Mr. SACHS. I wish to say but one ‘word by way of quieting the conscientious >scruples' of those members of this Conven- tion who think by accepting this invitation ‘we are wasting the people’s money. The benefit to be obtained, the pleasure of enjoy- ing the courtesy extended to us by the citizens of the city of Louisville, is already admitted and well understood. The gentle- man from Henderson and the gentleman from Allen, and perhaps a few others, offer ‘this suggestion, that we are here as the serv- ants of the people, that we are here to perform a service that is expensive to the people, and we ought in good conscience stay here and do our work. In answer to ‘that proposition I will say, that there is scarcely a member of this Convention with- in the sound of my voice that is not con- tributing out of his own pocket twice as much as he is receiving from the State; ‘that is double expense contributed by the majority, if not all the members of this 'Convention, out of their own private purses, as compared with what they get from the common purses of the whole State of Ken- tucky. Then, can not we in good conscience, and logically, ask all the people of the ‘ .State of Kentucky to bear their little pit- tance while we are accepting courtesy ex- tended by the invitation from the citizens a nd city of Louisville‘? Mr. AUXIER. So far as the compen- sation is concerned, there are more than one- half of the Delegates in this Convention .actually losing money by their services in ‘this House; and if we are making a sacri- fice for the people, I do not think we have any constituent who would begrudge us a day off to accept an invitation, not to go to _ Atlanta or some other city, not to leave the jurisdiction of this Commonwealth, but to go in obedience to an invitation from our own proud city of Louisville. I esteem it an honor to this Convention to be tendered the invitation ‘we have received from that great metropolis, and the fact we lose one that day, and come back the next all ready for business, will not interfere with our labors, but rather prepare us better for our work. Therefore, I shall vote for the motion. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. It does seem to me it would be very ungracious on the part of the Convention to refuse to accept the gener- ous invitation of the great city of Louis- ville so hospitably extended to us. The city of Louisville is the metropolis of the State, and a great city. Her general inter- ests have become so interwoven with the general interest of the State, that it would be very d‘ifiicult to separate them. That this visit will be beneficial to the work of this Convention is apparent. Experience teaches us men, do very little work with their heads in one place and hearts in another, and it is evident, not only that the hearts of the Convention but of the Com- monwealth, will be in Louisville next VVed- ncsday; and for these reasons I shall vote to accept the invitation. Mr. BUCKNER. It does not impress me as a question of dollars and cents or of the loss of a little time of the Convention. I think it has been the custom (and one always to be honored) that a body like this ought to participate in matters which con- cern the interests of the people whom they represent. It is, in one sense, a kind of a public duty. W'e lose nothing by going there, by interchanging views with the people whom we will meet from every part of the State. We can enlighten ourselves as to their wants better by going there than by staying here and wishing we were there. It impresses me, therefore, as a duty we owe to the peoplewho sent us here to ac- cept the invitation extended by such a large portion of those people, and to meet them on this distinguished occasion. INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. 11 Tuesday,] BRONSTOX—BRO\VN—J oxsox. [September 30 . Mr. BRONSTON. Lest my silence may be construed, as suggested by a gentleman near me, into a feeling of jealousy against Louisville, with her Sunday clothes on, as a rival to Lexington in the location of the Capital, I desire to say that I am very much in favor of adjourning to go to Louisville. I .am' specially anxious that the Delegates shall see Louisville with her Sunday clothes on'—-something that you don’t often see—and especially would I be glad to meet my friend and brother from the county of Allen there with his Sunday clothes on. I know that he will enjoy it much more than he tells you he did the two days, or a week, or whatever it was, he was absent from the floor of this Conven- tion. I might say to him that I have been there, and I know how it is myself, par- _ ticularly when we have such a cordial in- vitation from the gentlemen who represent the City of Louisville. But I think we can go there and represent our constituents. We can go there and perform what I be- lieve to be a very important duty. It has been determined that this Convention shall consider, and seriously consider, the loca- tion of the Capital. Louisville is an appli- cant for that distinguished honor, and it is certainly due them that we shall give an opportunity to the Delegates to see what Louisville is. and I know there is not a man in Kentucky that will not appreciate an effort upon our part, in voting upon that proposition, to do, as we expect to do upon all others, that which is best for the whole people of Kentucky; and whatever location may be honored, we will have the gratifica- tion of knowing that we have been actuated by but the single purpose of doing our best for the whole people; and for that reason I am in favor of accepting this cordial invi- tation. ' Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I feel called upon, sir, to break my record. It was stated on Thursday of last week, I be- lieve, by a Delegate to my left, that he was the only Delegate in this Convention who had, up to that period of time, failed to either introduce a resolution or make some remark on this floor. I beg leave to say that I have felt some degree of intimi- dation in appearing in the presence of so many of my distinguished fellow-citizens, the Delegates in this distinguished body, and heretofore have not felt called upon to obtrude myself upon their notice. I con- fess myself to be essentially and emphatic- ally an old fogy. such, and, because they consider me such, they sent me here, and before the discussion of this question began I felt like voting against the resolution; but when I came 7 into this body, I felt that I realized in all its intensity the idea that the spirit of a great God was brooding over our delibera- tions. I felt myself to enter intensely into the expression of. the apostle when he said: “The powers that be are ordained of God.” In that spirit I took my seat in this body; in that spirit I came here to listen to the words of wisdom as they should fall from the mouths of the wise men who compose this body. It was my determination to try to serve my constituents the best I could; to economize‘ in every particular, feature and essential that was of interest to them; but after hearing the arguments that have been introduced by gentlemen in favor of this proposition, I am ready to say I yield, I yield. This Convention was called into being with one grand idea. That idea was that the Commonwealth of Kentucky, in her development, was behind the age. In that spirit I have come to the Con- vention. In that spirit I propose to act in the Convention. In that spirit I propose, as I honestly believe, to cast every vote that I hope to cast in this Convention. This grand metropolis of the State holding out the idea and representation which carries us back to Calvary, when the Son of Man was upon the face of the earth, and, as one of the Delegates has so properly said, that being the very quintessence of the law of humanity and dignity, and in addition , My people consider me 1'2 INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. Tuesday,] J oNsoN—SMITn-MoELRoY. September 30 . to that, see the evidences of advancement that arebeing made by the spirit of enter- prise in Kentucky: I say I shall take the responsibility of accounting to my constit uents, and I, too, shall support the motion. (Applause) Mr. JONSON. I had no idea that I would be taken by any gentleman on this floor as an old man, and when I see Dele- gates upon this fioor whose hair is white in comparison with mine, who can sit up with the boys all night in a State Convention, it is an insult to my young manhood to in- sinuate that I am an old man. I am like the Delegate from Campbell. With, or without an “h,” I want to be put down in that list. Now, if it please you, sir, I had the honor of meeting this Commercial Club at Louisville three years ago in a Commercial Conference, held by delegates voluntarily assembled there from every county in the State, and in that Conven- tion or Conference I met, for the first time, quite a number of distin- guished gentlemen, who are now here. I received very large benefit in education from that Association. I believe that we may all receive a like benefit by accepting the invitation, with or without the consent of the masses of our constitu- ency. Our manhood should prompt us to do what We believe to be right. A celebrated character in our government said on one occasion, that he would rather be right than President of the United States. I am not sure but what, when this thing is ar- rayed before us, the fear of displeasing our constiuency is not rather a begging of the question. It is not an appeal to a man’s intelligence or manhood or patriot- ism or any thing else, but an appeal to one of the most despicable of all the character- istics of humanity, and one not generally entertained by Kentuckians, I am glad to say, for they have always had the distinc- tion among their fellow-citizens of the United States of being brave men, what- ever they may have been accused of. I do not know but what we had better quit. that business of holding in terrorem over us public sentiment, and come down to our work, and do it like men, and act for the best. I believe we would be depriving our- selves and these boys, that I first appealed to this Convention in behalf of, of a great privilege in not accepting the invitation. Mr. H. H. SMITH. As all of the boys have concluded that they would go to the celebration as a matter of kindness, and in -a very happy feeling, I call upon the gen- tleman from Allen and the gentleman from Henderson to take hands with me, and let. three old men go to the celebration. The- gentleman seems to think that in going down to the city of Louisville (a most fascinating place, both in its internal and external beauty) that he might lose some of the ideas that he brought to this Convention. I am sure that the hospitable people of Louisville will insure to that gentleman that his ideas, that his integrity for the good of his State, will not be lost by such a visit. I insist, therefore, upon the gentle-- man foregoing for the hour the duty of watching the great State of Kentucky, and let’s lend a hand to the industrial progress of the State, a consummation which will be carried out to-morrow. I think, in a lib- eral spirit, that the gentleman ought to join hands and take this little trip to Louisville. I don’t think the Treasury of the State is going to be depleted by the visit to Louis- ville, and, as said by the Delegate from Newport, most of us are here under a sac- rifice. I don’t know whether that applies to the gentleman from Allen or not; but I do not believe that the good people he rep- resents down in Allen would object to his going down to Louisville, even if he didn’t care to indulge in the simple mint julep while there. Mr. McELROY. Mr. President, I am conscientiously opposed to this proceeding. Now, in this invitation we have heard from the gentleman from Lexingson; there is. something more in prospect than the show. INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. 13 Tuesday,] ArPLEeA'rE—HARRIs—McDERMoT. September 30, don’t know what kind ofa show it is ; I can’t tell whether it would be one that I would feel at home if I was at it or not, whether I could enjoy it or not. I can not tell about that. I recall that the custom has grown up here in the Kentucky Legisla- ture of visiting. On one occasion they vis- ited the Tennessee Legislature upon a mere invitation, and, according to the report in the papers there, they expected to be noticed considerably; and it seems, from what the papers said, that the people there privately turned their backs on them when they got there—the Kentucky Legislature that they did not ask, feeling that they were so far out of their place; and I feel that the best citizens of Louisville, if we were to go there, would feel a good deal that way. I don’t know if the object is what the gentle- man from Lexington indicates, to have an influence over this body in the location of the Capital. I have seen Louisville; I have been there frequently. I do not think it would have any effect upon me in that respect; but then, if that is the motive, why Lexington in a short time will make an in- vitation of a similar character, and we will break up and go there, and see what a beautiful place there is there for the location of the Capi- tal, and I dont know where it will end. ‘Our mission here was to frame a Constitu- tion, not to go around on pleasure trips to be seen and to see the people, but to do our duties as representatives of the people. I have no objection to the members doing that, if they individually believe in going around on these trips of pleasure and mer- riment. I do not believe it is discharging their duties, and therefore I positively and unequivocally oppose it. Mr. APPLEGATE. vious question. The PRESIDENT. The question is now whether the main question be now 'voted upon? Several Delegates asked recognition. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate I move the pre- withdraw the motion for the previous ques- tion‘? Mr. APPLEGATE. NO, ‘sir. And the vote being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative. Mr. HARRIS. Mr. President, I wish to say at the outset that I appreciate the courtesy of Louisville, in extending this in- vitation, as fully as any gentleman upon the floor. I am proud of Louisville. Louis- ville is rather in my portion of the State. My people deal with Louisville. W’e are all interested in her prosperity and in her welfare. N ow, gentlemen have said that they want to go to Louisville for the purpose of seeing Louis- ville with her Sunday clothes on. That is the main object and the main argument to induce us to go. My information, Mr. President, is, that Louisville does not put on these Sunday clothes till late Thursday evening in time for us to go Thursday and see her with these clothes on. There is a very important matter upon the calendar of Thursday, and we could debate that- matter an hour or two, and then adjourn in time to get to Louisville and see her with her clothes on. (Prolonged laughter.) This pageant, this magnificent pageant that is to represent the characters in the book written by Gen. Wallace, as I understand, will take place after sundown, and the ball, to which we have all been invited, and where we ex- pect to see the beauties, the elite and the intelligence of Louisville, will take place, perhaps, after nine or ten o’clock. Mr. MoDERMOTT. The pageant will be Wednesday night, and the ball will be Thursday night. Mr. HARRIS. I understood that the ball was to be on Thursday night. Well, this pageant, as I understand it, will take place after dark. Mr. MCDERMOTT. On Wednesday. Mr. HARRIS. After dark? Mr. MCDERMOTT. Yes. Mr. HARRIS. Then we can 'adjourn on Thursday? Mr. McDERMOTT. You can’t go to 14 INVITATION TO vrsrr LOUISVILLE. Tuesday,] HARRIS—COX—BIRKHEAD. Semptember 30 . see the pageant unless you are down there on Wednesday. Mr. HARRIS. If seeing the pageant is the object, and commingling with the peo- ple of Louisville and seeing what they think of us and the Constitution, and an interchange of views—if that is to be the object, we can accomplish it by adjourning Wednesday evening and coming back Thursday, or by adjourning Thursday evening and coming back Friday. For that reason, Mr. President, I shall oppose the resolution. Mr. COX. I can not say, with the very young gentlemen on this floor, that I be- long to the “boys.” That period has passed with me—the period for going to frolics or to balls—and I concur with some gentlemen upon this floor that I do not conceive that our mission here is to attend balls or to attend frolics. I do not con- ceive that the people of Kentucky sent this / Convention here for the purpose of en- gaging in frolics. We have had it clearly represented, and represented with force and eloquence, that this is to be a great scene— a ball at night, and I know not what else. I know not what will be spread before us; but as I am too far advanced to engage in any thing of the sort, I expect to vote on this question “no.” I do it, not from a desire to show any disrespect to the city of Louisville—far from it; but there is one great question before this Conven- tion. That question is upon the changing of the location of the Capital. That ques- tion is before the Committee now, and soon, perhaps, thatCommittee will report to us. I do not propose to accept any thing at the hands of any place that expects to be an applicant for the Capital to be located there. It would look very much like I was accept- ing a bribe. Almost ere this Convention has returned from the city of Louisville, it will again be called upon to go there, and the next time it will be for a higher and holier and more important purpose. The Sons of the Revolution will meet there for the purpose of doing honor to the distin- guished men and patriots who, in rags and suffering, secured American independence. I expect we will ask the Convention to ad- journ and go with us there at that time; but not for the purpose of a frolic, but for the purpose of giving expression of our gratitude to those patriotic men who gave up their lives for American freedom. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Mr. President, I did not expect when I came here to take an active part in the proceedings. I only want to take a verymodest part; but I am a man who has been accustomed to hard, constant labor. you might say, all my life. These holidays, when I take them, I shall take them at my own expense, and I do not want to be understood as being illiberal. or contracted, 'or any thing of that kind ; but a part of my people, from Daveiss county, will attend that display there. They will do so at their own expense. When I accepted this position at the hands of my people, I necessarily took into consideration the fact that I would incur, perhaps, considerable expense, maybe losses. It may be that I would lose by coming here, viewed from a financial stand-point. I presume that the Delegates from the city of Louisville and other portions of the State took the matter under consideration in the same way. They accepted this position with that under- standing. IVe have come here to deliber- ate, to compare our views, and to formulate a Constitution for our people. My people disapprove of this matter of going off on these excursions ; accepting these invitations at the expense of the State. If Delegates want to go, I think they ought to have the right ; they ought to be allowed to donate their per diem to the State during their absence. If we are going down there to see Louisville, as has been stated, with her Sunday clothes on, I do not see how it is going to aid us any in discussing that re- formatory institution that is set for Thurs- day. I do not see how we are going to INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. 15 Tuesday,] YOUNG. [September 30. contribute any to the information we have as to the proper method for discussing that question. That question is bound to come. We are compelled to consider that question. We will have to move it out of the way and go off down to Louis- ville on a play or frolic, as you might say, and come back here and take up this busi- ness again and consume time on it. I therefore shall vote against it. I appre- ciate the invitation. I would like to go. I intend to go to some of these gatherings in the future, but I am going at my own ex- pense. I shall not ask my people-—and I believe my people are as liberal and as able to pay, sir, the per diem here as the people of any other county in the State—to pay my expenses, while I go off to see something that is being made by the very towns and cities of our State. I shall vote against the proposition. Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, I am glad the gentleman from Daveiss mentioned one fact, and that is that the special order for Thursday is to consider the advisability of establishing a Reformatory Institution., I think if the Delegates from this Conven- tion will go to Louisville, the education they will receive there in that single re- spect will be worth ten times the money it may cost the State. If they go, I will undertake to say that they will see the ‘leading Reformatory Institution of this‘ country without spending the dollars and cents of the State of Kentucky. Go and look at the records of these meet- ings which have been called to consider Reformatory Institutions, and you will find that the Louisville Industrial and Reform School, with its three hundred pupils, stands to-day in the fore front of all Reformatory Institutions in this country; and as far as the expense to the State is concerned, the five hundred dollars which the State may lose by our going away will be ten times repaid by the education to be afforded by seeing the process of operating this Reform School. \Vithout being unkind, I might , say that I suppose half of the Delegates to this Convention have never seen a Reform~ I would not, if it had not. It is- not a discredit to anybody. If my friend from Allen, and the distinguished Delegate from Daveiss, would go to see this Reform- atory Institution, I think it would give them better ideas of what is needed. It. would give them a more thorough concep- tion of what a Reformatory School should be than all the reading and studying they‘ could do. It would be a good object lesson there before them to see the colored boys; and the colored girls and the white girls. and the white boys gathered in there, taken from the scenes of vice and crime in the city of Louisville, and brought up to be useful citizens. I say this object lesson atory School. been that I had one at my very door. ‘would be worth more than any five hun- dred dollars to the State of Kentucky. There is one subject upon which I. would like to speak, and that is about this pay. Is the State of Kentucky, with her magnificent wealth, always to be considering these niggardly questions. about five dollars to a Delegate‘? I am giving the State of Kentucky far more service in coming here than she is paying me for; and this thing of consid- ering what is being said by constituents—I ‘am not always considering what my peo— ple say. I am sent here clothed with sov- ereign power, and if my people don’t like. what I do as a sovereign, it makes no difference to me. They have chosen me be— cause they thought I was a proper man to fill the place—because they thought I un- derstood Constitutional questions; and if they want to raise any quarrel with me about . my conduct, I can tell them that it will make very little difference to me. I have no political future before me. I expect my course to be guided by independence and manhood, and if the people of the Fourth District of the City of Louisville do not like the way I attend to my duties in the Con- vention, then let them get somebody else. 16 INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. I remuneration. Tuesday,] ENGLISH—FARMER. [September 30 . I know that if I knew then what I do .now, Mr. President, they would have had to hire somebody else at this magnificent But I am a servant of the people. I want some glory. I want some judicial history, and I am giving up just about ninety-five dollars a day to come here and get it. I do not intend to worry myself about what the people say or think when I am making such a large sac- rifice for their benefit in furnishing them with my information and my experience. Now, the State‘ of Kentucky is indebted to me, and she is indebted to ninety-nine other men in this Convention; for I told a gen- tleman the other day down in Louisville I consider that I am a pretty big sort of :a man, but when I got up here, I found ninety-nine other men as big as I am. It is not a very pleasant consideration, but we have to face these facts. Now this Capital consider- ation ought not to have been introduced into this matter. I believe the Delegate from Fayette had some spite up when he mentioned that. This is a clean, clear-cut case of Kentucky hospitality; and the gentleman from Fayette says we want the Capital. We want you to come to see us. It isn’t the Capital. It is because we want ‘to see the magnificent body assembled here to provide a new Constitution for the Com- monwealth; It would be a great service and benefit to the city of Louisville to see one hundred disinterested men who have left their homes, given up their avocations, and are sacrificing their private interests in order that the State of Kentucky may receive the benefit of their aggregated wisdom., Gentle- men, I hope you will all come. There is nothing mean about this matter. It is a nice, big thing, and we want you to come. You are not going at the expense of the {State of Kentucky. I understand that if I telegraph to the Board of Directors of the Reform School we can have you all visit that institution during Wednesday after- noon, and if you are golng to consider this matter, I believe the best thing you can do is to let every man in the Convention see that great object lesson, erected by the city of Louisville at a cost of thousands of dol- lars, without outside aid, to educate these fallen boys and girls; and if you are going to undertake to recommend such an affair for the State, come and see how we have done it, and you will know better how to do it when the occasion arises. Mr. ENGLISH. I'simply want to add one word to what has been said by the Delegate from the Fourth District. Fore- paugh’s circus will also be there ; admis- sion only twenty-five cents. ( Laughter.) Mr. FARMER. If there had not been so much eloquence on this matter, although the remark will not apply to my case, I should not get up to address you; but as we have had a great flow of eloquence upon the sub- juct, I assume it will be proper for me to say something. In reply to the gentleman from Louisville, I would say that no one appreciates more than I do the invitation that has been given us by the various insti- tutions of Louisville and the Reformatory Schools; but it is suggested by the gentle- man that if we go there for a few hours we will gain a great deal of information. I would like to know how. We will see a row of boys and girls. Our admiration might be excited, but as to the workings of the institution, we would gain nothing. I have seen a great many in my life. I have been in a great many places, and it has been the case with me that I could not properly inform myself by merely looking at the re- sults. I humbly submit to the sense of this Convention, what could we do by going there for a few hours‘? As to the great sac- rifice that the gentleman says he is making to come to this Convention, I will say that I am just exactly the opposite. The gentleman is probably losing a good deal of money ; but Ifsay that all I get here is clear gain, be- cause I am no account at home. _ I am not worth much at home, and I won’t be much .missed. I will be benefited by coming to INVITATION TO VISIT LOUISVILLE. 17 'Tuesday,] McELRoY-—EDRINeToN—PnELrs. September 30 . ‘this Convention. I say that I would wish to get through with the doings of this Con- vention. All the sacrifice I make is the :absence from my family. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the motion offered by the Delegate from the Fifth Louisville District, which is, hat when the Convention adjourns on Wednesda,y that it adjourn to meet Friday :at 11 o’clock A. M. Mr. MCELROY. Mr. President, I want ‘to place myself correctly on record in this matter, and in doing that I am compelled to place others also. I therefore call for ‘the yeas and nays. Mr EDRINGTON. I second the call. The PRESIDENT. The yeas and nays are demanded, and the Secretary will please call the roll. _ And the vote being taken on the said mo- tion, resulted as follows : - YEAS—46. Allen, M. K. Hopkins, F. A. Applegate, Leslie T. James, A. D. Askew, J. F. Jonson, Jep. C. Auxier, A. J, Johnston, P. P. Beckner, W. M. Kirwan, E. E. Berkele, Wm. Knott, J. Proctor Boles, S. H. Lassing, L. W. Brents, J. A. Lewis, J. W. Bronston, C. J. Martin, W. H. Brown, J. S. McDermott, E. J. Buckner, S. B. Muir, J. W. Carroll, John D. Petrie, H. G. Chambers, G. D. Phelps, Zack English, Sam E. Sachs, Morris A. Field, W. W. Smith, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Spalding, I. A. Forgy, J. M. Straus, F. P. Funk, J. T. Washington, George Glenn, Dudley E. West, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Hogg, S. P. Woolfolk, J. F. Holloway, J. W. Young, Bennett H. NAYS—37. Allen, C. T. Farmer, H.H. Amos, D. C. Graham, Samuel Ayres, W. W. Hanks, Thos. H. Beckham, J C. Harris, Geo. C. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Kennedy, Hanson Lewis, W. W. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. Brummal, J. M. Miller, Will. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, \V. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Montgomery, J. F. Clardy, John D. Moore, J. H. Mr. President Clay. Moore, Laban T. Cox, H. Nunn, T. J. DeHaven, S. E. Pettit, Thos. S. Doris, W. F. Pugh, Sam’l J. Durbin, Charles Quicksall, J. E. Edrington,:W. J. Rodes, Robt. Elmore, T. J. - ABSENT—17. Bennett, B. F. Parsons, Rob’t T. Buchanan, Nathan Phelps, John L. Coke, J. Guthrie Ramsey, W. R. Goebel, Wm. Smith, W. Scott Hines, J. S. Swango, G. B. Jacobs, R. P. Trusdell, George Mackoy, W. H. Twyman, I. W. May, John S. Wood, J. M. O’Hara, R. H. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. Mr. Chairman, I desire to say that the invitation applies to all of the officers of the Convention as well as the members—to the Secretaries and even the Pages; and, while I am up, Mr. Presi- dent, I would suggest to the Delegate from the Fourth District, that as I have the honor of being a member of the Board of Directors of the Louisville School of Re- form, I desire to extend an invitation to all the Delegates on behalf of the Board of Directors to visit the institution, and we will arrange an hour to take them out. We can go out after the dinner at the Galt House. The PRESIDENT. Are there'any other reports from Committees? If not, motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. APPLEGATE. Mr. President, I desire to offer a resolution, and ask that it be passed. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Applegate’s resolution, which is as follows: Resolved, That the special order of Thurs- day be made the special order of next Mon- day at 11 A. M., and that the resolution rela- tive to Reformatory Institutions be printed and laid on the desks of the members. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is in- formed by the Secretary that there is a special order for that hour. 18 ' RESOLUTIONS. Tuesdayn] ELMORE—APPLEGATE—SACHS. [September 20 , Mr. ELMORE. Mr. President, I have a resolution. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate from Pendleton change his motion? There is a special order for that hour. Mr. APPLEGATE. I would like to change it from Friday to Monday. The PRESIDENT, Monday, at 12 or 11 o’clock‘? It is moved and seconded that the special order for Thursday he made a special order for Monday at 11 o’clock. Is that the motion of the Delegate ‘? And the question being taken upon said motion. the same was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Report the resolu- tion offered by the Delegate from Graves. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Elmore. which is as fol- lows: Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con- vention that a Journal of this Convention be printed and kept separate from the de- bates. for future reference of this Conven- tion. Mr. ELMORE. I would like to have that acted upon immediately. There are numerous resolutions inquiring about the matter before the Committee. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the resolution just read. Mr. SACHS. As I understand it, that resolution calls for the printing of the Journal. I will ask to have it reported, so that I can get at the meaning. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resolution. The Reading Clerk again read the reso- lution offered by Mr. Elmore. Mr. SACHS. Mr. President, as I under- stand it, the motion now before the house is for the printing of the Journal. It strikes me that it is a matter of so much expense, very large expense, running into the thousands of dollars, that it is well enough to stop and consider. Now, I be— lieve that this Convention has provided that a stenographic report shall be taken of all its proceedings. The report, as it is now being taken and printed, if I am cor- rect, is, so to say, a photograph of all the proceedings of the Convention. It fills the dual capacity of what this resolution calls for, and at the same time contains all the debates. In my opinion, that manner of photographing , the pro- ceedings of this Convention is superior to the old-fashioned way of separating the debates from the balance of the work. I think it is more logical, it is more practical, more in consonance with modern ideas, to publish the whole proceedings as they occur, and not to make them separate like they have been made in the former years. Now, I believe that this thing of publishing the Journal separate from the debates origi- nated. or is derived, from a time when the system of taking down speeches in short- hand was not as perfect as it is to-day. That comes to us from a time when we had not the facilities for taking down the pro- ceedings of the Convention and printing them that we now have; and I say. by way of conclusion, that it is already apparent that we can save money, we can save time, and we can get up a better report of the proceedings of this Convention, by allow- ing the whole proceedings to be published in one book, according to the picture that the Short-hand Reporter takes of the pro- ceedings of the Convention. Mr. \VASHINGTON. I have a resolu- tion which I would like to offer as a substi- tute. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the substitute. The Reading Clerk reported Mr. Wash- ington’s substitute, which is as follows: WHEREAS, It is desirable that the pro- ceedings and debates of the Convention shall be so arranged, printed, and bound as to simplify them and make them easily in- telligible without being unnecessarily cum- brous or difficult of reference; therefore, be it Resolved, First. That the Journal of its proceedings, as approved from day to day, be published in one volume, similar in style to those in which the Acts of the General Assembly are published. Second. That in a separate volume, bound in law calf, shall be published 1st. A tabulated statement: showing the RESOLUTIONS. 19 - Tuesday] SAPLDING—MCHENRY. ' * [September 30. votes cast at both elections for and against‘ the call of this Convention, similar to that contained in the volume in which are pub- lishedthe debates of the Convention of 1849. 2d. The act of the General Assembly calling this Convention. 3d. The proceedings connected with the organization of this Convention. 4th. All reports of Standing Committees, as a matter proposed to be embodied in the Constitution to be framed by this. Conven- tion, and all amendments proposed thereto, together with all the debates thereupon, and the votes upon the question of their adoption or rejection of said reports and amendments. Third. All proceedings and debates in the case of McChord vs. Lewis. Fom'th. The Constitution which may be framed by this Convention, with the signa- tures thereto. Fifth. The vote of the people upon the question of its ratification, certified by the Secretary of State. Sixth. In the event the people ratify the result of the labors of this body, and if its reassembling after such ratification, then all such proceedings as may occur thereafter in this body. Seventh. All remarks submitted to the Convention by its President, whether upon its adjournment for the purpose of submit- ting its labors to the people, or upon 1ts reassembling, as stated in paragraph six. or upon its final adjournment. Mr. SPALDING. I move to refer the resolution and the substitute to the Com- mittee on Printing and Accounts. Mr. McHENRY. Is not this a report from the Committee on Printing and Ac- counts‘? I thought it was offered by the Chairman of that Committee. Is it a res- olution or the action of the Committee ‘2 The PRESIDENT. The original reso- lution was reported ‘by that Committee. The substitute was offered by the gentleman from Newport. The substitute, the Chair thinks, would be in order as a separate res- olution, but hardly thinks it is in order as a substitute, as it covers more subject than the original resolution. Mr. MCHENRY. Is the question de- batable ? The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir. Mr. MCHENRY. I want to say this; I do not see how we can get along without the Journal. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would like to state his opinion as to the relevancy of the amendment. He holds that there is only a part of the amendment or substitute that is relevant or in order ; that part which refers to the Journal. The other part would be in order as a separate resolu- tion, but it is not in order as a substitute for the original resolution. Mr. lWIcHENRY. I think so. We can adopt the resolution offered by the Dele- gate from Graves, and the suggestion made in the resolution of the Delegate from New- port can come in subsequently. It provides for what shall be put in the record, because this Journal is the record of this body. The proceedings as given by the stenographer is not a record. We have not made it a record of this body. The speeches of the Delegates and various things will be put in there, but that is not a part of the record. We want here simply a clean record of the action of this Convention, and if we do not have a Journal there is nothing to show, legitimately, that there ever was a Conven- tion. It is like a Circuit Court holding its term and having the minutes in the memo- randum minute-book; that is not a record book. I hope, sir, that this Convention will have a regular Journal, just as the Legisla- ture does. It is the oflicial action, a record of the ofiicial action of this Convention, and I think the cost ought not be taken into consideration at all upon the settlement of this question. We ought to keep a record here which will last and be preserved in the archives of the State. I hope, sir, that this resolution will be adopted. We need it every day, sir. We do not know what we have done. Only to-day we had to ask the recollection of the Reporter and Clerks as to what had been the action of this body 20 RESOLUTIONS. Tuesday,] SPALDING—ELMORE—BULLITT. [September 30 . upon certain matters. Otherwise we have to send to the Clerk’s ofiice and get the loose sheets in which he keeps the record; and it ought to be printed and laid on our tables every morning. I hope, if the reso- lution passses, that the printer will be directed to print it, commencing now, for he would be eight or ten days behind if he started to print it from the beginning, and let him print it and lay it upon the tables the second day, the next morning after it is printed. The PRESIDENT. The Chair was un- der a misapprehension in regard to the mo- tion to refer made by the Delegate from Newport. This motion does not admit of debate, but as the gentleman has been al- lowed to make a statement, I will also allow the gentleman from Union to make a state- ment. Mr. SPALDING. In the first place, Mr. President, I was under a misapprehen- sion as to the character of the resolution. I did not understand that it was a 'report of the Committee. My motion would be to re-commit that and refer the other, the sub- stitute. Now, I don’t propose to go into the merits of the matter as to the necessity of having a separate Journal, or any thing of that kind; but it occurs to me that there is a good deal of confusion here about the printing of our proceedings, and that the whole matter ought to be digested and sys- tematized by a Committee. We are going at these things by piecemeal, and already there are differences between the Public Printer and the Clerk and the Stenog- rapher, and nobody wants to go into an in- vestigation of that upon the floor here. It is a matter that ought to be adjusted in Committee. Let the Committee digest the matter, and report to the Convention a statement. We ought to have these pro- ceedings all before us as promptly as possi- ble, and if it is desirable—and I think it is —for the Journal to be printed, let the Committee take charge of that and get it before the Convention in intelligible shape. The Delegate from Graves asked recog- nition. The PRESIDENT. The question is not debatable, but by unanimous consent the gentleman can proceed. Mr. ELMORE. Mr. President, I do not wish to debate it, but I simply want to state that it is not a report of the Commit- tee on Printing and Accounts; but it was introduced by me to get the sense of this Convention, to know whether they desired a Convention Journal printed or not. Resolutions are coming in, one of which I hold in my hand, from the gentleman from Lewis, inquiring what has been done in reference to the matter. The Committee on Printing has taken no action, from the fact that the House has taken no action, and I ofl‘ered that resolution, at the request of the Committee on Printing, merely to test the matter, and see what the Convention de- sired in that respect. Mr. BULLITT. I simply desire to ex- plain the status of this printing matter. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the gentleman can proceed. The Chair hears none. Mr. BULLITT. I was with the Com- mittee that formulated the arrangement_ We ascertained that it was utterly impossi- ble to get the Journal in time to have it laid upon the table the following morning. Having ascertained that the Journal could not be furnished till, perhaps, midnight, or some time in the night; sometimes it could be gotten at about 6 o’clock; and the printer said it would be too late to furnish the proceedings of that day the following morning; so that our committee concluded to let the Stenographer take down all the proceedings of the Convention. Now, there will be but very little difierence between the Stenographer’s statement and the Clerk’s statement of what is contained in the Journal. Likely the Stenographer will have a little more. Some gentleman who makes a motion may preface it with a few remarks. Those RESOLUTIONS. 21 Tuesday,] ALLEN. [September 30. remarks will be taken down by the done, and in the order in which it is said Stenographer, and would not appear on the Journal, so that the Committee con- cluded that the best way was, in order to get the proceedings of that day on the fol- lowing morning, to lett he Stenographer re- port every thing that transpired, and let that all go in the report the following morning. We therefore made no arrange- ment for the printing of the Journal, as corrected by the Convention. We left that to the Committee on Printing, and if it is the desire of the Convention to have the Journal printed, it is true that the printed Journal cannot come to the Convention till the second day, the day after its ap- proval. That is, it will be approved this morning; the proceedings of yesterday would be approved this morning, and toimorrow morning it will he laid on the tables of the various members. That would make night Work for the printer. Now, I think we ought to have some evidence that we can refer to; but in the absence of a printed Journal, we have these slips that we file away about like the proceeding or papers in a case in court, and We can refer to them, The PRESIDENT. The hour for the special order set for to-day has now arrived. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I move that the special order set for this hour be postponed until the present matter is disposed of. The motion was seconded, and, on being put to the House, was carried. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I ask the unani- mous consent of the House to make a few remarks about this matter of printing. I was one of the Special Committee, of which the gentleman from McCracken was Chair- man, to arrange this matter of printing, and this Convention accepted the report and made its order. There are reasons why that order should not be disturbed. There is one good reason why we have no use for the Journal. The order of this Convention is that the Stenographer shall take down in short-hand every thing that is said and and done in this Convention. That order comprises and covers every thing. Every resolution that is offered or read; every vote that is taken, and whatever action is taken by this Convention, at any stage of its proceedings, appears in this report. In printing a Journal of the Legislature there is an end to be attained which is not here. That Journal shows what acts were passed and what were defeated. Our Work -is comprised in one whole thing—a Constitution. That Constitution, as a whole, goes to the people to be ratified or rejected as one thing; not as a dozen acts. The acts of the Legislature are divided into many acts, and the Journal shows which have been passed and which have been defeated. Our Journal is rounded up in one thing; and what object there can be in having a Journal printed separate from these proceedings I can not see. The Clerk's Journal is read here every morning. It is nothing more than a repetition of what the Stenographer has taken; and if you order the printing of the Journal, you are duplicating in printing the work which you have already. What more can any Del- egate ask than that every word that is said, every act that is done, shall appear here in these proceedings? I did not catch the idea embraced in the substitute of the gentleman from Newport; but it seems to me that he is looking to an elimination of a part of the proceedings of this Conven- tion, and inserting that which is important, and throwing out that which is unimport- ant. I do not know that I caught the idea correctly, but I got it that way. Who is to tell when the twenty minutes’ remarks of the gentleman from Mason is important or unimportant? Who is to say when the remarks made by any other gentle- man covering an hour and a half are important or unimportant? The order of the Convention has been made that every thing that is said and done here on aqis floor, shall appear in print the next ' 22 RESOLUTIONS. Tuesday,] J OHNSTON— A rrLEeA'rE—MILLER. [September 30 . morning. It is true we are behind, owing to insuperable obstacles in the way of the Public Printer; but I am informed by him that in a few’days he will be up, and every morning 125 copies of the previous day’s proceedings will be laid upon our desks for reading and correction; and, as corrected by the different members in their remarks, it goes back to the'Printer, and 4,000 copies are printed. I do not appreciate the object that we gain by printing the Journal. Mr. JOHNSTON. I desire to offer an amendment to the substitute. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon referring the resolution and amend- ment to the Committee on Printing and Accounts, and by unanimous consent the amendment can go with the resolution. NIr. JOHNSTON.‘ I desire to have my amendment read for information. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows: Re-commit the report and amendments to the Committee on Printing, with the ex- pression of opinion that a separate Journal of our proceedings would be an unneces- sary expense. Mr. APPLEGATE. tion. The PRESIDENT. The vote will be first taken upon the substitute motion to recommit the resolution and amendments to the Committee on Printing and Ac- counts, with instructions that the printing of the Journal is unnecessary. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The rules pro- vide that there shall be a Committee on Printing and Accounts to supervise the printing that may be done for this Conven- tion, and examine, audit and report upon I second that mo- ,the accounts created- by this Convention. It seems to me that the Committee on Printing is not the proper Committee to consider this matter. That Committee is not charged with the duty of saying to this Convention what shall be printed; but the duty of that Committee is to supervise the printing which is ordered by this Con- vention; and I think it would be more proper to have this resolution and pending amendment committed to the Committee on Rules, and, therefore, I move as a sub- stitute for the motion the committal of this resolution with its amendment to the Com- mittee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. The motion sub- mitted by the Delegate from Lexington is a substitute to the motion already sub- mitted, and your motion is not now in or- der until this is acted upon. The question is upon the motion offered by the Delegate from Fayette as an amendment to the motion of the Delegate from Union. The motion made by the Delegate from Fayette is, that the resolution and amendments be recommitted to the Committee on Printing and Accounts, with instructions to report that the printing of the Journal is unnec- essary. That is on the motion in substance. The motion was put to the House, and the Chair declared the same carried. Mr. PETTIT. I call for the yeas-and nays. The PRESIDENT. Will the Delegate say that he made the call for the yeas and nays before the Chair announced the re- result‘? Mr. PETTIT. I do not know that I called for the yeas and nays before the re— salt was anonunced, but did so just as soon as I could get the attention of the Chair. The PRESIDENT. The Chair cannot then recognize the call. Mr. PETTIT. I move then to recon- sider the vote by which it was adopted, and I desire to explain my reasons. Mr. JOHNSTON. I make the point of order that he has no right to move a recon- sideration, as he voted in the negative, and is therefore in the minority. The PRESIDENT. It is unnecessary to determine how ‘he voted. That rule only applies where a roll call has been made, and not to a viva voce vote. The motion is upon the reconsideration of the last vote. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to say in a few words why I moved to reconsider, and for RESOLUTION S. _ 23 ,Tuesday,] FUN K—PETTIT—BURNAM. [September 30 . that purpose ask the unanimous consent of the House. Mr. FUNK. I object. The PRESIDENT. There being ob- jection, the question now is upon the recon- .sideration of the vote by which the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Lexing- ton was adopted. ' Mr. PETTIT. Upon that I call for the yeas and nays. The motion was seconded by Mr. Birk- head. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will -call the roll. Mr. PETTIT. I would like to make a parliamentary inquiry pending the calling of the roll. In the event that we do not publish the proceedings of our Convention, by what means are we to know, after we have adjourned, what have been the pro- ceedings of this Convention‘? I want to .state that the report kept here is an un- oflicial report, and the only ofiicial report is kept by the ofiicers of this House. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman can lonly proceed by unanimous consent. The Secretary will please call the roll. The result of the vote was as follows: YEAS—19. Beckham, J. C. Moore, Laban T Birkhead, B. T. Muir, J. W. Brents, J. A. Pettit, Thomas S. Burnam, Curtis F. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Quicksall, J. E. Durbin, Charles Forrester, J. G. Smith, H. H. Hogg, S. P. Washington, Geo. McHenry, Henry D. Wood, J. M. .Miller, W. H. Rodes, Robert Nave—58. Allen, C. T. Harris, Geo. C. Allen, M. K. Hendrick, W. J. Amos, D. C. Hines, Thomas H. Applegate, Leslie. T Holloway, J. W. Askew, J F James, A. D. Ayres, W. W. Jonson, Jep. C. .Beckner, W. M. J ohnston. P. P. . Berkele, Wm. Kennedy, Hanson Blackburn. James Kirwan. E. E. Blackwell, Joseph Lassing. L. W. Bourland, H. R. Lewis,_J. Bronston, C. J. Lewis, W. W. Brown, J. S. Martin, W. H. Buckner, S. B. McDermott, E. J. Bullitt, W. G. McElroy, W. J. Carroll, John D. Montgomery’, J. F. Chambers, G. D. Moore, J. H. Cox, H. Nunn, T. J. Doris, W F Petrie, H. G. Edrington, W. J. Phelps, Zack Elmore, T. J. Sachs. Morris A. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. Farmer.- H H. Straus, F. 1’. Field, W. W. West, J. F. Forgy, J. M. Whitaker, Emery Funk, J. T. Williams, L. P. V. Glenn, Dudley A. Woolfolk, J. F. Graham, Samuel. Young, B. H. Hanks, Thomas H. ABSENT—23. _ Auxier, A. J. May, John S. Bennett, B. F. Knott, J. Proctor Boles, S. H. Mackoy, 'W. H. Brummal. J. M. O’Hara, R. H. ‘ Buchanan, Nathan Parsons, R-ib’t. T. Clardy, John D. Phelps. John L. Clay, C. M.. Jr. Ramsey, R. Coke, J. Guthrie. Smith, W. Scott Goebel, William Swango. G. B. Hines, J. S. Trusdell, George Hopkins. F. A. Twyman, l. W. Jacobs, R. I’. Mr. BURNAM. I have a resolution which I desire to be acted upon. The PRESIDENT. The only thing now in order is the special order for 12 o’clock, which the Committee will please report. Mr. BURNAM. If the gentlemen will allow me to make a statement in re- gard to the resolution, I will state its nature. The Sergeant-at-Arms was put to expense in going to the county of Wrashing- ton in obedience to the resolution. of the House adopted some time ago. The resolu- tion which I desire now to offer is an order reimbursing him in the sum of $13 ex- pended by him for that purpose. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec— tion to the consideration of the resolution? ' The Chair hears none, and the Secretary will report the same. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: ' Resolved, That the Auditor of Public Accounts be directed to draw his warrant on the Treasury in favor of Robert Tyler 9 24 COUNTIES. Tuesday,] YOUNG—ALLEN. [September 30 - Sergeant-at-Arms, for the sum of $13.38 for expenses incurred by him under the order of the Convention in going to Wash- ington county, Kentucky, to serve on W. F. Booker a subprena duces tecu'm for the poll-‘books of Washington county, to be used by the Committee in the contested election case of McChord vs. Lewis. The resolution being put to the House, was declared adopted. The PRESIDENT. That matter hav- ing been disposed of, the time for the con-‘ sideration of the special order has arrrived. The President designated the Delegate from Shelby county,‘ Mr. Beckham, as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. YOUNG. When the Report of the Committee on Municipalities was presented, several amendments were offered. These matters have been considered by the Com- mittee, and the Committee stands by its original report. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will please read the report. The Reading Clerk read the report, as fol- lows: Counties. SEC. 1. No new county shall be formed or established by the General Assembly which will reduce the county or counties, or either of them, from which it shall be taken, to less contents than four hundred square miles, nor shall any county be formed of less contents; nor shall any line thereof pass within less than ten miles of any county seat of the county or counties proposed to be divided. SEC. 2. No county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, without submitting the question to a vote of the people of the county, nor unless the ma- jority of all the legal voters of the county ‘voting on the question shall vote for the same. SEC. 3. There shall be no territory stricken irom any county unless a majority of the voters living in such territory shall petition for such division. But the portion so stricken off and added to another county, or formed in whole or in part into a new‘ county, shall be holden for, and obliged to pay its proportion of the bonded indebted-- ness of the county from which it has been taken. Amendment offered by Mr. Straus: Provided, That nothing contained herein shall prevent the Legisltaure from abolish-~ ing any county or counties. Amendment offered by Mr. Bullitt: Resolved, That the amendment to the Constitution proposed by the Committee- on Municipalities, relating to new counties, be amended as follows: And that the county seat of no county as now, or may hereafter be established, shall be moved except upon a vote of two-thirds of those‘. voting. Amendment offered by Mr. Kennedy: Nor shall any new county be established which will reduce any county to less than fifteen thousand inhabitants; nor shall any county be formed containing a less popu» lation. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I offer an amend-- ment. The amendment was read by the Read- ing Clerk, as follows: Amend first section by striking out the word “ contents,” wherever it appears, and insert the word “ area ” in lieu thereof. Mr. BRENTS. I offer an amendment.. The amendment was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows : - Amend by substituting the following for- section 2: N 0 county shall be divided, or‘ have any part stricken therefrom, without first submitting the question to the voters- of the part proposed to be stricken, nor un-- less three-fourths of the legal voters of said part shall vote in favor of the proposition. Mr. YOUNG. I trust the Convention will pardon me for naming some of the sug.-- gestions which induced the Committee on Municipalities to report these provisions 1 Kentucky now has 119 counties of extraordi~ nary size, some of them, almost all of them, with extraordinary shapes. They have been made not so much for public conven- ience, but oftener to gratify in a name the political ambition of some distinguished COUNTIES. 25 Tuesday,] YOUNG. September 30. citizen, or to encourage the enterprise of somezland owner in laying out a county seat, Of these 149 counties, only 43 are self- supporting. 76 of these municipal organ- isms pay less into the State Treasury than they take out. Nine counties of the State, viz., Bourbon, Campbell, Fayette, Jefferson, Kenton, Mason, Scott, Shelby and Wood- ford, pay 80 per cent. of the netprevenue which goes into the State Treasury. Eight oounties contain less than 100,000 acres, less than 154 square miles, or less than 12% miles square. 36 counties contain less than 150,000 acres, less than 234 square miles, or lessthan 15% miles square. With 119 coun- ties the average acreage is 213,000, or 336 square miles, or 18% miles square. In 1849, when our present Constitution was made, Kentucky had 100 counties, and I think it is now the unanimous opinion of all the people of our State that this matter has gone far enough, and that no new coun- ties should be made unless under the most stringent public necessity. The trend of public opinion in Kentucky is towards a re- duction of this number, if it were possible. Comparisons are sometimes valuable. I do not think, because other States pursue a particular line of policy, it is necessary al- ways for us to do so; but it may assist us in the discussion of this question to see what has been the action of other States. Illinois has 56,000 square miles in round numbers; it has 102 counties, and her pop- ulation in 1880 was substantially twice that of Kentucky. Indiana, with 36,000 square miles, 4,000 less than Kentucky, has 84 counties, and a population of 1,978,000. New York, with 49,000 square miles, has only 67 counties, with a population of 5,000,000. Iowa, with 56,000 square miles, has only 100 counties, with a population the same as Kentucky, Missouri, with 69,000 square miles, has 116 counties, and her population is 400,000 more than Ken- tucky. Pennsylvania, with 45,000 square miles, has only 67 counties. Ohio, with 41,000 square miles, has 92 counties, and a. population three times more than Ken- tucky. Tennessee, with 42,000 square miles, has 96 counties, and Texas, with 265,000 square miles, with organized and unorganized counties, has only 146 coun- ties. The Committee is unanimously of the opinion thatdl400 square miles should be the smallest area entitled to a separate organi- zation. We have consulted the provisions of other States, and, after looking over the whole situation, the Committee believe that the provisions proposed cover the entire‘ ground. A county gerrymander or im- proper dismemberment is impossible under the restrictions now offered. The Commit— tee have also considered the question whether it would be feasible to suggest a pro- vision for a reduction of the number of exist-- ing counties; but they hardly felt it would be wise to do so, as it might create antag- onism; and although the time may come when it will be necessary'to abolish a county or counties, and unite them to counties adjoining; yet, as it seems to be- unanimously conceded that there will be an open clause in our Constitution under which amendments to the Constitution may be submitted at anytime to the people, the Committeeh have left this matter to be gov-- erned by amendments when the exigencies. of the State call for such action. These figures and facts are not to be con- sidered as reflecting in any way upon coun- ties which do not pay a sum into the State Treasury equal . to that which they draw out. These matters have been brought. about by circumstances beyond our control- In a short time in the future this condition of affairs may change, and we can new deal only with general principles for the wise and economical government of the State. Twenty-nine, or nearly one-fourth, of the counties in the State have no railway communication for opening up and develop- ing their resources, and these contain three- fourths of the mineral and timber wealth. 26 COUNTIES. Tuesday,] YoUxe. [September 30 _ of the State, and cover that territory in our State which, in the next twenty years, will be the source and seat of Kentucky’s greatest wealth. The erection of new coun- ties has been a great evil, and the abuse by the law-making power of the right to ‘create new counties has been flagrant and outrageous. If this practice shall now be stopped and proper restrictions thrown around this subject, the present counties in a decade will multipiy in wealth and population and product, and remove this anomalous and unjust condition of political affairs in which forty-three counties pay all the expenses of government. The amendment suggested by the gentle- man from Nicholas provided 300 square miles as a proper area for a county; but the Committee, after looking over the areas of all the counties in the State, saw only three or four cases in which the creation of a new county could be a necessity at all, and vthat not within a period with which this Convention may trouble itself. Limiting the population of any ‘new county to 10,000 will prevent, in the ordinary course -of human events, the erection of another new county in this State for fifteen years; and we have thought it unnecessary to deal with this question now. That conditions may exist, that changes may occur that will render this necessary, we are not pre- pared to say; but with the right on the part of the people of the State to amend their Constitution whenever in their judgment the emergency arises, we have reported this provision, believing that it covers all the ground necessary for such provision to cover at this time. Mr. STRAUS. I am not sure that the Committee investigated the question as to the power of the Legislature, under the present Constitution, in reference to abol- ishing counties. I do not understandthat it did so from the remarks made by the Chair- man of the Committee. Quite a number of lawyers of the State have doubted the power of the Legislature to abolish a county. The question has been investigated before quite a number of Legislative Committees, but I have never seen any definite report upon the subject. I believe the power now exists in the organic law of the State to abolish a county, and while I am not sure that the language contained in the pro- posed section from the Committee clearly takes away that power, it might be con- strued as doing so. I am satisfied that that power—-a wholesome power—should be left with the Legislature. It may not be exer- cised. It will rarely, if ever, be exercised; but a state of affairs may arise in certain sections of this State that may call for the exercise of the power. It may be necessary to use or exercise the power in order to suppress lawlessness in certain sections of this State. I am certain it would be a heroic remedy; but, perhaps, would not be exercised once in twenty-five years, and maybe never at all; but it maybe absolutely necessary at some time or another to exer- cise that power. I know the question was brought before the Legislature of 1885-’86 and was submitted to the Committee on Circuit Courts, whether or not we should abolish Rowan county in this State because of the lawlessistate of affairs in that county. The question was fully investigated, and many of the good people of Rowan county came to this Capital and went before that Committee and pledged themselves that if we did not destroy their county, that they would secure law and order in that county. And it was a close vote in the House whether or not we would abolish that county, most of the members concluding that we had the power to do so; but it was not abolished. But I am satisfied the effort to abolish it produced good results in that county, and it may be necessary again, in the future, to do so. Other reasons may exist why we should abolish a county. Certain sections in this State now rely alone upon mining for support, and emi- gration from one point to another in certain sections of this State may almost leave a COUNTIES. 27 Tuesday-‘,1 YOUNG. [September 30 . county, as now organized, depopulated; and it may become necessary for that reason for the Legislature to exercise, the power of abolishing a county; And there should be no doubt left in the new organic law as to that power. If it is the sense of the Conven- tion that that power is a dangerous one, and should not be left with the Legislature, let us say so plainly; but if it is the sense of the Convention that that power is a wholesome one, and should be left with the Legislative Department of the Government, let us say so in plain language, so that there can not be litigation nor any trouble about the con— struction of the new Constitution upon that point. I believe that it is a wholesome power of discipline. While we may never exercise it, yet we can say to certain sec- tions in the state: “ You must maintain order; you must suppress crime; you must preserve order and peace within your juris- diction ; or if you continue in a state of lawlessness so long as to become a constant menace to the State, we will exercise the great power of abolishing your county.” I believe it will have a wholesome influence upon certain sections of this State in secur- ing order and obedience to law. However, I repeat, let us have no doubt about this power in the new organic law. If it is a dangerous power, say so. If you believe it to be a wholesome power, say so, and not leave it to doubtful construction. Mr. BRENTS. I am a member of the Committee on Municipalities, and I concur in the report of the Committee in all re- spects, except one; and I concur with what was said upon this floor by the Chairman of the Committee afew moments ago. Ac- cording to the provisions of the report of the Committee, no new county can be formed or established which will reduce any county to less contents than 400 square miles; nor shall any new county be formed of less contents; nor shall any line thereof pass within less than ten miles of any county seat. The proposition that I object to is this, that the Committee re- port that county lines shall not be changed until a majority of all the voters of the county vote in favor of it. In some instances that may produce great hardship. For instance, there is a portion of a county-in some little nook or corner twenty or twenty-five miles from the county seat. It would be a great hardship, a great incon- venience to them, to attend the county seat. They are unanimous in favor of the line being changed and being transferred to an— other county, where it would be more con- venient to attend the county seat. It may be, and I know one instance where there are, perhaps, fifteen or twenty votes cut off from the county seat by the river. Those people desire, and have made some efforts to be transferred to another county, but they have not succeeded; and now suppose a ma- jority of the voters of a county refuse their assent to relieve those people so situated? It would work a great hardship to them, and it is, to some extent, a denial of local self-government, and denying the people of the right to choose the county in which they will reside. Now power in this State, and in all other States in this Union, is divided into‘ three departments—the Legis- lative, the Executive and the Judicial. It is very important that the balance or the equilibrium of power between these three departments should be kept up. If we judge from the resolutions that have been offered int this Convention, there is danger that the Legislative Department will be so weakened :hat this equilibrium' will be destroyed. The Executive and J u- dicial Departments will become stronger than they are now, and the Legislative Department subordinated to these two other branches of government. It seems to me that the restriction that no county line shall be changed until a majority of the voters of that part proposed to be stricken shall first petition the Legislature, and then the proposition shall be submitted to the voters in that district, or that part, and change shall not then be made until 28 COUNTIES. Tuesday,] DEHAVEN—PHELPS. [September 30’. three-fourths of the people within that part vote in favor of it, is best. According to my amendment, a county line cannot be changed until a majority of the vote in the part proposed to be stricken off petition the Legislature, and then the Legislature must submit that to the people within that particular district, and the vote must _be taken. That will delay the matter until another session of the Legislature, and if those people still insist upon it at that time, the members of the Legislature can duly deliberate and duly consider the mat- ter. It does seem to me that the House and the Senate ought to be trusted to grant the relief to these people who petition for it. That is all I desire to say. Mr. DEHAVEN. I desire to offer an amendment. The amendment was read by the Read- ing Clerk, as follows: Amend by striking out the second sec- tion. Mr. DEHANEN. In my own section of the country I do not think that this provision which is proposed to be inserted in the. Constititution will out much figure But really, I am not well‘ enough ac- quainted with the portion of the State to know exactly how it will operate in those portions of the State. I have risen more for information than for any attempt to make an argument upon the merits of this proposed provision. The amendment that I offer proposes to strike out the second section of the bill. reading the first section of the bill, that in the first place any proposed new county must contain 400 square miles. In the second place, the line shall not pass within less than ten miles of any county seat of the county proposed to be divided. The second sec- tion, “No county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, without sub- mitting the question to a vote of the people of the county; nor unless a majority of all the legal voters in the county voting 011 the It will be perceived, by . * question shall vote for the same.” There- may be portions of this State, and about that I desire some information, in which there is sufficient country to make a. county of 400 square miles. The erection of a new county may not pass within ten miles of any county seat, and still by the- second section you prevent these people- from erecting a new county unless the- proposition is submitted to that county from which it is proposed to strike out a part, which means, in my humble judgment, an absolute denial of any relief at all in that, direction. Because.~ if you submit it to the people of the county that are to be afl'ected by striking off a portion of it, as a matter- ,of course, they will always vote against any portion of it being stricken out; but it may be that there is area enough tha tthe line will‘ run far enough from the county seat ac- cording to these provisions, and still, if a majority of the vote of the county from" which it is proposed to strike off a portion, vote against it, there can be no relief in this: ‘direction at all. I think that we ought to give- them, if they have all the other requisites, the opportunity to form a new county in that portion the State if they desire. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to say that I think the Committee should be con-- gratulated upon the excellent manner in which they have solved this very difficult proposition. I came here wedded firmly to the idea that we should, in so many words, say in the new Constitution: “No new county shall ever, at any time, be formed in this State.” I believe that this growing‘ habit of gerrymandering and changing the- boundaries of counties, and making new counties in honor of the name of some dis-v tinguished citizen, should be checked, be- cause I think, with the Chairman of the Committee, that the limit has at last been reached, and I believe the report of the Committee is even a wiser plan than the one that had occurred to me. I think that the report would as effectually COUNTIES. 29 Tuesday,] McDERMOT—STRAUs—MILLER. [September 30 . cure this evil for the present as would a straight-out provision that no new county should be formed. It does so at least for the present, and leaves the matter at the ‘ same time in the hands of the people for the future. It seems to me that the Com- mittee has stopped just one notch short of where they should have gone, and I think that the amendment offered by the gentle- man from Bullitt supplies the one thing that Committee has overlooked. That is to say, that some power to discipline a county should exist somewhere. There should be in the hands of somebody the power to hold these counties to account for the faithful performance of their duties as municipalities. It may be that there will be some county in the future which will de- cline to elect officers. It may be that there will be some county in the future which will fail to pay its taxeskor collect its taxes; or it may be that there will be some county - in the future which will fail to enforce the laws properly. or to preserve peace and order in the county. In that event I think there should be a clear, unequivocable power somewhere to properly discipline the county by either abolishing the county or otherwise. Therefore, I shall vote for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Bullitt, which, in effect, says by pro- viso that nothing herein shall be so con- strued as to prevent the Legislature from abolishing counties. Mr. McDERMOTT. I offer an amend- ment. The amendment was read by the Read- ing Clerk as follows: Add to the end of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Bullitt'these words: “With or without the petition or consent of the voters of said county. The territoay of the county abolished shall be equitably partitioned among the counties contiguous thereto.” Mr. STRAUS. I accept the amend- ment. ‘ Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I offer an amend- ment. - The amendment was read by the Read- ing Clerk, as follows: Amend by striking from third section, sixth line, all after the word “county” and insert the words So detached, if any there be.” - Mr. W. H. MILLER. I offer an amend- m ent. The amendment was read by the Read- ing Clerk, as follows. N 0 county shall be divided, or have any part separated therefrom, without submit- ting the question to a vote of the people re- siding within the territory proposed to be separated: nor unless a majority of all the legal voters of such territory shall vote for same. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I amendment. The amendment was read by the Read- ofl‘er an _ ing Clerk, as follows: That the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Bullitt be amended by adding thereto the following: When it may be- come manifest to the General Assembly that for a period of two years there shall be such a failure to execute the laws in such county or counties as will, in a reasonable degree, protect life, liberty or property. Mr. KENNEDY. I concur in the main with the report of the Committee on Mu- nicipalities, and I heartily endorse all that was said by the distinguished Chairman of that Committee. The resolution offered by me with reference to the formation of new counties, and referred to that Committee, provided that there should be no new county containing less than 300 square miles. This report makes it 400 square miles, and I am willing to vote for that proposition. Upon investigating what other States have done in reference to the formation of new counties, I find that the following States have provided in their Constitutions that no new county should be formed containing less than 400 square miles, viz.: Pennsylvania, Florida, Missou- ri, Michigan, Maryland, Kansas, Iowa, In- diana, Illinois and Arkansas. I find, also, that that subject was duly considered by these States, in the formation of their Con- stitutions, and that they agreed that no 30 COUNTIES. Tuesday,] KENNEDY—YOUNG. [September 30. new county should be formed containing less than 400 square miles. The other part of my resolution was that no new county should be established which would reduce any county to less than 15,000 indabitants, nor should any new county be formed which contained a less population. My idea for that was this: The fact that a county contains 300 or 400 square miles, not of itself show a sufficient reason for es- tablishing a new county. I find, as was said by the distinguished gentle- man from Louisville that 43 counties only in the State of Kentucky are self-sustain- ing. I would not undertake to say that no county should exist that is not self-sus- taining; but I do think we are poverty stricken with counties. I find upon exam- ination of the Auditor’s report for the year 1885, that there are 31 counties in the State of Kentucky, containing 400 square miles or over. I find that those 31 coun- ties draw out of the State treasury about $160,000 more than they pay in; that only 6 counties out of 31 containing an area of 400 square miles or over are self-sustaining. Therefore, the fact that a county contains so many acres or so many square miles does not make the county ‘self-sustaining. It requires something more than that. It requires a population, and if I understand the object of forming new counties, it is for the purposes of convenience and of local self government. I do not understand that because there is a certain amount of terri- tory with but few people on it that the purposes of local self goverl'nnent will be better established or conserved by the es- tablishment of new counties. My object in the gresolution for requiring that there be 15,000 inhabitants was, that the county when formed might be self-sustaining if possible. I do not understand that any county without Fthis population will be self-sustaining, nor do I understand that a population itself will make a county self-sustaining; but I un- derstand that there must be people in the county to create wealth, and for that reason I offer the resolution. As to the resolution of the gentleman from Bullitt, that nothing contained in the Con- stitution should prevent the Legislature from abolishing any county or counties, I am heartily in favor of it. I thinkit would have a beneficial effect and a healty influ- ence on the counties. Mr. YOUNG. If nobody else desires to discuss this question, I would like to make a few explanations, which I think wil satisfy some gentlemen. No Constitution can be made without some compromises. Half the counties in this State may be called small counties, and if an unlimited power is given to the Legislature to abolish coun- ties at will, you will excite in the minds of the people in these counties a fear that that power may be exercised to their injury. \Ve do not know yet what sort of a Constitu- tion we are going to make, nor should we create antagonisms unnecessarily in the minds of the people who constitute these small counties. We know what Legisla- tive will is. Legislative will in Kentucky has bet-mm.- to be the power and desire of a- single man who represents that county. It is no longer in Kentucky what the whole Legislative body thinks about a matter. By what is known as Legislative courtesy, the man who represents a particular county legislates in all local matters for that county, and the other ninety-nine men in the Legislature vote with him; and it is to meet that very difficulty that the Commit- tee have put the report in the shape that it is. We have no pride of opinion. I think the right to abolish counties is probably a proper one; personally, I think so. Committee did not think so. But it is on the other hand a dangerous power. And with the right to amend the Constitution, if these counties conduct themselves in such a manner that this power ought necessarily be exercised, an amendment can readily be provided in that respect. The State cannot suffer any more in two years than it The , COUNTIES. 31 I Tuesday,] STRAUS—YOUNG. [September 30 - has already suffered from the difficulties which have arisen in these counties. We considered that matter, and we thought it best to leave it just where the report of the Committee leaves it. If in the future the State sees that it is better to change county _ lines and to abolish counties, then that question may be submitted to the people. As to what the Delegate from Oldham has said, it was just to prevent the very things that he suggests that that second provision is made. It is just to say that this legisla- tive will of one man shall not come here and decide for the whole people of the State what shall be done in regard to any one county. We have had gerrymander coun- ties in the State of Kentucky, and I make no reference to any particticular one. Of course that has simply disgraced them. Some man in the corner of a county wants to be a candidate, he gets his mem- ber to go tot-he Legislature and change the county line so he may be eligible for elec- tion to some office in the county the succeed- ing ‘year. General principles always admit of individual hardships. The particular case which the gentleman mentions from Clin- ton, is ahardship; but if, during the last twenty years, these counties have not seen proper to relieve themselves of this hard- ship, when we come now to make an organic law, we cannot make that organic law for- individual cases, but for general applica- tion; and if you submit Mr. STRAUS. I would like to ask the gentleman a question for information. My amendment does not favor gerrymanding in any way, does it‘? ' Mr. YOUNG. I am not speaking of your amendment at all. I think, and the Committee thinks, it is a wise provision; but as to whether it would be well to exer- ciseit now or not, there was doubt in the minds of the Committee, I was answering 'the objection of Judge DeHaven as to what. induced the Committee to take this par— ticular course. Whenever you permit leg- islative courtesy, and permit a single man in the Legislature, to make a law for his county, irrespective of whether it is right or wrong, then you submit that par- ticular power to abuse The PRESIDENT. The hour for ad- journment has arrived. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that the time be extended indefinitely. The motion being seconded, was put to the House and lost. The Convention thereupon adjourned. ggrmvenfinn guard. -—-KENTUCKY-— CONSTITUTIONAL CCDN'V'ENTION- V01. 1. FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 1, 1890. No. 19 Wednesday,] Cox—MONTGOMERY. [Octoberil , The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Darsie. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. . Mr. COX. I ask leave of absence :for the Delegate from Marshall county. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such leave is granted. Mr. ‘MONTGOMERY. The amend- ment which I offered was an amendment to the resolution, or the amendment, of the Delegate from Bullitt, instead of the Dele- gate from Oldham. The PRESIDENT. Is there any cor- rections to the Journal; if not, it stands approved. Petitions are now in order. The Chair will present the petition of Mrs. Mary B.Clay, praying for woman suffrage, and ask that it be referred to the Commit— tee on Elections and Elective Franchises. Are there any other petitions? There being no petitions, the Chair will call for the unfinished report of yesterday, which was a report of the Committee on Munici- palities. Petition read, as follows: WHITEHALL P. 0., Sept. 26, 1890. The undersigned, being one of the sov- ereign people, a tax-paying, law-abiding, white born citizen. prayeth your honorable body to be given, in the new Constitution which you are assembled to frame, my fundamental right of self government; and your petitioner appeals for herself and her sex, one-half the adult people of Ken- tucky, that in ‘the new State givernment we be no longer the :only part 'of the citi- zens discriminated against, and held sub- ject to the will of the black and white men, the other part of the people. Your honorable member, Mr. Brents, reiterates that the fundamental principles of this government (of which Kentucky is a part) are “that all men are created equal, and all just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; that there should be equal and exact justice to all men; that the people are capable of self govern- ment, and have the right to choose their own oflicers; and‘ it is inconsistent and in violation of these fundamental princi- ples to proscribe or exclude any class of citizens,” &c. And the Hon. Mr. Hendrick says: “It is in recognition of a principle as old as liberty itself, that all power resides in the peaple.” ' Believing these gentlemen to mean what clearly their language implies, logically and justly they cannot deny to women —one-half the people, citizens, inhabit- ants of Kentucky—the equal rights of self-government they claim for themselves; the right to make the laws which govern our lives, liberties, and the protection of our property. These rights we are now denied by the Constitution . of 1849, and Kentucky has not a Republican form of government, but is an oligarchy of sex, the white and black men the sov- ere‘gns, women, white and black, the sub. jects; we are governed without our consent, taxed without representation; tried, con- demned and punished withouta. jury of our peers—only disfranchised men are the le- gal peers of women. 2 COUNTIES. Wednesday,] J OHNSTON—AUXIER—CARROLL. [October 1 , Your petitioner appealeth, restore to her and her sex her God-given right to the same liberty that you claim for yourselves, the ballot, being the primary right by which all other rights are protect- ed in a true republic. For this, and our civil, political and religious liberty, your petitioner ever prayeth. Respectfully, MARY B. CLAY, Vice-President Kentucky Equal Rights Association. Mr. JOHNSTON. to offer. The PRESIDENT. Resolutions are not now in order, unless by suspension of the rules. It can be read for information, how- even Resolution read, as follows: I have a resolution WHEREAS, To insure an accurate report of the proceedings of this Convention, it is due to the members and to the Reporter that opporlunity should be given, directly alter the proceedings are bad, to make all neeesary corrections of the proof; and whereas, we are now more than two weeks behind with the printing; and as uncer- tainty and con‘usion may grow out of this state of case. it is Resolved, That the Committee on Print- ing are hereby instructed to take steps to remedy it as soon as possible. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec tion to the present consideration of the res- olution‘? The Chair hears no objection, and the question is on the adoption of the res lution just read. And the vote being taken upon said res- olution, it was declared adopted. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in orderjis unfinished report of the Committee on Municipalities. ‘ Mr. AUXIER. Ihave an amendment, which I ofi'er, to the report of the Com- mittee on Municipalities. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the amendment. ‘The amendment was read by the Read- ing Clerk as fo,lows: then, torE your sense of justice and right, that you 5 Resolved, That the report of. the Com-- mittee 'on Municipalities be amended by striking out of the amendment offered by Mr. Bullitt the words “two-thirds,” and. insert “ a majority.” Mr. STRAUS. I offer an amendment to an amendment. The PRESIDENT. The question will“ be on the first amendment, offered by the Delegate from Bullitt. Mr. CARROLL. Before that amend- ment is voted upon, I desire to submit a few remarks in opposition to it. I am in favor of the report of the Committee as presented by them without any amend- ment being made to it at all, because I be- lieve the report embodies the correct idea. in relation to the formation of new coun- ties; but I am especially opposed to the amendment ofl’ered byqthe Delegate from Bullitt, because that amendment permits- the Legislature of the State to abolish at any time any county in this State. Under the present Constitution, as I understand it, the Legislature has a'right to abolish counties at its pleasure ; but under the re-- port of the Committee, the Legislature will not have that right, unlessthe amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Bullittis adopted. I take it, in the first place, that. there never will be atime in Kentucky when the subdivisions, now known as counties, will not exist; and hence, the only reason for investing the Legislature with the power to abolish counties. is in order that they may7 inflict summary pun- ishment on the people of some particular locality, When the Legislature creates a. subdivision, known as a county, and in- vests the people of it with certain powers, among them the right to impose taxes for the erection of public buildings, for the transaction 'of the business of the county, ar-d the right to build turnpikes and county roads, it seems to me there is an implied contract between the people of the State and that county, and when those people have, with their ownlmeans, built public buildings suitable and necessary to COUNTIES. 3 Wednesday] CARROLL—SMITH. _ [October 1. carry on the business of the county, and, at great expense to themselves, erected bridges across public streams in the, county and built‘ turnpikes and county roads lead- ing to the county seat, the power to render useless those public buildings and worth- less those public highways, and to destroy the utility of the bridges erected, ought not to be vested in the Legislature of the State, Igrant you, that whenever a municipal subdivision is formed, certain reciprocal obligations rest on the people of that terri- tory. Those obligations are to preserve law and order in that community, and discharge such duties as the State may call upon the people of that territory to per- form; but if they fail in these particulars; if there is in that county or territory a law- less faction; if crime and violence prevall in a certain part of it, does that authorize or warrant the Legislature of this State to virtually confiscate the property in which the people of the whole county have in- vested their money for their convenience, benefit and protection‘? The obligations resting on the people of those counties where crime and violence exist, and may continue to exist, for aught I know, are only the same as rest on the people of every portion of this State; and ior any violation of the law, it seems to me the individual ought to be brought to account, and not the people of the entire county punished. It may happen, some time or other, that the Legislature of the State may see proper to say “we will dismember Carroll county, blot out Henry ‘county, divide Gallatin county, and attach part of it to one county and part to anothrr; we will do this without reference to the wishes or desires of the people of those counties.” That arbitrary and unjust'power ought not to be vested ‘in the Legislature of the State, and I trust that this Convention will vote down the amendment offered by the Delegate from Bullitt. It may be true that the Legislature will never exercise this power, that they never have abolished a county and probably never will; but the fact that they have never abolished a county is no argument that they will not do it; and the statement that they will not do it in the future,is a concession of the principle that they ought not do it. The PRESIDENT. There are several amendments pending the amendment ofiered by the Delegate from Bullitt,and, as a matter of course, the question is first upon the amendment to that amendment, which the Secretary will report, so the House can understand which amendment is now pending. , The Reading Clerk read the amendment of Mr. Straus. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment just read. Mr. H. H. SMITH. As a member of the Committee on Municipallt’es, I rise simply to submit a few remarks on the amendment now pending to the amend— ment, as I understand it, from the gentle- man from Bullitt, that is, delegating to the Legislature the power to abolish at any par- ticular time a county that may be desired to be abolished by some member near to, or from the caprices of an ambitious politi- cian. I do not desire to enter at length, into the discussion of this question,~but to submit briefly my objection to the amend- ment ofi‘ered by the Delegate from Louis- ville and the amendment of the Delegate from Bullitt. , He seeks to give to the Legislature the power to abolish any county at any time, notwithstanding the will of the people. If the gentleman had submitted an amend- ment, giving the Legislature the power to abolish that particular county, after a ma- jority of the people of that county had voted for the abolishment of the county, I_ would have favored it. But he seeks to give to the Legislature an authorized power that is extraordinary in the history- of State government. I do not believe- that, in the history of the State in the past,_‘ there has been any necessityhfor abolishing 4 COUNTIES. Wednesday] SMITH—STRAUS. [October 1 . :any county in the State; nor do I believe in the future there will be any necessity for abolishing any particular county; and, as said by the‘ distinguished Delegate from Henry, when counties have built bridges, put up their institutions and all the necessary things for local self-government, there is no reason why power should be delegated to ‘the Legislature, giving it power to abolish that county without the consent of the people. I hope that the Delegate will give a‘ fairer consideration to his amendment than he previously has. To give the Leg- islature that power would be extraordinary. It would even say to the people of the State, “ You are not the judges of your fis- cal afl'airs and social affairs, but it shall be given to the Legislature, which has the abil- ' ity to judge of county organization but the people in the county have no right to judge for themselves." After a county has worked for half a century under the laws of the State, organized perfectly, while it may be a pauper county and not paying as much into the treasury as it is drawing out, be- cause certain of its citizens commit crimes which are derogatory to the State’s welfare, ‘in opposition to progress and social institu- tions, there is no reason that I can see why a part of the best citizens of hat county, I may say five-sixths of the citizens, and generally the property-holders, should have that county abolished, simply because a few men have violated the law, and sought to (defame the name of the county throughout the State. I hope the amendment offered by the Delegate from Louisville will be ‘voted down, as well as that of the very, very (distinguished Delegate from Bullitt. I am ‘certain that giving the Legislature pow- er to abolish a county at any time, without negard to the will of the people of that ‘county, is a violation, not only of the spirit 1:of the Constitution, but the true letter of the people’s rights. I hope both amend- sments will 'be voted down. Mr. STRAUS. ~ It seems to me that the import of‘ the Committee shows a'want of confidence in the Legislature as to forming counties. They are not willing to trust the Legislature with that subject. The- Delegate from Henry is in full accord with that report, and he goes further, and says he is not willing to trust the Legislature with the power to create or to abolish. Then if I understand all these gentlemen together, it is this: That this boddy is ‘ not willing to trust the Legislature with the power to create or to abolish. I do not think that we ought to manifest such a distrust in one of the Departments of Gov- ernment. I do not think that we ought to lodge with the Legislative Department, at least, the power to abolish, conceding that the report of the Committee is right,that no more new counties ought to be formed. I do not know of a single gov- ernment on the earth which has ever sur- rendered the power to abolish any political subdivision that it has created for‘ its own convenience. There is not a State Con- stitution in this Union that has, in terms or by indirection, surrendered the power to abolish any of its municipal divisions created for its own convenience. The power to create political subdivisions or abolish them is a governmental power, which has been held and adhered to by every government on the earth. I chal- lenge the gentleman on the other side of the questien to show me a Constitution in this Union which has ever surrendered that power in any degree. The Legisla- ture of this State to-day can abolish any county. It can take away from the great city of Louisville its charter, or from any town in this Commonwealth its charter; and if you are going to insert into the new organic law this provision, and take away from the Legislature the power to abolish any political subdivision, you had just as well take away the power to revoke any town charter. I‘ say it is a governmental power that has never been vsurrendered and never will be. TheCommittee did not dare to bring into this'Convention-t'he COUNTIES. 5 ‘ ported it? Wednesday,] ALLEN—MOORE. [October 1 I naked proposition that no new county should be formed at all, although the Com- mittee has made an effort to make it almost impossible. Suppose they had brought that naked proposition in the Convention that the Legislature should never have power to disturb the political subdivisions of this Commonwealth in any way what- ever, would this Convention have sup- And still I fully agree with the Committee that it should be made dif- ficult to form new counties. I would never vote for any proposition keeping the Leg islature from forming new counties, nor would I vote for any propcsltion taking from the Legislature the power over politi- cal subdivisions. It is a governmental pow- or which belcngs to every government on earth. Mr. ALLEN. I wish to make a few re- marks on the matter of dismembering or abolishing counties entirely. There are counties in this State deeply in debt. Their bonds are out, and, unfortunately, a few of these counties are in_ very serious trouble about the payment of interest as well as the principal upon those bonds. Suppose the Legislature abolishes one of those coun- ties. Can it be done? Can the law be changed after a contract has been made? It is a very serious question of law. Sup- pose the Legislature should abolish a county in debt, and whose bonds are out. How will the tondholder sue‘? In what Court will he sue‘? You see this is a very serious matter, and it presents a mountain pile of questions of constitutional law These debts have been created when the counties existed as a political subdivision. Take that county and divide it into four parts, and where will the holder of the bond be placed ‘I . How will he sue‘? Where will he sue? Who will be authorized to levy taxes to meet the interest on those bonds? It is a power too great to be given to the Legislature of any State to dis- member a county or abolish it under cir- cumstances like that. And I agree entirely with the Delegate from Henry in his able argument against the amendment ofi'ered by the Delegate from Bullitt. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I suppose all the amendments are subject for discussion, are they not? The PRESIDENT They are. Mr. MOORE. I desire to submit a few remarks on the amendment of the Dele- gate from McCracken. I cannot forego to express the full commendation of the ac. tion of the Committee upon the matters- they have acted upon, but I do not think the report gees quite far enough upon at least one proposition. It will be observed in the first section, fifth line, they have- established a very conservative rule in re- gard to county seats: “Nor shall any line thereof pass within less than ten miles of' any county seat of the county or counties- proprsed to be divided,” That applies, however, only to the counties to be formed hereafter, or those to be divided. I think the amendment of the Delegate from Bul- liet shou'd be made to this report providing that the location of no county seat should be changed, except upon a two-thirds vote. I believe that, from the fact that it i- or e of the most irritating and troublesome ques- tions that we have. Take, for instancathe history of the western States, Kansas and Nevada, and the qurstions of removal of county seats there have produced blood-- st ed and violence. In these times, espe- cially, it seems to me that this Convention should take every means of precaution to- prevent any irritating influences being ex- cited in any of the counties of the State. These propositions to move county seats, as a general thing, do not result from the necessities of the people or the desire of the residents of the county, but proceed from a dispo- sition of greed. Some gentleman has a farm that he desires to sell at a- very high price, and he thinks if he can get the county seat located there, he can divide it into lots, and by that means he can sell e > I v COUNTIES. Wednesday] AXIER—YUoUNc—JoHsoN [October 1 . out at an exorbitant price. He has no con- cern about the citizens of the county. It is only for his especial benefit that he de- sires the removal of the county seat from where ithas been long located. And it seems to me, at this particular time espe- cially, a matter of concern to our people, when this craze of building cities is per- vading the population of this whole country. Towns spring up as if by magic, and some of them go .down in the same way. Take, for instance, the State of Ne- vada. It had an immense population a few years ago, and to-day they have scarcely as much population as some of our Congressional Districts. Many a time in the West, where mining interests made cities, the population, like the Bedouin in the night, folds its tents and hies away. The operations now going on in the mountains of Kentucky and different parts of the State, speculative gentlemen will go and purchase property where they think is a favorable site for a city and sell it out in lots. The gathering population for the time being have endeavored to bring the county seat on their speculative property, and they may have a majority of votes by counting their population gath- ered for the time being and only transi- tory, and with the money they can use for the purpose of getting the county seat 'there and sell their property at high prices. I think it is a conservative rule which should be adopted, and that it should re- quire two-thirds of the population to move the county seat. If there is any great necessity for the removal of the county seat, there can be no question they can get that number; and it will prevent this thing of taking county seats from their present location and putting them where ‘it is a matter of speculation - for the parties who have located these cities. now mostly on paper, but which will probably :have transitory population for a short time.v Mr. AUXIER. I desire to have my amendment read for information. The amendment was again read. Mr. YOUNG. Will the Delegate from Pike allow me to make a suggestion. Mr. AUXIER. Yes, sir. Mr. YOUNG. The county-seat question has been injected into this discussion, and I want to say, as far as the Committee has been concerned, it has been generally con- ceded that special legislation would be inhibited, and among the inhibitions of the Constitution, in endeavoring to prevent special legislation, is this: That a general law shall be passed regulating the removal of county-seats, and the Committee thought it well to leave it to the Leglslas ture, under the general law, to provide in what manner changes in county seats should be made; and if the Convention further along, feels it necessary to put in such inhibition, the Committee on Munici- palities can take such action as will render that unnecessary. But there have been several resolutions ofi'ered suggesting only should be changed by general law, and if the Convention desire it, that matter is before the Committee on Municipalities, and they can bring in a report on that. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment proposed by the Delegate from the Fifth Louisville District to the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Bullitt. . The question being put on the adoption of the amendment to Mr. Straus’ resolu- ' tion, the same was lost. Mr. Montgomery’s amendment was read Mr. J ONSON . I think that some of the Delegates are proceeding from a wrong conception. I heard a gentleman on this floor yesterday referring to the fact that we might provide for the abolishment of a certain county in this Commonwealth be- cause of crime in that section. I heard a gentleman here this morning, and this last amendment suggests the idea, that the counties are to be held responsible. Under our present system, it is the State and the State’s oflicers who are to enforce the law COUNTIES. 7 -Wednesday,] J ONSON. [October 1 , “ff .and if there is a failure, it is not in the county oflicers in the first instance, but it .is in the State’s ofiicers. It has been said this extraordinary power has never been exercised in the State of Kentucky, and I believe the reason of that is, that it has not been within the spirit nor the letter of the Constitution that it should have been ‘exercised by the abolishment of a county .in this Commonwealth. Whlle I agree perfectly with the Delegate from Henry in his argument, I go further, and I believe "that when a county has been formed by legislative act, and when they have been erecting county buildings, that they have ratified a contract; and I believe that it is a contract in all the essential particulars applying to contracts. Gentlemen will recollect that in a celebrated college char- ter, the highe-t court known to this or any other people in the world, the Supreme ‘Court of the United States, held it was a contract. Is an institution -of learning, a great college for the in- struction for the young of our country, to be more sacred than the charter of a -county? I believe not. Whether it is a contract or not, I believe if gentlemen will bring this opinion- home to them, and take ‘their imagination from the Rowan counties -of this State, or the mountain counties, where it is not my ox which is gored, but yours, they will come to the conclusion ‘that perhaps it may be their county which may be dismembered, there will be a ~~change of sentiment on this subject. I am not a pessimist nor an optimist, and I don’t concur with the gentlemen when "they express opinion that crime will be- come rife in this State of ours. I believe i we are on the high road to progress, intel- ~'ligence and evolution in a better direction 5 and I believe that the unfortunate feuds which have for some time marred the good name of our {State, have been suppressed; :and I believe their occurrence will no more be a matter of history in this Com- rmonwealth of ours. Whether that be true or not, I say this is a dangerous power to confer upon any Legislature. or upon any body. I recollect to have read somewhere of a partition of a little State in Europe. The stronger powers, desiring to get into their clutches the State and territory gov- erned by Poland, did partition it out, and from one of the fairest portions of that great continent, it has become practically a desert. Bloodshed and oppression have reigned there, and reign there to-day ; and as long as there are such persons in that country as Kossuth, I imagine rebellion will be rife. And I believe if I.were in Poland to-day, I would be in rebellion against the government holding that part of the land owned by my forefathers. I believe, if the Legislature of Kentucky were trying to partition my county, I would be opposed to it. I am opposed to the proposi'ion in all its particulars. If the gentle man’s proposition is correct, that this ptiwer has never been yie‘ded by any State, there is no necessity of attaching his amendment. If that power exists in the present Constitution of Kentucky—but I believe it does not--then it would exist under the sections offered by the Commit- tee. , I hope that it will be voted down. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Adair. The Secretary will please re- port the amendment, in order to call the at- tention of the members to what they are voting for. The Reading Clerk re-read the amend- ment offered by Mr. Montgomery. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment just read. And the question being taken thereon, said amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Read the next amendment to the amendment No. 1. There being no other amendment, the question recurs upon the adoption of amendment No. 1. 8 COUNTIES. Wednesday,] STRAUS—MCELROY—BURNAM. [October 1. Mr. STRAUS. Mr. President, this is a i can conceive of no wrong which would be very important question, and I desire to call the yeas and nays upon it. The PRESIDENT, Who seconds the call ? Mr. MCELRO Y. Let us have the amend- ment reported. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Straus. The PRESIDENT. Who seconds the call for the yeas and nays? Mr. FUNK. I second the call. Mr. BURNAM. Mr. President, I un- derstand that the difl’erence between the authority of the Congress of the United States and of the Legislatures of the States is this: No power can be exercised by the Congress of the United States except by authority delegated to them by the Consti- tution. No power can be withheld from the Legislature except by express provis- ion given. Now, I have no doubt myself, in view of that principle of law, that the Legislature of Kentucky has the right to abolish a county, and I can not see the necessity for adding to the report of the Committee the proposition which the gentleman from the county of Bullitt I believe, has submitted. (Reads) That “nothing contained herein shall prevent the Legislature from abolishing any county or counties.” Now, sir, it has never hap- pened that a county has been abolished. The argument that has been suggested over the way, however, that this should not be done at any time in the future, because thereby rights would be impinged, strikes me as'not very strong. The gentleman has said that in pursuance of the authority to establish new counties, large means have been expended in the way of building schools, bridges and other improvements. They would still remain for the comfort and convenience of the people, if the por- tions of the county were attached to those, from which they were originally taken. I done in that state of case, and I can concive- of no good reason why the power should rest in the Legislature of Kentucky to do- away with counties. Now, sir, it has not been very far back in the past (I think it was in one of the counties above us) that no- man could be induced to hold the office of ' Sherifl“. The people were in such a condi-- tion, oppressed with debt, that when execu- tions came they could not be collected; when. levies were imposed by the fiscal court of the- county they could not be collected, because the people were impoverished, and it could not be done. Now, sir another thing; the‘ gentleman who is behind me suggested that a great wrong would be done, possibly,. in the ca=e where a bonded debt overhung- the county, and that grave constitutional questions would arise in the attempt to- collect such debts. My understanding is, that when suit has been brought in the- United States District Court at Louisville by bond-holders against the county, that (if I recollect the ruling of the distin-~ guished Judge Baxter), the judgment could be levied upon the individual citizen living within the boundary of the county, that he might make one- or more citizens pay the debt. When I first announced myself as a can- didate fir the Constitutional Convention from Madison county, I called the atten» tion of the people to the fact that certain- ly a wrong had been done us by the- formation of new counties. and I think if there was any proposition, upon which there was gcneral unanimity, without dis» tinction as to parties,it was that no new coun- ty should be made in the future, and, that, if" possible, the right of the Legislature to re- duce the number of counties should remain intact ; and I am still satisfied that this thing of the creation of counties has come- from a period far back in the past. I think it began originally with a struggle- to create the county of Boyle. There was a conflict between the two beautiful towns COUNTIES. ' 9*- Wednesday,] of Harrodshurg and Danville. Year after year there was an effort madeto change the seat of justice from one town to the other; and, failing to do that, and in order to get clear of this trouble, just as it is said the woman married the, man in order to get clear of him, the Legislature of Kentucky created the County of Boyle, locating the seat at justice at Danville. A county was created whose torder on one side was not three miles from the county seat, and the other boundary was some ten or twelve miles away. I think that was the begin- ning of this struggle that has been made to create additional counties. I think that there is no necessity for the adoption ofthis amendment proposed by the gentleman from the county of Bu-litt. I think he weakens his case by his argument upon it. Mr. STRAUS. I would like to ask the gentleman a question, if he will permit me. The PRESIDENT. There is a special order for this hour. Mr. CARROLL. I move to postpone the special order until the subject before the House has been disposed of. And the question being taken upon said motion, the same was adopted. Mr. STRAUS. I would like to ask the gentleman one question. Do you think that the new provision reported by the Committee takes away the power of the Legislature in that respect? . Mr. BURNAM. I do not. I do not think that the power of the Legislature is taken away except where an express pro- vision taking it away is found in the Con- stitution itself. Unless that provision is found, it does not cease. ~ Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. President, I did not intend to say any thing on the sub- ject, but I want to ask the gentleman from Madison—I want to call his attention to the report of tt e Committee-but it seems that he has taken his seat, so I will call the . ' tention of the House to that report. The see 'id section of the report provides that STRAUs—CARRoLLéBUBNAM. [October 1 . “no county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, without submitting- the question “to the vote of the people of‘ the county, nor unless the majority of all‘ the legal voters of the county voting on the question shall vote for the same.” It the Legislature has the power to abolish a county, of course there must accompany that. the right to apportion that county that is abolished to the adjacent counties. There‘ fore, it would be dividing counties unless. you assign the whole of it to one county, and if you did, it would come within this provision. The report of the Committee prohibits the apportionment, therefore it prohibits the abolishing of a county except. upon the vote of the people of that which, you propose to apportion and abolish- Does not this necessarily restrict the power‘ of the Legislature ‘2 Does it not say that. you shall not apportion a county without. the vote of a majority of the people, not. only the portion that is to be divided, but in the county that you propose thus to- divide, and of necessity the Legislature- will have taken from it the power to abol- ish a county. Now, if that be a correct statement of the provisions of the report offered by the Committee to this body, is- this body now ready to say that no Legis- lature which hereafter may be convened“ shall have the power to say whethertr not. political subdivision needs no longer to» exist, and shall be apportioned between the- couoties that may adjoin it? There is a. principle underlying that which I cling to with a tenacity that I do not intend at any- time shall be shaken. I am unwilling to- assume, however much respect I may- have for this body, that it is the- only body that has ever assembled: in Kentucky capable of representing the will of the great people of the State. We may be experienced, we may be intel- ligent, butI am unwillingv that we shall lay down any rule which shall say that Kentucky can not select, by a vote of its people, a representative body that will ‘10 COUNTIES. '“Wednesdayij idice behind it. % CARROLL—BRONSTON. [October 1 .' “make laws reflecting the will of the people. Are we not assuming here that a Legisla- ‘ture can never be convened that will not trample upon the rights of the people‘? My ‘distinguished friend from the county of Henry has said that it might be worked in- ‘to a machine of political oppression. Mr. President, I am not willing, as a Kentuck- 'a n, to admit that ever, at any time, will there be elected by the people of this great State a body assembled in the Legislature hat can be converted into a machine of po- litical oppression. Mr. CARROLL. It the Delegate will ‘permit me, I desire to correct the gentle- "man, because I hardly think I used the ‘words “political machine” or “political oppression” in the few remarks which I submitted. Mr. BRONSTON. I am very glad to "understand from the Delegate that that was :not the meaning of his remarks. I can ‘plac l no other construction upon it except ‘that that was the ultimate end to which his xemarks lead. What was the position that ‘was taken? It was this: That when you ‘form a county, and the citizens in that particular boundary expend ,their means for the erection of public build- ;ings, for the building of" turnpikes and of public roads, and the time comes when Kentucky, not a Representative here or a Representative there, but when Kentucky as a whole, concludes that that particular ‘political subdivision has ceased to perform "its part of the work of this great machine, “and says that she desires it to be subdivided .and apportioned, that great wrong will "result. Now, that could never come about unless it was from a political sentiment, :according to the suggestion made, because “hardship will never be worked upon any people unless there was passion or preju- But how could that arise ? ‘Why the turnpikes and the roads would _ still be there for the enjoyment of the peo- ple. ‘They would simply concentrate themselves at other county seats, where the demands of the great people of the Com- monwealth would be met for the enforce- ment of its laws, and the advancement of its progress, and the money expended would not be wasted. The farmer who’ has had built in front of his place the turn- pike road would still be able to enjoy it, and the value of his property would be enhanced by its nearness to it. The one who lived on the public? road which had been improved would still enjoy the bene- fit, but at the same time, not only would he enjoy the benefit, but his property would be enhanced from the fact that the laws, which theretofore had grown lax and could not be enforced, could be there- after enforced by blotting out that subdi- vision which had not performed its duly to the government of the State of Kentucky. Now, as I said before, there is a principle which underlies this whole subject that I cling to, and that is, that we are divided into three parts, the executive, the judicial 'and the legislative; and there ought to be deeply implanted in the bosom of every Delegate upon this floor, a determination to preserve those three departments of the Government absolutely intact. We ought not trench upon either of them by the. assumption that that particular depart- ment will not and can not discharge its duty. I do not believe that it is for us to undertake to conduct the legislative de- partment of this Government, and es- pecially to say that we do not believe they will be honest enough to do their duty, or that they will have intelligence enough to understand what that duty is. I am will- ing that the Committee shall prescribe these rules, which will make it hard for the Legislature to create new counties. Under the operation of the preset Constitution, whilst the Legislature had the right to make new counties, I might say, the almost unrestrained right, only nineteen coun- ties have been created within forty years; and you have no right to an- ticipate that for the next forty years, COUNTIES. 11 Wedn esday,] BRONSTON—AUXIER. [October 1 , v——-—* if the Legislature has the same un- restrained right, there would be more than nineteen additional counties created. 'But I am willing that these retrictions should be placed around the Legislature "in the formation of counties, and I beg of ‘the Delegates here present that you do not sav that the Legislature shall not have ‘the power to abolish counties. It is not a ‘power derived by construction, but a power conferred by express language as the rep- resentatives of the people of the Common- wealth of Kentucky. If the time should arrive when, by reason of emigration or by reason of demoralization, a county has ceased to perform its functions to the gov- ernment, and has become, as it were, a stain upon its fabric, the Legislature should have the power of apportioning it out, and expressing the will of the people. I have great confidence in the will of the people of Kentucky. I am not one of those who will ‘stand here and say that the Legislatures of Kentucky in the past have been a dis- credit. I deny it, and I defy any gentle- man to point us to any general measure, I mean by that a general law, which has not been the result of wisdom and of prudence, and has reflected not only to the welfare of Kentucky, but has reflected its honor. Local legislation, where the members have been subjected to appeals and entreaties, has grown to an alarming extent. I be- lieve that for the good of the legislators as well as the people, that that should be wiped out, but I no not, for my part, believe that Kentucky has been impeded in her progress by any legislation passed. Then let us be cautious when we undertake to say that the people shall not, through their Representatives, abolish a county, if they find in their wisdom and experience that "it ought to be done. For these reasons, Mr. President, I shall support the amend- ment ofl’ered by the gentleman from Bullitt. ‘Mr. AUXIER. I agree with the Dele- gate from Lexington as to what are three great co-ordinate departments of our State Government. I claim that this Conven- tion has the right to contract and limit the rights of either one of those departments, and as to the abolishment of a county, I insist that the power to create does not necessarily imply'the power to annihilate and destroy. It is too much like the un- natural mother who commits infanticide upon her own offspring. Certain vested rights are always given and acted upon in the creation of counties, and when the State once creates a county, I would be 10th to give any Legislature the power to destroy that county. But upon the other question involved I wish to address myself now, and that is the amendment that I ofl‘ered in reference 'to the removal of county seats. The worthy Delegate from Boyd insists that before any county seat shall be removed, that there shall be a two- thirds vote of the peop‘e of the county. In that position I think the Delegate is incorrect. If it should require a two-thirds vote to move the county seat in which all the peopleof the county alike are interested, why not carry that prop- osition further, and say that the County Judge and the Sherifl'and the Clerk should be elected by a two-thirds majority. I thought that to-day we were living in a Democratic government, one that recog- nizes the eternal right of the majority to rule. Then why, in these last days of the nineteenth century, shall we go back to a doctrine which requires two-thirds, instead of amajority, to settle our differences and to regulate our affairs, both State and county? The objection made is, that in the settlement of counties and the building of towns a new population may come in and remove the county and the power of the county to one locality. Well, that same objection may be urged upon any other. It may control the vote, the elec- tion of county ofiicers, or any other’ ques- tions that may be proposed and agitated among the people of the county. I, for 12 COUNTIES. "majority. Wednesday,] C LARDY—B ECKHAM. [October 1. one, shall enter my protest against estab- lishing by this body any rule of election, or for the control of our county or State af- fairs, other than that which simply and solely is recognized as a government of the people, by the people, and that by a simple We ought not to recognize that two-thirds of the people of the county can settle the question of the county seat, when, at the same time, a majority of one, in this Convention, sett'es any question that may come up before us. We ought, if we establish that doctrine, re quire that no measure should pass this body, unless carried by a vote of two-thirds of the members present. If we adopt or advocate a rule which requires atwo-thirds vote on any proposition, let us be generous enough to carry it to every question that may come up, and in every department under our government require a two-thirds majority. There is no way except to recognize the doctrine that the majority shall rule. Mr. CLARDY. Mr. President, it is a fact that this question has been thoroughly discussed. It is not my purpose to pro- long the discussion to any very great length, but it appears to me that there has been in this discussion one point which has not been sufficiently brought out, and that is, that the counties are not charged with the execution of the law in the State of Kentucky, but that that belongs to the Executive Department of the State. It is the prerogative of the Executive Depart- ment of the State to have the laws exe- cuted in all parts of the State of Ken- tucky. It seems to me that it would be un- wise to hold the counties, who, in many re- spects, are certainly impotent, responsible for not executing the laws, when they have not the power to do so. Now, I believe it is a fact that a majority of the people, probably, in every county of the State, are law-abiding, and would like to see the laws'executed. Now, if we adopt this motion, and the Legislature is given that _ opinions upon that question. arbitrary power to abolish any county at will, why they may abolish a county while a large majority of the people are law-abiding, and as good citizens as there‘ are in any‘ other county in the State. Now, I say it is a fact that the law should. be executed in these counties, but who? should do it? Are these quiet, peaceable- citizens in these counties, who are staying at home and attending to their business, to be held responsible? I say it is unreason- able and, in my judgment, entirely unnec' essary to give this arbitrary power to the‘ Legislature. It is the duty, as I said, of‘ the State, where the power rests and where the duty belongs, to execute these laws, and if the State will discharge its duties. and see that the law is executed in these’ counties, there would never be any neces-~ sity for abolishing a ctunty for this cause. Now, it is a fact that will be admitted by most people, that we have too many counties in the State of Kentucky, and I would have no objection to seeing a law like this, that any two or more counties, by the will of their own people, should be consolidated, but not- contrary to their will. I believe when’ these counties are once formed and estab- lished in the State, they have rights which should not arbitrarily be taken away from them. Mr. BECKHAM. Mr. President, before the report of this Committee was made by this Committee I had given but little at-- tention to the matter, but since the report. has been made I have studied with great. care the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Bullitt. I feel quite sure, sir, that if this Convention adopts the report. of the Committee, that it ought also to adopt the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Bullitt. I am quite sure that the Legislature of Kentucky to-day, under the Constitution as it now is, has the power, when the occasion may arise, to abolish a county. There can be no room for two I think the COUNTIES. 13 Wednesday,] BEcKHAaL—BUcK-NER. [October 1 . distinguished Delegate from Madison, if he looks carefully at the second sec'ion of the report of this Committee, will agree with me that, if we adopt the report of the Committee without adopting the amend- ment ofl'ered by the Delegate from Bullitt we would take from the Legislature that power that is now in its hands. Are we ready to do it‘? I do not believe it. I do not share the apprehension made of my friend from Henry. This power has ex- isted and has been in the legislative department of this State for an hun- dred years. I am not one of those who are afraid of the Legislature in the future. Then, if it is true that we take away this power by adopting the re- port of the Committee without this amend- ment, is this Convention ready for it‘? It ‘is clear, I think, that the second section does take away from the Legislature that power. “N 0 county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, with- out submitting the question to a vote of the people of the county.” Can the Legisla- ture destroy, and abolish what it has not the power to divide‘? Is the less power denied to it by the express statement in the Constitution, and does the greater exist by implication? No canon of con- struction under the sun would justify such .-a conclusion as that. I say that I am not afraid to trust the Legislature with this power in the future as it has been trusted in the past. I am not one of those who be- lieve that wisdom will die with this Con- vention. I am rather one of those who be- lieve that the generations to come after ns will be better and wiser than we. I am one of those who believe that the world grows better as it grows older, and that we can safe. ly leave this power with the Legislative De- partment of the State. I shall therefore vote for the amendment offered by the Del- egate from Bullitt. Mr. BECKNER. I submit to the Con- vention this question. Does it believe that .n times of peace and quiet and general safety the Commonwealth would abolish any county in this State? Is it not a fact that the only time the question of removal of county seats has been mooted has been when violence prevailed in some section of the State, and the Legisla- ture has been called upon to exercise its power? Does any one think that, without any disturbance, the Legislature will abolish a county‘? Certainly not. Then should we not say that in times of passion and prejudice the General Assembly shall not have the power to do that which in times of peace and quiet it would not think of doing? We are here to put a limit onthe action of the General Assembly; to pre- scribe that which it ought to do, and forbid- ding that which it ought not to do. I shall vote upon that line all the session. I do not claim this Convention is wiser than all the bodies that may sit in this hall after we are gone; but Ido hope that this Convention, called under the provisions of the Constitu- tion under which we live, for the purpose of putting a limit upon the action of fu- ture Legislatures and doing our duty to that people whom we are here to represent, will do for the people whatever we deem proper and ~ right. This body is here for that purpose, and I do not believe that the General As- sembly should be allowed to punish any section of the State, whether it be a small or large county, by such a proceeding as the distinguished gentleman would authorize. The counties come under the provision of the Constitution providing that no cruel or unusual punishment shall be inflicted. We would be punishing at a sweep the in- nocent as well as the guilty, because in all these counties that have been threatened with dismemberment, there is a majority of good people who would like to see the law enforced. The failure to enforce the laws is the fault of the administration of the af- fairs of the State of Kentucky, whether in the executive, judicial or legislative depart- ment I will not attempt to say. It lies in a great part in the failure of the people to provide those sections of the State with 14 COUNTIES. Wednesday,] BUCKN ER—BULLITT. [October 1,. sufficient educational facilities; for with education given to them, we would elevate their characters and make them respect the law. I am against the proposition to allow the General Assembly to dismember any county in the future. Mr. BUCKNER. I have but a few Words to say on this subject in explanation of the vote I propose to cast._ A good deal has been said in reference to the State, that the failure of the administration of justice in the counties has been because of the inaction of the State. What is the State but as represented in its different depart- ments? We are here attempting to formu- late an organic law which will provide for the execution of justice and the preserva- tion of order throughout the Common- wealth. If we frame a Constitution, we must not do it so it will give too many checks, like that which was formed by the celebrated Frenchman in forming his Con- stitution. There were so many checks thrown around it that the government could not operate at all. We certainly should avoid that error. When we form our Constitution and establish the three separate departments, we should give each one the authority necessary to carry into effect the object indicated by the Constitu- tion. It is eminently proper that there should be a check upon every one of the departments, and especially the Legislative power. Unless there is some restriction, the power of the Legislature will be absolute; therefore,we, representing the sovereignty of the people, expressing the views which they entertain, propose to limit the repre- sentatives of the people hereafter in the proper exercise of their power, so that it will not be harmful to the people. But we must be particular not to cut off all power of action at all. It has been said that the Governor, the Executive of the State, is to blame. If he neglects his duty, he is to blame; but I ask each gentleman in this Convention, how can you ,Executiver exe- cute his powers and see that the laws are enforced except through the instrumentsL given him by the Constitution under the laws? To-day there exists many cases- where your Executive is forbidden to act, because you have not given him the power- The ministerial ofiicers fail to do their duty. What can the Governor do with them, ex- cept through the means chosen by the Leg- islature and the Constitution? You, there-7 fore, should give your Legislature, it seems to me, the power to act in such a way, to frame laws to meet the ends in view. You authorize them to constitute counties, un-< der certain restrictions, if it be necessary to the public welfare, and that is the thing to be considered, not the individual interests- of the locality alone; but if it is necessary to the whole public welfare, and if, in the- jndgment of the Legislature, it is the only means of obtaining justice and preserving order, they should have the power of abol-A ishing or reconstructing or assigning those counties as they please. It is a power which might be absolutely necessary. Take a case which has occurred in some counties where the civil officers have refused to do their duty. The people have refused to elect. The Legislature is met with the proposition, What shall we do? We are forbidden to act. The people themselves refuse to act. What can we do but assign them to some othdr community ? I shall therefore vote for the amendment proposed by the Delegate- from Bullitt. Mr. BULLITT. Mr. President, I fully concur with the gentleman from Lexington, that it is the duty of every department of the government to concede to each of the other departments of the government, to act with intelligence, fidelity and honesty of purpose‘? But what have we to do with that‘? We are here exercising control over each of these different departments. We are here for the purpose of placing such restrictions upon each one of the de- partments in our government as in our soundest judgment may seem proper in the discharge of our duty to our constitu COUNTIES. 15 Wednesday,] BULLITT—WILLIAMS. cuts, to carry out the will and in accord- ance with the liberties of the people and the prosperity of the State. Now, it is a well settled rule of law that the power to create carries with it the power to destroy, and the power to create counties neces- sarily carries with it the power to destroy them, unless the Legislature is restricted by express language. When the Legislature creates counties, those counties ought to stand unless there is some evidence strongly presented that the county ought to be destroyed. Whilst in the creation of ‘a county no man has been induced to invest his capital in procuring the convenience of getting to the county seat, no man has paid taxes to build the county seat, or to aid in the construction of roads and bridges to carry him to the county seat, but after the county has been created and has been established and in working order, nearly every man who is a tax-payer has aided in build- ing up all those conveniences. Large numbers of them have invested their money. in real estate adjacent to the county seat or to some road leading to it. Now the power to destroy that county ought to be, in my judgment, limited. The Legislature ought to have to consult the people that have thus expended their money in thus building up these con— veniences, and before the county seat should be removed‘ from where it has been thus located, the Legislature, or who ever may have the power of removing, ought to be limited in their removal of the county seat. Why, sir, down in my part of the State there were some gentlemen, excellent gentlemen they were, too, who owned a large body of land in one corner of the county, offered to pay $5,000 for the con- struction of a court-house, and give the site to'the county. Not only the money and land for the county site, but they furnished whisky, and where even an act of the Legislature required should have a majority of all the voters of y the. county, they carried it. But those»- gentlemen knew well what effect the whisky would have, and when they got them under’ the influence of the liquor they were in- clined to do something; and so, as they would not let them vote against it, they-- went and voted for it, and transferred the-- county seat to one corner of the coun.ty,. which necessitated, a division of the; county. Now, if these people had been restricted by requiring a two-thirds vote- upon the proposition, it never would have- occurred. remained, and we would have had but one- county, the county of Ballard, one of the- best counties in the State of Kentucky now. liitle counties, but they are both too small_ However, I think they are getting along very well as they are; but still, it would have been so much better to have left it as it. was, and I am sure that a large number o~ people to-day regret that they ever voted to carry the county seat away from Bland-- ville, where it was originally settled. I will, therefore, vote against the resolution offered by the gentleman from Bullitt,. because I feel that the people ought to be» consulted after they have been induced, by the location of the county seat, to invest. their money before the county is abolished or before the county seat is moved. Mr. WILLIAMS. It is not my de-- sire or purpose to prolong this discussion; but no man is ever more willing than I,. when my rights or the rights of my con-- stituents seem to be trampled upon, to raise my voice in their defense. from Bullitt, as I understand his amend- ment, gives to the Legislature the power to- abolish any county when, in its judgement, it is necessary that that county should be- abolished; and the distinguished gentle- man yesterday, in advocating that amend-- ment, related a circumstance which oc- curred not long since in the county of‘ Rowan, as much asto say that that county, on account of the feud which originate (I [October 1 .. The county seat would have- Ballard and Carlisle are both neat. The Delegate- '16 COUNTIES. ~'VVednesdayJ abolish a county. convenience. BURNAM———BIRKHEAD———CARROLL. _- a [October 1 . there, and which was due to only a few men, ought to have been abolished. I am not here to defend the county of Rowan in :saying or intimating that another such feud will at any time arise, but I say God :forbid that such should ever occur, and no one regrets it more than the people of Rowan county; and in that contest in the Legislature the question of abolishing that county came very near carrying, and had it carried, and the county been abol- ished, the good people of that county would have suffered in their rights ~and property on account of the lawlessness of a few. I say that the Legislature, in my judgment, ought to have no more right after a political subdivision has been created in this State, to abolish it, than they would have to create a county under the report of the Committee. I think re- strictions ought to be put around them so, that they would have no right to create or The Congress of the United States, as I believe, had the same ‘right to abolish the State of Virginia on account of the John Brown raid in 1859, or the State of South Carolina on account of its seceding, as the Legislature has to abolish a county on account of lawlessness. After a county has been created, and the people of the county are enjoying their political rights as citizens of that county, it would be unjust to confer the power to take that away from them, inasmuch as they have invested their money in property and real estate in that county, and aided in building its roads and turnpikes for their Therefore, I shall vote against the amendment as offered by the gentleman from Bullitt. The PRESIDENT. Upon that ques- tion the yeas and nays have been demanded. Mr. BURNAM. Mr. President, I wish to make one statement. After an examina- tion of this original report, the idea which‘ was in my mind, and which I think is the correct interpretation of this report, is, that where the request has been made by j the citizens of a county, and the notice re- quired by the statute of sixty days, that then the Legislature should not do that un- less amajority of all the legal voters of the county voted on the question, and that, I think, is the true meaning of that section, if I understand it; but in order to relieve the matter from every possible doubt or un- certainty, if it be the opinion of the gen- tlemen who made this report, and others learned in the law, that a vote of the peo- ple should be taken before the county was abolished, I shall withdraw my objection to the provisions of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Bullitt. Mr. BIRKHEAD. The senior Delegate from Daveiss (Mr. Pettit) was called away yesterday on business. He is not present his morning. I therefore ask leave of ab' sence for him. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such leave is granted. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Bullitt. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to make a single suggestion before that amendment is voted upon. There was a rule of the com- mon law, as it existed centuries ago, which provided that the hundreds should be held responsible for misdeeds or crimes of any of their number, so that if any member of that hundred division committed any offense at all against the law, the whole hundred was held responsible for his conduct. From the time that law was abolished, because unreasonable and unjust, there has never existed in any enlightened and civilized country a law holding responsible innocent people for crimes committed by other per- sons. The argument made by almost every gentleman who has spoken in favor of this amendment is based upon the proposition that a state of lawlessness and crime may some time exist in some portion of'some county, and interfere with the just and proper execution of the law, and hence that county should:be dismembered, its public buildings destroyed, and the traditions as- COUNTIES. 17 . Wednesday,] STTRAUS—GARROLL—BECKHAM' [October 1 . sociated with the creation and growth of the county blotted out. Mr. STR-AUS. Will the gentleman from Henry permit me to ask him a ques— tion‘? Mr. CARROLL. Certainly. Mr. STRAUS. Did not the English Government always have the power to abolish the hundreds? Mr. CARROLL. Unquestionably, and under the law now existing there is no doubt about the power of the Legislature to-abolish any county in the State. Mr. BECKHAH. If that power now exists, if the report of the Committee is adopted without the amendment of the Delegate from Bullitt, will it not be a sur- render of that power‘? ‘ Mr. CARROLL. Unquestionably, in my judgment, and, therefore, I am against the amendment. If the report of the Com- county will be taken away from the Legis- lative Department of the State. But to go back to the suggestion I wish to make, I said that the whole argument offered by the gentlemen who were in favor of this amendment is based upon the proposition that certain sections or neighborhoods may become lawless and violent, and the proper and just administration of the law inter- be blotted out. You make, in other words, deeds‘ and misconduct of certain individ- uals and certain portions of it. You re— which has been abolished for a century, and inflict punishment on hundreds, perhaps thousands of innocent people, for crimes committed by certain individuals. I would single case known in which innocent peo- ple are punished for crimes committed by others, or where any person is punished T unless he was the perpetrator of the crime ‘? M1‘.- STBAUS. The power of abolishing 1 tion. 2 Assembly would punish the hundred .be— 1 cause of the crimes of the few. l I do not believe that this body would do it, and therefore I am not willing to admit ‘ that the Legislature will do it. _ f think it is fair to assume that the Legisla- mittec is adopted, the power to abolish a 3 a county would not depend upon the ideav of punishment, but upon the idea of en- forcing the laws of the State for the benefit of the State, and not upon the idea of pun- f ishment. : involved in it at all. The idea of punishment is not Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. President, I ; simply rose to answer the suggestion in the 5 form of an argument proposed by the Del- ;: egate from Henry. I deny that the prin- ,= ciples now involved are as suggested by ' him. , the hundred shall be responsible for the act It is not the question as to whether of the one. The gentleman begs the ques- He 1s assuming that the General I deny it. I do not ture would be governed by motives as sug- gested by the Delegate from Clark. He 1, made a very eloquent speech upon this ‘ floor that was evidently intended for an- { other subject that had been assigned for to-day; but it fit in very nicely, Mr. Presi- § dent, and it was very ably said, as his 1 speeches always are. ' markable‘statement, that in the past this question had never been agitated except in fered with, and, therefore, the county will , But it is rather a re- times of war; that in times of peace the Legislature would not do it, and in times of the whole county responsible for the mis- ‘ war they ought not be permitted to do it. ; He again begs the question by assuming the 1 very thing to he arrived at. enact the old law relating to the hundred ' That is, that in these times of war, when matters in the mountains of Eastern Kentucky are so much disturbed, this body is better capable of saying what ought to be done than the ' legislative body. I call the attention of like to ask the gentleman if that rule ap- ; plies in any other state of case ?‘ Is there a . i to exercise this right, and would not the gentleman to the fact that even in times of war the Legislature hesitated exercise it. Why? Simply because they were not convinced of the fact that there was a necessity which demanded it. Therefore, if they then refused to do it 18 COUNTIES. Wednesday,] MCHENRY—YOUNG. [October 1 , why do gentlemen assume that they will do it in the future‘? It is the same proposi- tion suggested by both : that we are assuming that this ‘body is wiser and more prudent than the legislative bodies will be in the future, and for this reason I think the amendment ought not to be voted down, but ought to be sustained. Mr. McHENRY. Mr. President, the debate seems to go exclusively on one sub- ject, that the Legislature ought not to tamper with the counties. Now, I think upon that question, sir, we might as well trust the Legislature as ourselves. The Legislature has never abolished a county for that reason. There may be other reasons, and I am very loth to take from the Legislature the power, which I thought she always had, of abolishing a county. Now, take the instance related by the Delegates from the county of McCracken. Here were two counties made out of the county of Ballard. It was a nice county as it was, and situated in a good territory, and had a good population, but for some reason the Legislature hastily cut it in two, and formed the county of Carlisle. I un- derstand that there is a very strong feeling to undo all that, and reconstruct the county of Ballard. In other words, let the Legis- lature have the power, which she ought to have, to repeal the law establishing the county of Carlisle. (To Mr. Young.) Did I understand that, under that report, they could do that? Mr. YOUNG. If they vote for it, they could do it under this. Mr. McHENRY. I thought, under the amendment of the Committee, it would take that power away. Mr. YOUNG. The Legislature would have the right to do it if the county de- sired it, on submitting it to a vote of the people. Mr. McHENRY. The Legislature ought to have this power anyhow. There seems to be a difi'erenc of opinion abou tit. Now, the Legislature has always had this power. w comes absolutely lawless. There was an effort made to do it, it seems, as applicable to the county of Rowan; but The Legislature will be very loth to blot out a county when it has it was not done. simply been so unfortunate as to have some lawlessness within the limits of the county, which cannot be controlled by the good men of the county. If the Legisla- ture has the power to abolish a county, there may be a case where that power will be carried ‘to an extreme, if the county be- I do not mean it as an application to the county of Rowan ; for if I had been in the Legislature, I would not have voted to abolish the county of Rowan, for the reasons that oc- curred to the Legislature, and which were considered by it, and the Legis- lature acted wisely upon the subject. as I think future Legislatures will. There was a county established while I was in the Legislature some years ago called the county of Henrietta. At the next Legis- ' lature, before it was put into operation, the law was repealed. That was under this Constitution. The Legislature made a mistake in establishing this county of Hen- rietta, and before it was put into operation the people saw that the county ought not to be established, and they did not go through the formula of law in order to organize the county, and the next Legisla- ture repealed the law; but according to the construction which gentlemen are placing upon this, if such a thing shall occur again in the future, once having passed the act of incorporation incorporating a county it is eternal, and the Legislature can not go back of the step taken in creating it. Some of the smaller counties may find that their taxes are too heavy, necessary to enable them to carry on a government. They may petition the Legislature to abolish their county rights and to restore them to the counties from which they originally came. It may be to the interests of the Commonwealth and to the people them- selves, and I do not want to restrict the COUNTIES. _ 19 Wednesday,] EDRINGTON—DEHAVFN—LEWIS. [October 1 . Legislature in a case of that sort, to say that when a county has been created or abolished, it is so eternally, and that the Legislature may not have the power to remedy the evil. Mr. EDRINGTON. I desire to correct an impression made upon this Convention by the Delegate from McCracken and the Delegate from Ohio. The county of Bal- lard was divided into two counties, and in- stead of both being anxious to go back into a solid county, there is not one man in ten that would vote to go back into a solid county. They are both more prosperous now than before divided, and I will put my county against any county in the State. We have not a man in the Penitentiary- We have built our public buildings in five years, and are about out of debt. Our jail doors stand open, and we have not a pau- per. Mr. DEHAVEN. I have listened with a great deal of interest to the very able dis- cussion that we have had upon this subject, and it impresses me with the idea that we are discussing as to whether this Conven- tion now shall or shall not abolish a county. I do not understand that to be the question that we are now called upon to determine. The question, as I under- stand it, is as to whether or not, by the adoption of the report of the Committee, we shall take away from the Legislature the power to abolish a county. That I under- stand to be the distinct question. For my own part, I am unwilling to take that away from the Legislature. I do not think that we ought to cripple the Legislature in any instance whatever, unless it has been made apparent to us by experience that that power has been abused. It seems to be conceded on all hands that this second sec- tion of the report of the Committee takes away from the Lgeislature the power to abolish a county. I was impressed with that idea myself, and it was with that view that I moved to strike out the second sec- tion of the report of the Committee. I do not think that we ought to so crip- ple the Legislatures that shall come after us, as to prevent them from exercising that power in a good case. I am satisfied that they would not exercise it unless upon some extraordinary occasion. /It has been in our present Constitution, and in the Constitution before us for 100 years, and has never been exercised. It may occur, however, in the future that it would be highly proper for them to exercise it, and for one, I am in favor of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Bullitt. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. The Bill of Rights in our present Constitution says that abso- lute arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of a freeman exists nowhere in a republic, not even in. the largest major- ity. I submit now the question for the consideration of the Convention, whether or not the abolishment of a county against the will of the majority of the people of that county, and against the will of a majority of the people in the county or counties to which it is to be transferred, or, having been divided into fragments, is to be transferred, would not be an exercise of that absolute arbitrary power over their lives, liberty and property. The people of the county to be abolished are not the only people interested in this question. The peo- ple of the county or counties to which they are to be transferred are equally interested and, when a county is unwilling to perish’ when its people declare that they are un- willing to perish, should the Legislature have cast upon it the power to inflict capital punishment upon that county by destroying it‘? I think not. Upon the other hand, should it have the power to force other counties to receive and harborlawless individuals and criminals who may have afflicted other counties? I think not. In addition to this, many counties are heavily burdened with debt. If these counties are abolished and transferred to other counties, these debts and liabilities are transferred to them also. It may be argued that the 20 n COUNTIES. Wednesdayfl SMITH. [October -1 . law fixes that, and establishes the liability for them when they go to another jurisdic- tion. It is impossible; I don’t care what the law may be or how it may be con- strued, it is utterly impossible for that county or the people of that county to re- lieve themselves of the complications growing out of those questions of debt and liability that may have existed upon the destroyed counties turned over to them. That is another reason why I oppose the amendment ofiered by the gentleman from Bullitt. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Just a single sug- gestion. It was my understanding, and I think it was the understanding of the Com- mittee, that under this section a county is not prohibited from voting and giving the the power to the Legislature to abolish counties. If the majority of the people of the county desire that the county shall be abolished, the Legislature has athat power. The gentleman from Bullitt says it is not for the purpose of punishing the people of the county, but only for the purpose of en- forcing the law of the State. It think that it requires a very fine stretch of scholarship to see the difference between enforcing the law of the State and a punishment to the people in a county. If you enforce the law against some man who has violated the law, you must punish him; but that is irrelevant, and has nothing to do with this question. The real question is whether or not, say out of a population of 15,000 people in one county, because 100 of those people have violated the law, the Leg— islature shall have the power to abolish that county, destroy its institutions, take away the county seat and the form of government locally, destroy the property rights of the , citizens,‘and entailing great loss upon them. -. I am opposed to the amendment of the . gentleman from Bullitt. Mr. HOPKINS. as to , Mr. President, I- had hoped that nothing would be introduced in i the report of the Committee, or in the dis- ' cussion before the Convention, that would bl make me feel it was necessary on my part to say any thing on the subject, but there is a proposition before this Convention for its consideration, which, I think, if adopted in the present Constitution, would ‘be very dangerous, and would bethe cause of great evil and of great danger to the interests of the State. That proposition was intro- duced by the Delegate from Pike in the form of an amendment to the resolution offered by the Delegate ‘from McCracken, and provides that county seats may be moved upon the bare majority of the voters in the county. This I believe is not right. I believe that a proposition of that kind would simply be placing county seats upon the basis of a bargain and sale. There are counties within my personal knowledge in this State where these questions are rife, ' and where the n'iajorities are equally upon either side. Take it that this Convention would adopt that resolution, and place it in the power of the counties to vote upon this question. There is also pending be- fore this Convention a proposition to take from the Legislature the right to pass any local legislation or move a county seat, Now, with the probability that that clause will be engrafted into the new Constitution, where will this power be vested ? Will it not naturally be vested in the County Court‘? Then, if the County Court should at any time in the future see cause to sub- mit such a proposition to the will of the people, where will it end ‘? Take a county where the question is close, and it is submitted to a vote of the people, and is carried by a small majority. How long will it be before the old county seat, which has been lost, will make the same applica- tion to have it returned? Go to the State of Kansas, where these questions have been presented in all their objectionable features. See the riot and bloodshed caused from their existence. Then take our mountain coun- ties; we are branded as a set that are easy to get out of the traces, easy to become ex- cited, and easily» provoked-to violence. If COUNTIES. 21 Wednesday,] PUGH——HANKS. [October 1 . you enact a law like this, it will be condu- cive in its nature to promote these troubles, because no trouble ever creates more bad feeling, ever sinks deeper into the minds of the people, than a local question in a county_ I know it. I have felt the sting of it, al- though I speak now not from any personal stand-point, because the question is settled, and settled beyond all question with me but I speak of it from a stand-point of gen- eral good. The gentleman said that it was an old ‘and well settled doctrine, and a cherished one, that amajority should rule_ That is all right. A majority should rule; but there is another Democratic principle, the greatest good to the greatest number, and this should prevail. Then if there are two sections contending for the boon of a county seat, would it not be better for a majority of both of those sections that that question be settled, and the troubles and dif- ferences between them adjusted, and that they move on to progress peaceably and quietly with their shoulders to the wheel ? Would it not be better for all‘? Why was it that the wise makers of the present Constitution incorporated into 'the old Constitution, under which we have so prosperously and so happily lived for 40 years, a clause that the State Capital should not be removed from Frankfort except by a two-thirds vote of the General Assem- bly‘? Was it that a bare majority was not allowed to prevail in that instance, as it is claimed it should prevail in this instance‘? Because it was for the common good that it should not prevail; that the State Capital or that the county capital should not be disturbed upon petition of a bare majority. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will make a suggestion. It is true that general debate has not been closed, and that we passed an amendment to our rules bywhich these amendments are considered in their order, and as a matter of course, they are liable to debate; still, the Chair thinks it -would-facilitate the proceedings very much if the gentlemendiscuss the amendment that is going to be voted on first. The Chair will give ample time to a discus- sion of the amendments as they are report- edby the Secretary. Mr. PUGH. As this is an important and interesting question, one which‘ should receive consideration commensurate with its importance, I move that its further consid- eration be postponed until 11 o’clock on Tuesday next. I know that there are oth- ers here in my immediate vicinity that would be heard, but through deference for the convenience of others, not wishing to . obtrude themselves upon their time and pa- tience at this late hour, will not speak, and I think it is due to them that a postpone- ment of the question be now ordered. I therefore move that the further considera- tion be postponed until Tuesday next,a t the hour indicated. , ' The motion being put ‘to the House, was defeated. a ' Mr. HANKS. In the discussion of this question much latitude has been taken by the gentlemen in their arguments. Those op- posing the amendment base their argument upon a want of capacity on the part of the members of the Legislature hereafter assem- bled to discharge their duties as Represent- atives of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. There is no other argument that can be made, except that the Legislatures here- after assembled are not competent to make such laws as are necessary to govern the people of Kentucky. There is no other argu- ment that can be made. What other ar- gument has been offered except the want of capacity on the part of Legislatures here- after to- protect the people of Kentucky properly in their rights. I heard * no other. The very able and learned gen- tleman from the county of Boyd has based his argument upon one ' ‘hun- dred bad men doing that which was wrong, which he says would subject the whole county to destruction. Do you sup- pose any Legislature of Kentucky, ‘upon the lawlessness of 100 men, would destroy 22 COUNTIES. Wednesday,] HANKS. [October 1 a county in this Commonwealth? It is to be presumed, at least this Convention will presume, that the intelligence of Legisla- tures that will meet hereafter, if not up to our standard, will be about there. It has been shown clearly in the past that Legis- latures are not very ready to abolish counties. I had the honor of being a member upon this floor a few years ago, when a very lawless county, as has been said, was in Kentucky. It was argued that lawlessness existed in the whole county, and the Legislature in its wisdom—I sup- pose that it was wise in doing so, at least that is my opinion now--refused to abolish the county. And I think a county would have to become exceedingly depraved before the Legislature would abolish it. I think when it will do it, it will have done right. I take it that the Legislator, when he convenes here as a Legislator, will be as wise as the Delegate to this Convention, and will act with equal prudence in the discharge of his duties. I, therefore, think that the Legislative Department of this government should not be hampered any more than any other department‘ of this government. Deprive the Legislative De- partment of the government of the power- to exercise the functions belonging to that branch of the government, and you cripple that arm of the government. I will, therefore, support, with pleasure, the amendment of the gentleman from Bullitt. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment pro_ posed by the Delegate from Bullitt, and upon that the yeas and nays are demanded. The Clerk will call the roll. The result of the vote was as follows: YEAS—48. Allen, C. T. Hines, J. S. Allen, M. K. Jacobs, R. P. Amos, D. C. Johnston, P. P. Applegate Leslie T. Kennedy Hanson Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. B cknam, J. C. Knott, J. Proctor Blackwell, Joseph Lassim, L. W. Lewis, W. W, Bourland, H. R Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Buckner, S. B. Burnam, Curtis F. Martin, W. H. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Chambers. G. D. Miller, W. H. Clay, C. M., Jr. Montgomery, J. F. DeHaven, S. E. Moore, ‘J. H. Doris, W. F. Moore, Laban T. English, Sam. E. Muir, J. W. Farmer, H. H. Petrie, H. G. Field, W. W. Phelps, Zack ' Funk, J. T. Rodes, Robert Glenn, Dudley A. Hanks, 'l‘hos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P.‘ Woolfolk, J. F. NAYS—33. Auxier7 A. J. Forgy, J. M. Ayres, W. W. Hogg, S, P. Beckner, W. M. Holloway, J. W. Bennett, B. F. Hopkins, F. A. Berkele, Wm. James, A. D. Birkhead, B. T. Jonson, Jep. C. Blackburn, James Lewis, J. W. Brents, J. A. Miller, Will. Brummal. J. M. Nunn, T. J. Bullitt, W. G. Pugh, Sam’l J. Carroll, John D. Smith, H. H. Clardy, J. D. West, J. F. Cox. H. Whitaker, Emery Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. i Elmore, T. J. ' Forrester, J. G. Williams, L. P. V. 'Wood, J. M. Young, Bennett H. ABSE err—19.. Boles, S. H. Pettit, Thos. S. Buchanan, Nathan Phelps, J. L. Coke, J. Guthrie Quicksall, J. E. Goebel, William Ramsey, W. R. Sachs, Morris A. Smith, W. Scott. Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George O’Hara, R. H. Twyman, I. W. Parsons, Rob’t T. Washington, George The PRESIDENT. The result of the vote is yeas 48, nays 33. The amendment is adopted, and the Secretary will report the next amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by the Delegate from Pike (Mr. Auxier) to the amendment of the Dele- gate from McCracken (Mr. Bullitt). Mr. AUXIER. I call for the yeas and nays upon that question. Graham, Samuel Hines, Thomas H. Mackoy, W. H. May, John S. COUNTIES. 23 Wednesday,] FUNK—KENNEDY—MILLER. [October 1 , The PRESIDENT. Is there any sec- ond‘? There is no second, and I shall put the question before the House on the adop- tion of the amendment of the Delegate from Pike to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Bullitt. The question being put to the House, the amendment was rejected. ‘ The PRESIDENT. The next question is i on the adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate fram McCracken. Mr. FUNK. I would like to have it read. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Bullitt. The question being put on the adoption of the amendment, a division of the vote was called for, and the President declared the same adopted. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment of the first degree. The READING CLERK. The next amendment was that offered by the Dele- gate from the county of Nicholas, which reads as follows. ‘ The amendment offered by Mr. Kennedy was read, as follows: Nor shall any new county be established which shall reduce any county to less than fifteen thousand inhabitants, nor shall any county be formed containing a less popula- tion. To which amendment the Delegate from Bullitt offered the following amendment: “ Amend by striking out 15,000 and in- serting 10,000.” Mr. KENNEDY. I accept the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Bullitt. The PRESIDENT. The amendment is accepted, and the Clerk will please insert it properly. When inserted, read it as amended. ' The reading Clerk read the amendment as follows: “ Nor shall any new county be established which shall reduce any county to less than 10,000 inhabitants, nor shall any county be formed containing a less population.” The PRESIDENT. The question is on _ the adoption of the amendment just read. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I moveto amend the amendment by striking out 10 and inserting 12. i The question being put to the House on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Lincoln, and a division of the vote being called for, the- President declared the same adopted. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment as amended, which the Secretary will please report. The Reading Clerk read the same, as fol- lows: “ Nor shall any new county be established which shall reduce any county to less than 12,000 inhabitants, nor shall any county be formed containing less population.” Mr. HARRIS. I move to amend by adding to it, after “less population,” the words “ than 10,000.” The PRESIDENT. The gentleman’s amendment is not in order, as that prop- osition has just been voted on, and stricken out of the amendment. Mr. HENDRICK. I rise simply to in- quire whether this amendment is the only amendment pending now to the Committee’s report ? The PRESIDENT. It is the only amendment in reference to that subject. Do you call for a report of the amendment? Mr. HENDRICK. Not at all. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment just read. The question being put.to the House, and a division of the vote being called for, the President declared the same'adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the next amendment. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the amendment offered by the Delegate from Caldwell, as follows: Amend the first section by striking out the Word. “QQntents,” wherever it occurs, 24 CCUN TIES. Wednesday,] AsKEw—ALLEN—BRENTS. [October 1 , and inserting the word “area” in lieu thereof. Mr. ASKEW. I hope that amendment will not prevail. It is a very small matter; but still/when we wrote that report, we gave it some consideration. If there were no other reason why that amendment should not prevail, the various pronuncia- tions of the word “area” heard on this floor should be sufficient to defeat it. It is hypercri‘tical, to say the least, and it is not supported by any dictionary that I know of. The word “contents,” everybody knows what it means when applied to a county. There is no better word. The word “area” or “aria,” is no better. The Century Dictionary has concerning that word “area” this definition: The area or space included in certain limits. When you come to the word “area” or “aria,” whatever you call it, it is this: “Any plain ‘surface within boundaries.” In addition to this, the Committee have no pride of opin- ion, and are not ashamed to tell where they got the language. When the Committee met they read all the resolutions submitted to them, and, under the skillful guidance of the Chairman, they arrived at the propo- sitions they were to discuss, and after they ‘ got on solid ground and agreed on certain things, I told them it was about time to throw off the mass of matter, and that we had better go to the original book; and, so in hunting Constitutions in Poore’s Manual, we found provisions in the Constitution of thu State of Illinois, adopted in 1870, sim- ilar to what we wanted, and wherever that Constitution embraced the ideas that we intended to embrace in the report to this Convention, we adopted it. So, 011 every ground, I am opposed to the adoption of the amendment. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I always thought a county was part of the earth’s surface, and I have always heard the earth’s surface referred to as being of such and such area. The idea suggested to my mind by the word “contents,” was a box or barrel, something like that; and vI think the word “ area” should be adopted. That is the reason I suggested it. 'Whether it is pro- nounced right or wrong, We all know what it means. - The question being taken on the adoption of the amendment, the same was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the next amendment of the first degree, The Reading Clerk read the amendment as follows: Amend by substituting the following for section 2, namely : “ No county shall be di- vided or have any part stricken therefrom without first submitting the question to the legal voters of the part proposed to be stricken, nor unless three-fourths of the legal voters of said part shall vote in favor of the proposition,” which amendment was offered by the Delegate from Clinton. Mr. BRENTS. Before a vote is taken on that amendment, I wish to call the atten- tion of the Delegates to the fact that this amendment does not interfere with the first section, which proposes to restrict the for- mation of new counties; but it goes to the question of arranging or making changes in the lines between two counties. The proposition of the Committee is, that the question must be submitted to the people of the whole county, and a majority of the legal voters shall vote in favor of it. My amendment proposes that the question shall be submitted to the people in the ter- ritory proposed to be stricken, and no changes of line shall be made unless three- fourths of the legal voters in that terri- tory vote in favor of it. That is the ef- fect of this amendment‘? I wish to call the attention of the Delegates to this matter: First, a majority of the people in the ter- ritory proposed to be stricken must petition the Legislature. Second, the Legislature must submit this proposition to the people in the territory proposed to be stricken, and three-fourths vote in favor‘ of it; then it goes back to the Legislature. The peopl COUNTIES. 25 'W'ednesdayg] HARRIS. [October 1 , of the county have a Representative in that Legislature as their advocate. The people in the district proposed to be stricken have no advocate in the Legislature. The other members of the Legislature take the mat- ter under consideration as unprejudiced and unbiased representatives of the peo- ple, and I believe that the wisdom and the honesty and the fairness of those Represent- atives would do right between the people of the county and the people in the part proposed to be stricken. I am not in favor of taking that power from the Legislature of the State. Mr. HARRIS. I concur with what the gentleman has said, except I do not think he has gone far enough. He says it has no reference to the creation of new counties. I admit the evils under which we have been living for the last forty years, growing out of the loose way in which we have created new coun- ties; and I am much inclined to think that those evils are going to drive us to the other extreme. The first section throws limitations around the Legislature—three very important limitations. It provides, first, no county shall be formed or estab- lished by the General Assembly which shall reduce the county or counties, or either of them from which it shall be taken, to less area than 400 square miles. That is one limitation. Nor shall any county be formed of less area. That is another limitation upon the power of the Legislature. Nor shall any line thereof pass within less than ten miles of any county seat of the county or counties pr.o- posed to be divided. This is a third limit- ation, and taking all together, it seems to me that those three constitute a suflicient check upon the power of the Legislature; and these are physical facts over which the citizens have no control. The next section provides that no county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, without submitting the question to a vote of the ' people of the county. How can new coun- ies be created? My county that I have the honor to represent was created by striking out a portion of three counties. I have been informed that there are some citizens in this State who have to go sixty miles to their county seats. If this rule prevails when the population becomes dense enough, and the people are wealthy enough to perform the functions of a county, what obstacle will this second section oppose to them‘? It may be, and doubtless will be, necessary in the creation of any county, to take a part or parcel off to make three or four counties. I can very readily conceive a case where, on account of the distance to a county seat, the people ought to be allowed to form a new county, and that county come up to the size required in this first section. But before they can do that under the second section, the question will have to be submitted to perhaps four different counties, and the question will have to carry in all of those four counties. It seems to me the limitations fixed in the first section are sufficient to keep the Leg- islature from doing any thing wrong about it; and if you adopt the second section as the Committee have reported it, it seems to‘ me practically to amount to an inhibition; that there shall be no further and no more: counties, and if that is the will 0‘ the Con-- vention, state it plainly. There is no use deluding the public with this idea that a new county may possibly be created when the conditions and requisites are such that they can never be complied with. submit the proposition to the people of a county as to whether or not a part of their county shall be cut off and form another county, and let it be conditioned upon the majority of votes in that county, and it will not carry. They will be opposed to it, and one county, in that event, could frustrate the happiness and prosperity and convenience of an- other section entirely; and therefore I shall indorse and vote for the amendment of the gentleman who has just made that motion, except I would rather he would make it two-thirds instead of three-fourths, 26 COUNTIES. ‘general consent. ' Convention. -will be ‘and if so, I VVQdnQ-Sday’] McHExRY—MooRE—McELRoY. [October 1 , and I have prepared an amendment to that efi'ect. ThePRESIDENT. The gentleman will please send up his amendment. Mr. McHENRY. Is it not in order to move to postpone the further consideration of this subject, as we will not get through by the adjourning hour ‘? The PRESIDENT. That is in order. Mr. McHENRY. I make that motion. The PRESIDENT. You make the mo- tion to postpone to what time? Mr. McHENRY. Until the subject is taken up again regularly. It has pre- cedence, I suppose, and will goin the Orders of the Day. The PRESIDENT. It came up as an unfinished report of the Committee. That is the ,way it came up this morning; but if you postpone it, it puts it out of that order. Mr. McHENRY. I move to adjourn until Monday morning at 11 o’clock. I want to say a word upon that subject by I understand from talk- ing to the stenographer and others, that the Printer will catch up by Monday, if we give him this time. We are not going to do any thing here on Friday or Saturday. I don’t think there will be hardly a quo- rum. I voted against adjourning over to- morrow for the reason that I have always been opposed to junketing. I am not making a record here in my old age, and I do not care what sort of a record I make if I do well; but I never did vote for one in my life, and never would go upon them. Away back there, thirty or forty years ago, in the Legislature, I voted against them, .and am going to vote against them‘in this It is the last legislative body I expect to be a member of. I suppose we invited to go to Lexington; rather think a majority of us will vote to go to Lexington. I shall vote against it. I say this in explan- ation of my vote yesterday; but I think it is the interest of all of us here to adjourn until that time, because many of us are go- ing home. I am going home unless the Sheriff attaches me, and I don’t expect to be back until Monday. I therefore move that this House do now adjourn, to meet again at 11 o’clock on Monday morning. Mr. MOORE. I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. McELROY. I second it. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will call the roll. The result of the vote was as follows: YEAS—IQ. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Lewis, J. W. Berkele, Wm. Martin, W. H. Brummal, J. M. McHenry, H. D. Buckner, S. B. Moore, J. H. Field, W. W. Nunn, T. J. Hines, Thomas A. Quicksall, J. E. Hogg, S. P. Smith, H. Jacobs, R. P. Spalding, I. A. James, A. D. NAYS—61. Allen, C. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Amos, D. C. Hanks, Thos. H. Askew, J. F. Harris, Geo. C. Auxier, A. J. Hendrick, W. J. Ayres, W. W. Holloway, J. W. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Bennett, B. F. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Hopkins, F. A. Jonson, Jep C. Kennedy, Hanson Kirwan, E. E. Lassing, L. W. Lewis, W. W. Boles, S. H. McElroy, W. J. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will Brents, J. A. Miller, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Montgomery, J. F. Brown, J. S. Moore, Laban T. Bullitt, W. G. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Petrie, H.-G. Carroll, John D. Phelps, Zack Clardy, John D. Pugh, Sam’l J. Cox, H. Rodes, Robert DeHaven, S. E. Trusdell, George Doris, W. F. Twyman, I. W. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. English, Sam. E. Wood, J. M. Faimer, H. H. Woolfolk, J. F. Forrester, J. G. Young, Bennett H. Forgy, J. M. Mr. President Clay. Funk, J. T. ' ABSENT—20. Buchanan, Nathan O’Hara R. H. COUNTIES. 27 Wednesday,] LEWIS—JOHNSTON—MCELROY. [October 1 . Chambers, G. D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Beckham, J _ (1 Hopkins, F, A, Coke, J. Guthrie Pettit, Thos. S. Beckner, W_ M_ J ames, A, D_ Goebel, William Phelps, John L. Bennett, B_ F, J onson, J 9p, (J, Graham Samuel Ramsey. W- R- Birkhead, B. T. Kennedy, Hanson Hines, J. S. Sachs, Morris A. Knott, J. Proctor Smith, W. Scott Mackoy, W. H. Straus, F. P. May, John S. Swango, G. B. McDermott, E. J. Washington, George Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I was necessarily absent when the roll was called upon the amendment offered to the Committee’s re- port by the gentleman from Bullitt. I ask the unanimous consent of the house to be allowed to cast my vote. The :PRESIDENT. I hear: no objec- tion, and leave being given, the Delegate may cast his vote on the amendment. Mr. J. W. LEWIS. I vote no. Mr. FUNK. I move that this Conven- tion do now adjourn. Mr. JOHNSTON. I desire to amend that motion by moving that we adjourn until Saturday morning at ‘11 o’clock.‘ The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that the motion to adjourn is not amend-- able. Mr. JOHNSTON. I move then that when we adjourn, we adjourn to meet at 11 o’clock Saturday morning. Mr. McELROY. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. BOLES. .I second it. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will call ‘the roll. The result of the vote was as follows: YEAS—9. Allen, M. K. Jacobs, R. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Johnston, P. P. Berkele, Wm. McHenry, H. D. Hines, Thomas H. Moore, J. H. Hogg, S. P. mars—68. Allen, C. T. Hanks, Thos. H. Amos, D. C. Harris, Geo. C. Askew, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Auxier, A. J. Hines, J. S. Ayres, W. W. Holloway, J. W. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Boles, S. H. Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Clardy, John D. Clay, C. M., Jr. Cox, H. Dehaven, S. E. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles. Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. English, Sam E. Farmer, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Kirwan, E. E. Lassing, L. W. Lewis, J. W. Lewis, W. W. Martin, W. H. McElroy, W. J. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. Petrie, H. G. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Rodes, Robert. Spalding, I. A. Twyman, I. West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. ABSENT—23. Buchanan, Nathan Chambers, G. D. Coke, J .. Guthrie Field, W. W. Forgy, J. M. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Knott, J. Proctor Mackoy, W. H. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. O’Hara, R. H. Mr. MCHENRY. Parsons, Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Ramsay, W. R. ' Sachs, Morris A. Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Straus, F. P. Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Washington, George Is it in order to move that we adjourn to meet this evening at 3 o’clock? The PRESIDENT. That motion is in ~ order. Mr. McHENRY. Well, I didn’t intend to make the motion. I just wanted to know. ( Laughter.) The Convention thereupon adjourned to meet again Friday morning at 11 o’clock. Qonvention Record Friday,] entitled to the floor. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1. FRANKFORT, OCTOBER 3. 1890. AUX IER—RODES—BRONSTON. No. 20 [October 3 . The Convention was called to order at 11 o’clock A. M., and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Darsie. The Journal of Wednesday’s proceed- ings was read and ayproved. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please ‘report the special order for this hour. The SECRETARY. The special order for this hour is the report of the Commit- tee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, which was ordered printed on the 29th, and made the special order for Friday at 11 o’clock, by the Committee of the Whole House. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that that order is sufiicient. and will call the Delegate from the Fourth Louisville District to the Chair. Mr. YOUNG here took the Chair. Mr. AUXIER. I have some amend- ments to the report of the Committee. Ths CHAIRMAN. The Secretary of the Convention informs the Chair there were three amendments oifered in the morning, one by Mr. Knott, one by Mr. Askew and one by Mr. Beckham. The Secretary will please report the amend- ments. Let the Delegates having amend- ments send them up. Mr. RODES. I do not know that I am‘ correct, but am under the impressionI am As Chairman of that Committee, I desire to make some remarks -on this matter before the amendments are ‘brought before the House. Perhaps that may be doing me an injustice, and under the circumstances it may be right and proper that I should say something about the proposition embraced in the Bill of Rights before the amendments properly come before the House. I do do not know that they would induce any change or affect in any way the Bill of Rights itself, but if it be the pleasure of the Chairman, I desire to review the Bill of Rights. Mr. BRONSTON. I rise to a point of order; that is, that the amendments having been offered before the discussion, we are entitled to hear them read. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Warren asks that he may make a few remarks, thinking, after his remarks, ‘the amendment might not be offered. Mr. BRONSTON. The point I make is, that the amendments are already offered and in charge of the House, and unless withdrawn—- The CHAIRMAN. Unless the House, by unanimous consent, desire to hear the statement of the Chairman.— Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point we should have the amendments reported. The CHAIRMAN. If the Delegate in- sists, the amendment will be reported. Mr. RODES. I was under the impres- sion I may be wrong about parliamentary law; I am not well posted, but my under— standing was, that when the matter was called up I was entitled to the floor, as Chairman of the Committee, before the amendments were offered. I do not desire to interfere with any rule of parliamentary law which facilitates business, except, if it be the pleasure of the House, I would like to make some remarks, not so much, as sug- gested by the Chairman, to prevent Dele- gates from offering amendments. Mr. BRONSTON. If it is put in that form, I make no objection. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the House will hear the statement of the Delegate from Warren. 2 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] BECKHAM—BULLITT—MOORE. [October 3 ,. Mr. BECKHAM. I am not a member of this Committee. I do not know how many members of the Committee are present. It is evident to our eyes there are quite a number of gentlemen who are absent this morning, and quite a number of gentlemen here have just returned from a day and night at Louisville. This matter of the Bill of Rights is certainly a very important one. In the discussion of it there are many gentlemen, I have no doubt, who desire to take part, and some of them are absent. I believe I will move that the Committee rise and report to the House, and that the further consideration of this matter be postponed until next Tuesday at 11 o’clock. I would suggest further, as a reason for that, that none of the amend- ments that have been offered by different gentlemen to the report of the Committee have been laid on our tables. I have not seen them, and I suppose other members have not seen them. I move that the Com- mittee rise, and the further consideration of' the matter be postponed until next Tues- day at 11 o’clock. Mr. BOYD. I second the motion. Mr. BULLITT. I hope the Delegates will permit all the amendments to go in, so they can be printed, and not let the matter be postponed. Let us do something. If we do not do something now, we will have to postpone again. Mr. BECKHAMY. For the purpose of having that motion made, I withhold the motion for the present. 'The CHAIRMAN. State your motion. Mr. BULLITT. I move that all gentle- ‘ men who want to offer amendments shall do so now, and that they shall be printed and laid upon the tables for consideration at a future day: ~Mr. ,MOORE. I think all we can do is to ask the- Convention to have these resolu- tions printed. In Committee of the Whole we have no such power. THE CHAIRMAN. The point is well taken. Mr. MOORE. I think that the motion of the Delegate, that we rise now and re-~ port to the Convention, should prevail. Mr. BULLITT. I am not acquainted with parliamentary law. I want to get- along, and I want to be in shape to do- something. If it is not proper or rulable- for us to offer these amendments here, when is it rulable for us to offer amendments‘? I want the amendments to go before the Con- vention, and the Convention get into shape, so that it can act upon something. I do- not' know where or when it is, but I want- it done in some form, so that we can reach the proposition. I have understood that- the question was not before the Convention until to-day. To-day it is before the Con- vention. This is the first time we have had any opportunity of offering amend-- ments, or of any gentleman presenting his views upon the subject; and I hope that- some method may be adopted by which we‘ can get to it. Mr. MOORE. Will the gentleman per-- mit a question? ' Mr. BULLITT. Certainly. Mr. MOORE. After this Committee re- ports to the Convention we can accompany our rising with the request that those reso- lutions be printed, and then the Conven- tion can have them printed. Mr. BULLITT. Will the gentleman nform me how it was we could not do that from the day this report was offered until now‘? If we could not do it then, how can we do it after we come back to the House I do not know the rule. A DELEGATE. We would like to have those amendments read. We want to- know what they are. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair under- stands there was a motion for the Commit- tee to rise. Is that motion pressed, or shall we hear the amendments? Mr. DEHAVEN. I understand that the Chairman of the Committee on Bill of Rights is ready to proceed with his argu- ment, and I would be gratified to hear him COUNTIES. 3 Friday,] I may be wrong in some conclusions I have arrived at, but if it suits his convenience, I do not see why we cannot hear as well now as any other day. I hope the Committee will not rise until we have heard him on the question. The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentle- man from Shelby insist on his motion? Mr. BECKHAM. He does not. I am willing to hear him. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to make a motion before the argument begins. Under arule recently adopted, it is provided as one of the standing rules of the House that reports of Committees may be discussed upon separate subjects. I call for a sepa- rate consideration of the various provisions contained in the report of the_Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The CHAIRMAN. After the Chair- man has been heard, we will dispose of that question. Mr. BECKHAM. The Delegate from Warren suggests, that as the matter has as- sumed its present shape, he is willing that it go over and he be heard on Tuesday. Mr. DEHAVEN. I withdraw my mo- tion. The CHAIRMAN. It is moved that the Committee now rise. Mr. BRONSTON. Before that is done I desire to make a motion before the Com' mittee of the Whole. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is ofthe opinion that that should be made before the Convention, and not before the Committee of the Whole. Mr. BRONSTON. I did not ask that the motion be acted upon now. The CHAIRMAN. You have made the motion. It is now moved that the Com- mittee of the Whole rise. The motion was put and carried. The PRESIDENT. The Chairman of the Committee will report to the Conven tion. The CHAIRMAN. The Chairman re- ports to the Convention that the Commit- BECKHAM—BRONSTON—DEHAVEN. [October 3 , tee of the Whole have had under consider- ation the report of Committee on Pream- ble and Bill of Rights, and asks that this matter be postponed until next Tuesday. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Commit- tee of the Whole. The vote being taken on the adoption of the report of the Committee of the Whole, it was adopted. Mr. JOHNSTON. I move that these amendments be printed and laid on the desks of the Delegates. The question being put, the motion was declared to have been carried. Mr. BULLITT. The Chairman of the Committee on Printing is sick and unable to be here, and he asked me to indicate to the Convention that he would like to have that Committee enlarged; and 'I hope that the Convention will unanimously consent that the question may be taken up and the Committee enlarged. The Committee on Printing, as all Delegates know, have had some difliculty in getting the printing at- tended to. The Chairman says, at apre- vious meeting of the Committee, they agreed they ought to be enlarged from seven to nine; and he asked me, as he was sick, to make that motion. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the request of the Chairman of the Committee’? The Chair hears no objec- tion, and the Chairman will appoint Messrs. Pettit and Beckner. The first thing in order is the unfinished report offered by the Committee on Municipalities. The SECRETARY. It is in regard to new counties. The PRESIDENT. Report the matter by title. The SECRETARY. It is the report of the Committee on Municipalities. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the next amendment in order. Mr. Brent’s amendment was read, as fol- lows: ' Amend by substituting the following for 4 COUNTIES. Friday, Section ‘.2, viz.: “ No county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, with- 'out first submitting the question to the legal voters of the part proposed to be stricken, nor unless three-fourths of the legal voters of _ said part shall vote in favor of the prop- ositlon. The PRESIDENT. ment to that amendment? it. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I ask if the amendment just read is in the form of a substitute or amendment‘? The SECRETARY. of a. substitute. Mr. BRENTS. The Delegate Simpson offered an amendment to that amendment. The PRESIDENT. Report the amend- ment to the amendment. Amendment offered by Mr. Harris to Mr. Brent’s amendment read, as follows: Is there an amend- If so, report It is in the form from Amend section 2, line 3, by striking out the Word “county” and inserting in lieu thereof the words “portion proposed to be detached,” and in third line, by striking out the word “ majority,” and insert in lieu thereof the words “two-thirds,” and by striking out in the fourth line the Word “county,” and insert in lieu thereof the words “portion proposed to be detached.” The PRESIDENT. That is an amend- ment to the original section. The question s first on the amendment to the amend- ment. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Is it in order ‘now to offer a substitute to this amend- ment? The PRESIDENT. There are always these amendments allowed: An amend- ment and an amendment to that amend- ment/and a substitute and amendment to the substitute. The question will first come up on the original amendment, because the amendment must be perfect before the motion to strike out. Mr. JOHNSTON. It seems to me these matters ought to be considered in a Com- mittee of the Whole. If I understand, an .aflirmative vote makes the matter part of MILLER—BRENTs Jonxsrox. the Constitution. I think these provisions should be perfected first in the Committee of the Whole and afterwards revised, if necessary, by the Convention. To go ahead as a Convention, and pass on the subject, it may be difiicult to reconsider or remodel it if, as we go on, we find it needed something. The object in going into Com- mittee of the Whole is, it enables you to perfect the matter in hand, and then when you report to the Convention you may still further supervise if it is neces- sary. It insures a greater degree of deliber- ation, and it enables us to perfect our work better than we can do it in the Convention. It might be embarrassing to go on and cast the final vote on the provision. fore move that the matter be referred to the Committee of the Whole. I The PRESIDENT. What time does the Delegate designate for the Committee of the Whole to sit. Mr. JOHNSTON. At once. Mr. JONSON. Before that motion is acted upon, I wish to offer an amendment to the report of the Committee on Pream- ble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent the amendment can be received. Mr. JOHNSTON. I would like to send up an amendment also. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection. The motion of the Delegate from Fayette is that the Convention go into Committee of the Whole to consider the report of the Committee on Munici- palities. Mr. BULLITT. I wish to make an in- quiry before the vote is put. I wish to oifenan amendment to section 1 and section 3, and I don’t know but what I might be precluded after the vote is taken in Com- mittee of the Whole. I wish to be in time. The PRESIDENT. The amendment can be offered now or afterwards. It is not in order now, but during the pending _mo- tion of the Delegate from Fayette there will be ample time. [October 3 . I there- ~ COUNTIES. 5 F ri(lay,] The vote being taken on the motion of the Delegate from Fayette, it was declared carried. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will name the Delegate from Woodford as Chairman of the Committee of the \Vhole. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will please report the order. The SECRETARY. The special order is the consideration of the report of the Committee on Municipalities, and various amendments thereto. The report of Committee was read. The amendments of Mr. Straus, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Bullitt and Mr. C. T. Allen, which were adopted, were also read, also the amendments of Mr. Brents and Mr. Harris. The CHAIRMAN. Action will first be taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Simpson. Mr. BUCKNER. Before a vote is taken on that question, I desire to give my opinion of the effects it will have on the original proposition of the Committee. The Committee proposed that in any discussion it might be had of the question, the people of the county should have a voice. The substitute and all the amendments, on the contrary, authorize asecession of the county at the will of those who desire to secede, without reference to the wishes of the county at large. As a practical point, I wish to call the attention of the Delegates to the fact that a single individual desir’mg to avoid any responsibility of any kind will vote himself out of it. Andthereare to- day not less than two hundred acts on the Legislative books where single individuals have been detached from one county and put in another. We can see the evil of that, placing at the will of a single individ- ual. I therefore oppose all the amend- ments, and advocate the original proposi- tion of the Committee. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I do not think that any division of the counties or muni- cipalities should be made unless upon ma- BreKxER—MILLER. _Now, there are large counties. [October 3 . ture deliberation; but if we make provision for division at all, we should make a prac- ticable one. If we say that this may be done, it seems to me that it is a contradic- tion of this expression of opinion, through a constitutional provision, to impose insup- erable obstacles in the way of it being done. We have had experience of that in the calling of this Convention, and I very much doubt whether our present constitutional provisions on that subject have been com- plied with. If it is ever wise to divide a county, let us present, along with the con- stitutional amendment or provision, an opportunity to do that thing. With these constitutional provisions, as presented by this Committee, it will be almost impossible to reorganize any of the counties of this Commonwealth, or to make new ones. We cannot yet tell whether our forefathers have builded wisely or not in regard to this matter. They have seen proper to divide this great Commonwealth of ours into , small counties. Three-fourths of the coun- ties are small, and we should make a gov- ernment consistent with that order of things. If we un- dertake to make a government with an organization of small counties, we leave behind us a number of counties of a large area or territory; and, therefore, the gov- ernment which we make here may not suit those counties when they become populous. It has been objected here that the making of small counties may produce pauper counties; but. on the contrary, the history of the State and the present condi- tion of affairs show that the smaller counties are those that pay the greatest revenue. It has been suggested that many of the peo- ple of this State have to travel 60 miles to reach their county seat. Should we remedy that condition of affairs? I ap- peal to every Delegate upon the floor of this Convention to know if he thinks it is to the advantage of his people to have to travel 60 miles of road, in a section of the State where the roads are almost impas- sable.for the purpose of reaching the county 6 ' COUNTIES. Friday,] MILLER—Mun. [October 3 , seat. It seems to me, with what little wisdom I have to bring to bear upon this matter, that it is not well to have these small counties. But they are existing municipalities; they are existing in such a manner, as arms of the government, that we can not safely obliterate them, and I therefore say, that if we tolerate this thing, let us not build around it an impas- sable barrier. Now, the first section of this report pro- vides that “no new county shall be formed or established by the General Assembly which will reduce the county or counties, or either of them, from which it shall be taken, to less contents than four hundred square miles, nor shall any county be formed of less contents, nor shall any line thereof pass within less than ten miles of any county seat of the county or counties proposed to be divided.” Now, I have no very great objection to the first part of this provision, but the last proposition may become an insuperable obstacle to the _ formation of counties, no matter what the necessities may be. Therefore, I am op- posed to so much of the report of the Committee. And the second section pro- vides that “ No county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, without submitting the Question to a vote of the people of the county, nor unless the major- ity of all the legal voters of the county voting on the question shall vote for the same.” Now, the people who desire to be separated are ordinarily those who are most interested. They are ordinarily those who are laboring under the most difficulty by reason of the situation of the county seat, and, therefore, to leave their well- being, their future, to the dictation of the people of other parts of the county, is un- just and is wrong; and it seems to me that the provision I offer as a substitute for this, is broad enough to meet all the demands of this question. It is provided that, in the first instance. there shall be a petition, then there shall be a vote upon the question. It does not follow that because we make pro- vision for a majority vote upon the ques- tion by the section proposed to be stricken off, that a new county must necessarily be formed. Certainly, the Legislature has some dis- cretion in regard to this matter, and the Legislature assembled here, it seems to me, would not permit the folly of separating a portion of the territory of a county unless in its discretion,‘ it is proper and right, and to the interest of that section to do so; and, therefore, I cannot approve of the amendments proposed by the Commit- tee in the form in which they are presented. Mr. MUIR. Mr. President, since the adjournment of the Convention the other day, I have undertaken, from statis- tics, to see the condition of our State as to its counties, the size of them and as to the re- spective populations of each county, in or- der to educate myself up to the standard of casting a- proper vote upon this question. I came to this Convention with the idea of endeavoring, so far as I could, to stop the making of any more new counties. I con- fess that, from what I have heard hereto- fore in the Convention, and what I have gleaned from statistics since the ('onven- tion adjourned, I have somewhat changed my opinion in regard to it, and I will en- deavor to give my reasons for it in as plain a manner as I can. I find that we have thirteen counties having an area of less than two hundred square miles. We have twenty-eight counties over two hundred square miles and less than three hundred. We have twenty-three counties of three hundred square miles, even, as reported in the statistics; it is singular, but so it is, that we have twenty-three counties of an area of three hundred square miles. teen more of three hundred square miles and less than four hundred. We have twenty-three counties of four hundred and not exceeding four hundred and fifty. We have twelve counties of five hundred and less than six hundred square miles Four- . COUNTIES. 7 Friday,] MUIR—YOUNG——BECKN ER. [October 3 . We have three counties of six hun- dred, but less than seven hundred. We have one county of seven hundred and ninety square miles, and we have one county of nine hundred and sixty square miles. That is the county of Leslie. The county of Carter has seven hundred and ninety. Now, I have undertaken to look at the condition the county of Lewis is in if it should undertake to divide itself, or to apportion a part of it to some other county, and to see how it will operate under the restrictions which are endeavored to be thrown round about it by this propo- sition. The county of Lewis. as I said, has nine hundred and sixty square miles. It has a population of thirteen thousand one hundred and fifty-four. If it were to un- dertake to cut offer divide itself, under the vote the other day, it could not reduce itself under twelve thousand, and could only lop off one thousand one hundred and fifty—four of its population. Of course, that cannot lessen to a very great extent the area, the mileage, of Lewis county, and would afford it but very little relief. It is bounded by the county of Carter, with an area of seven hundred and ninety square miles, which is nearly in as bad a fix as Lewis, with a population of twelve thou- .sand three hundred and forty-five, only three hundred and forty-five of population that it could spare if it were to undertake to divide itself or cut off a part of the county and give it to some other. Then we have the county of Rowan, right by it, with an area of three hundred square miles, and with a population of only four thousand four hundred and twenty. Well, now, we are endeavoring to es- tablish a rule here that no county shall exist; that is, be brought into existence, having apopulation less than twelve thou- sand, when here is a county, a great big county, that has only a population of four thousand four hundred and twenty. It does seem to me that the county of Lewis, with an area of nine hundred and sixty square miles, even having a population over twelve thousand by eleven hundred and fifty-four, might do itself good by building up the county of Rowan. But under the restrictions thrown about it here, it can not do so. Again here is the Mr. YOUNG. If the gentleman will permit me, I would like to ask him one question. Is he not mistaken about Lewis county‘? Mr. MUIR. No, sir, I am not. I have in my pocket Rand, McNally 8: Co.'s map Mr. YOUNG. The Auditor’s report gives the county of Lewis two hundred and ninety thousand acres. Mr. MUIR. Lewis county ‘? Mr. YOUNG. Yes, sir. Mr. BECKN ER. If the Delegate from Louisville will permit me, I would like Mr. MUIR. This map says nine hun- dred and sixty square miles. Mr. BECKNER. The Auditor’s re- port of 1887 differs two hundred and forty thousand acres from the report of 1888. Mr. YOUNG. In other counties it was worse than that. Mr. MUIR. I would state to the gen- tleman that it has been surmised that our State contains between thirty-six and forty thousand square miles. This map and these estimates make up the full forty thousand, and distributes it out among the counties in their due proportion, and I take it for granted, as it has gone broadcast over the land, and was gathered by intelligent men from the proper sources. that it is entitled to some consideration, and I read here that Lewis county has an area in square miles of nine hundred and sixty, and with a pop- ulation of twelve thousand one hundred and fifty-four. Mr. YOUNG. That is a mistake. Mr. MUIR. Well. I have it here. That is the source of my information. Now, then, we come again to Mason county. Mason county is one of the surrounding counties binding the county of Lewis. It has an area of three hundred and thirty quare miles, and a population of sixteen 8 COUNTIES. Frida y,] Mum—BRENTS. [October 3 , thousand two hundred and sixty-four, and Greenup county has an area of three hun- dred and eighty square miles, with a popu- lation of thirteen thousand three hundred and seventy-one. Now, I take it that Lewis county (and until I' get some better infor- mation than I have, I will claim that it has the area estimated by this book) is pow- erless to divide itself. Now, I come from a little county down here—I thought my county was a pretty respectable county—it has over sixteen thousand inhabitants, but although we reach forty miles from our court-house, twenty north and twenty miles south or south-east, making forty miles together, we only contain an area, according to this book, of two hundred and fifty square miles. We are set down as one of the small counties. Why, I find even in my own county our citizens traveling to Court; find that they are a long ways from the center of their county, from their county seat. We have had several attempts by the people of our county towards cutting off the southern and northern ends. Now it does seem to me that, under these stringent rules laid down here, that by providing that a county shall never be less than four hun- dred ‘square miles, and that it shall not have less than twelve thousand of popula- tion, you interdict every county in the State, I don’t care what the necessity may be, from either making a new county or cutting off a part and adding it to any other. Now of the large counties there is Lewis, with a population of thirteen thou- sand one hundred and fifty-four; you can only cut off one thousand one hundred and fifty-four from it; Carter county, with an area of seven hundred and ninety square with only three hundred and fifty four of its population that it can spare. Its population is twelve thousand three hundred and fifty-four; Now, gentlemen, here are enjoying the ben- efit of small counties. There are sixty odd counties, I believe seventy odd counties miles miles, with a population less than that; there are only seventeen counties in the State of an area of five hundred square miles and over. Now, the other counties in the State, one- hundred and two, would override these seventeen counties, and deprive them of the- liberty of cutting themselves down into con- venient shapes. We little believe that in the State there are one hundred and two counties cut up into convenient sizes. True, that many of our smaller counties are more populous, but that is by reason of the aeci-. dent of settlement. But I think it would be doing an injustice to a thinly distributed. population, over a vast area of country, to- com pel them to travel thirty and forty miles to their county-seat. I had not in- tended to make a speech, but to act modestly in this Convention; but it does seem to me that this information, from this little book I bought, pretty near to the issue, and I have gotten it into some form, and thrown it out for the benefit of the members. Mr. BRENTS. It is unanimously agreed that the Legislature of the State may create- new counties. It is also agreed that the- Legislature may change county lines, or- adjust the lines between counties. These- matters are propositions which seem to be very generally agreed upon in the Conven— tion. Now, the Committee on palities have made a report. It is con- ceded that the Legislature has gone too far in creating counties, and it is the» purpose to put a check upon it. They pro-i vide that no new county shall be created with an area less than four hundred square miles, and an amendment has been added “with less population than twelve thou-- sand,” and that no county line shall run nearer to the county seat than within ten miles. Now, is the proposition made in order to remedy this evil of the Legislature. creating new counties? To place a check. upon it? The Committee has also reported that the adjustment of county lines shall not be made unless awmajority of all the.- people in the county vote in favor of it- Munici-v COUNTIES. 9 C . - Legislature to destroy counties. Friday] BRENTS. [October 3 , As ‘it is a matter for the Legislature, I thought that was a ‘little too rigid, and thought if the people of the district pro- posed to be cut off were in favor, that is, three-fourths of themfw'erie in favor of being taken from one" county ‘and being added to another, that if the' Legislature then saw proper to adjust or change the county line, that they. should have the I‘ i i ' "egate upon this floor in claiming the rights ‘ 7 of the people to self-government, but there ‘ are some things which, when done, are power to do so, as the county would have a representative or advocate in the Legisla- ture to take care of the interests of the old I county, and the part proposed to be taken off would have no one there to advocate their rights or their claims, and, with the other members of the Legislature, would sit as impartial judges in the matter. But there is another matter that came in that I wish to briefly call attention to. It was voted upon last Tuesday; but as we are in Committee of the Whole, I wish to review that matter and call the attention of the Del- egates to the action of the Convention upon that proposition, and that is the proposition of the gentleman from Bullitt, county. He offered an amendment providing that the Legislature of the State might destroy counties. That power has never been con- ceded or recognized in the State of Ken- tucky; it is taking a new departure whenever this Convention authorizes the If the Legislature has the right to wipe out and destroy one county, it has the right to wipe out and destroy two. _ If it has the right to wipe out and destroy two counties, why may it not destroy all the counties in the State, and concentrate all the power in the State Government‘? I think we ought to consider that matter very seriously before we come to leave this matter, and this Convention finally adopt that proposition. Now, let us look for a moment to the effect of it. Some gentleman said here upon last Tuesday that all wisdom is not centered in this Constitutional Convention. That is true. I am one of ‘those'that believe in development and progress as much as any- body. I believe that the people of the next generation will have more wisdom than the people of this generation. They will have the experience of the past to aid them, and give them information and light. Some gentlemen said that the people could be trusted—that the representatives of the ' people: could be‘ trusted, I concede that, ‘and I expect to go as far as any other Del- irrevocable, and can not be taken back. If the Governor of the State grants a pardon and releases a man from the Penitentiary of the State, can the successor of that Gov- ernor revoke that pardon and return that. man to the Penitentiary? If the Judge upon the bench renders any final decision in a lawsuit before him, can his successor revoke that decision and grant a new trial? When the Legislature of the State grants a. charter to a railroad company, and that. company accepts the charter and proceeds. with its work and invests moneiy7 and builds. a railroad, can the Legislature of the State- revoke that charter, or take back what it has. done? If the Legislature of the State ere-- ates a new county, and the people within that territory accept the act of the Legis-v lature and organize a county government,. build court-houses, build jails, and build poor-houses, appropriate money, and build. roads and bridges, and invest their money, it is a very serious question whether the- Legislature of the State can revoke that authority, or revoke the act extending this authority to the people of this territory to organize a county. They have actually or-- ganized the county, and they have made‘ investments under that act of the Legisla- ture. Upon this question of the wisdom- a Legislature in the past that created a new county exercised all the wisdom that it. had. The members of thislConstitutional Convention ought to exercise all the wisdom they have; the next Legis- lature ought to exercise all the wise 10 COUNTIES. Friday,] BRENTS. [October 3 . dom they have, and it is not a a question of wisdom. It is not a question of wisdom; it is a question whether, when a judicial ofiicer acts, when an executive oflicer acts, when the Legislature of the State acts, whether the successor of the Judge, the successor of the Governor, or the suc- ceeding Legislature, can revoke what the former Judge, the former Governor, or the former Legislature has done. But I want to look at this matter from another stand- point, or take a different view of it. It is said that there are some pauper counties in this State—a great number of pauper coun- ties. Itis said that there are too many coun- ties. Now, these declarations have been made upon this floor and in the press. These matters have gone to the people. 'The people understood that there is a com- plaint that there are too many ties; there is a complaint that there are pauper counties in the State; and now, upon the top of that, this Constitutional Convention authorizes the Legislatuge to abolish counties. What do the people think of it? Will they not be- come restless‘? Will not the people con- sider that the county governments and the county organizations are endangered? They have established their county seat, and now this Convention says by its act that no county seat shall be moved without a vote of two-thirds of the legal voters of COLIN.— "the county. They have said that, and that no new counties shall be organized with a less area than four hundred square miles. The people will accept that proposition. That is all right. But when we propose to proceed further, _and say we will confer the authority on the Legislature of the State to destroy coun- ties, I say that the people will become rest- less, and they will consider that their county organizations are in danger. In view of the fact that it has been said that ‘there are a great many pauper counties, and ‘that there are too many counties in this State, and I say that it may be that a large ‘number of the people in this State will vote against our work when it is submitted to the people if that clause is inserted in the Constitution ; and the opponents of the Cons stitution that we make will take advantage of that. They will say to the people that the purpose is to destroy county organi- zation; that we propose to destroy these pauper counties; that the purpose is to make large counties and break up the pres- ent county organization, and re-divide the State and make, perhaps, fifty counties, seventy-five counties, or reduce the number of counties to one hundred; and when the opponents of this Constitution we f ‘ame go before the people and talk that way to the people, how many votes ‘will they with- hold or cause to be thrown against this Constitution upon that very point; that very idea, that these county organizations, some of them, have continued one hundred years, some seventy-five years, seine one hundred, some thirty, some twenty-five, and so on, are in danger; and they will say and will contend for their county organiza- tions, and they never would consent for these county organizations to be destroyed. The Legislature has never had the author- ity to do that, and now this Convention pro- poses to confer that authority upon the Leg- islature, and without any qualification. The gentleman from Adair ofl‘ered an amend- ment. That amendment was, that if the peo- ple of the county become lawless, or the gov- ernment is destroyed in that county, and the people of that county are not protected in their rights then, and in that event, the Legislature may divide that county up and divide it among the adjoining counties. Now, if the amendment of the gentleman from Adair had been accepted. that the purpose was to forbid the peaceable, law- abiding people of the county or counties to remain in their county organization; but if the people of some county became so disor- derly that there is no protection left for the people of that county, then the Legis- lature may destroy that county; I suppose that the people of‘ the counties would be- come restless under that proposition, and COUNTIES. 11 _ Friday,] APPLEGATE. [October 3 . consider that their county organizations were endangered, and that would be a power held over these people, perhaps. to keep them in line and make a greater ef- fort to maintain peace and order in those counties, in order that their county organi- zations may continue. But as it is, it is an unconditional and unlimited authority conferred upon the Legislature to wipe out the county organizations. They may not stop with destroying one county, but they may destroy a dozen or more counties. The people of Kentucky may not accept with good grace and willingly any such propo- sition as that. I thought it was right and proper to call attention to this matter. I contented myself here the other day to cast a silent vote agaist the proposition of tie gentleman from Bullitt, but as I had the floor this morning I thought it was my duty to call attention to this matter; and I believe I will, at the proper time, offer a motion to reconsider the vote of this Con- vention by which the proposition of the gentleman from Bullitt was adopted. Mr. APPLEGATE. The discussion upon ‘the report of the Committee has caused me to do some thinking in regard to this matter, and the more I have thought about it, the more conservative I have become in my views. I, like a great many gentle- men, when I came here was of opinion that the creating of counties—pauper counties, as they call them—added to the taxation of the rest of the State, and as I thought about the matter I have investigated it, and this proposition suggests itself to my mind: How does the creating of new counties increase the burden of the State? All the State does for a county is to pub- lish its records. The fact that counties are paupers does not change it. When you put them into a large county or a small county, it is the territory that is the pauper, not the municipality. In looking at the Auditor’s Report, I find that the State paid out for the year 1889 the sum of $1,396,090.28 for school purposes and for other expenses; for county purposes only $106,712.91. Had the whole State of Kentucky been one county, that $1,396,090 would not have been decreased at all, because you paid it out for school purposes, and the school expenses could not have been diminished by having your countieslarger. The $106,000 was paid out to grand and petit juries, to the Trustees of the Jury Fund and for other expenses; now will it take any more juries to try the same cases in 119 counties than it would in 100 counties? \Vill it take any more grand juries to investigate crimes in 119 counties than in 100 counties? As a matter of fact, and as a matter of reason, cannot a grand jury in a small county, with the power of the Commonwealth, bring witnesses in less time than larger counties? Cannot they investigate offenses at less expense to the Government than they can in larger coun- ties? The truth of it is, in counties of this dimension, a grand jury in two weeks’ time, witnesses where they are absconding or at- tempting to'evade the officers, cannot be obtained, and crime for that reason will go unpunished more in large counties than in the small counties. Why this outcry about these pauper counties‘? -The fact that you made them larger counties will not indae the territory richer. Dividing them into small counties will not make the territory poorer, and the expenses will be the same upon the government. Will they not diminish rather than increase it, owing to the advantage of getting witnesses at less expense to attend Courts? If it would re- quire a few more public records, it will be very few, because it does not require any more to record the deeds in two small counties than in one large county. If the cases accumulate in a large county you must have more order-books, and so on with all the printing to be done for that county. Now, on the other hand, we in the small counties, and counties conveniently ar- ranged, taking a view of this without due consideration and without thought as to ‘12 COUNTIES. Friday,] APPLEGATE. [October 3 . what is the effect of subdivisions of these counties, are liable to do an injustice to these large counties that are in the sparsely populated parts of the State, and it will be impossible to make that part of our terri- tory self-sustaining if you educate their children; because, you know, it is an old adage that, somehow or another, there are more children in poor families than there are in the rich, and consequently the greater the number of children the greater will be the outlay for educating them. Upon the proposition as to the subdi- vision of the territory ‘into counties, I do not see that the Commonwealth is in any particular danger, and I cannot see, alt though it has often been asserted and charged, that there have been too many counties created where the injury is. Point it out; make the indictment so specific the friends of these small counties may know how to answer these charges. As to other questions suggested, I can not agree with some of the gentlemen in their extreme view that the State ought not to have the authority to abolish coun- ties, because I deem that a wholesome pro- vision in the Constitution; that the Gov- ernment should have a right- to hold out over the ofiicers of a county the power of the State to revoke the charter or the grant to any county if they do not exercise the laws in that community as is proper, or if for any other reasons it might not be policy to maintain a county. Therefore, it is a high prerogative that I think-should belong to the Government, and should not be taken away from them, although when you come to exercise that power it should be very judiciously and carefully exercised. I have made these suggestions because I think that the requirements that are put in these two sections of the Committee’s re- port hedge about the people of these terri- tories in a manner that will practically prevent them from organizing any new counties, and that the Convention is liable to make a mistake in that line; and it seems to me that we ough to either adopt the territorial limit or the population limit, or the fact that you are not to come within ten miles of the county seat. It may be that, owing to the geographical shape of the territory, they may want to organize a new county. Having to cut it ofl' from other counties, it will not be practicable to get it into a square. Consequently, if you get 400 square miles into any other shape than a square or a circle, you are liable to encroach within ten miles of some other county seat; and it seems to me, with- out information as to the exact location of these present county seats that we are in- vading, a dangerous proposition when we- attempt to hedge about those people that are so poorly situated in reference to their county seats, as to throw about them these hinderances to organize a new municipality for their own convenience. They have to sustain the great expense of a county gov- ernment; they have to build their court- houses ; they have to build their jails, their clerks’ oflices; they have to maintain their clerks, their sheriffs, and all of their county oflicers, if they are maintained at all. be- cause the little that the State pays them could not maintain them; and if the peo- ple want to assume this burden, let us allow the Legislature to give them that power, granting that the Legislature will certainly exercise some wisdom, some discretion in giving it; and I am not prepared to say that they have ever violated that discretion, unless I were in the possession of facts or information to warrant that assertion; and I will not make it merely from public history, and from the particular- declaration that seems to sweep throughout the State, that there are too many pauper~ counties—I say, that without some good reason to the contrary, these communities- should be allowed to assume that burden for the sake of convenience, knowing they cannot get to their county seats to attend courts when there are cases to try, and they cannot get there without enormous expense’ COUNTIES. 13 Friday,] MAR'mx—Pnen. you will remember that when they have to . travel sixty miles over a muddy road on horseback or in a buggy, detained two or three days away from home in going to and returning from the court, the expense , becomes enormous to those people, and, as the facts are shown in this case, they are poor people in these large counties, and the burden is greater; and for these reasons I think we should be extremely careful about restricting them in the formation of new counties; and therefore I will agree with the gentleman who has offered the resolu- tion, that in changing and dividing these counties, that you will not require the vote of the whole population of the county in order to do it, because majorities are seldom considerate of the rights of the minority. Mr. MARTIN. I came here believing that Kentucky had too many counties, and that we ought to adopt a provision in this Constitution that no more should be made. I have had cause to modify that opinion. If you take the report of the Committee and regulate the matter according to the population, it will take 24,000 inhabitants in a county before it can be divided. How many counties in the State of Kentucky have 24,000 inhabitants? The first propo— sition was 30,000, but still, under the .amendment, it will take 24,000. Again, if you take it upon the other proportion of square miles, you may have a long and nar- row county with 10,000 people in one end and 10,000 in the other, or with 50,000 in one end and 50,000 in the other, any num- her you please, and it cannot be divided. It seems to me that this may operate to the detriment of the better portion of our State some of these days; and again, will we not be doing injustice to the sparsely settled part of our State, which cannot hope, in the course of many years, to obtain a popu— lation of 24,000, that it may be divided Again, according to the statement of the Delegate from Nelson this morning, we have but one county that can be made into we, and that contains an area of 960 square [October 3 . miles. If the county seat of that county is anyways near the centre—-if it is within fiive miles of the centre—that county can not be divided, because the line would run within ten miles of the county seat. I think the-Delegate from Pendle- ton has proven clearly here that the number of counties do not increase the expense of maintenance of those counties, by making them larger or smaller, and it seems to me, if we adopt [this report, we can have no more counties, no matter what the population maybe. If you adopt the area requisite, take for instance a county on the Ohio. It may have a population in one end of the county of 40,000, and in the other end of 40,000; it cannot be divided because it will not possess the necessary area. And we had just as well adopta prohibitory measure entirely, because it only applies to one county, as it now stands; and, if the county-seat is any way near the center, although it has an area of 960 square miles, it cannot be divided, because it will run within ten miles of the county seat; and, it seems to me, that this measure ought to be referred back to the Committee —ought to be recommitted. Mr. PUGH. It will be readily conceded by all that it is of transcendent importance that the instrument we are about to form here, and submit to our people for their approval and adoption, should be har- monious, or, to say the least, consistent in all its parts. I am not among the number, if such there be here, that arrogate to themselves individually, or to this Con- vention in its aggregate capacity, that prescience which, foreseeing all the exi- gencies which may arise in the future, will provide for them. Neither am I one of those who think it altogether proper to refer to the wisdom and the goodness of the Legislature, arbitrary and absolute power over an established county, any more than it is necessary or proper to clothe that body with limited authority to sunder or dismember such county. It is no 14 COUNTIES. the Legislature. Friday,] Pres. [October 3 , reflection upon the prudence or philan- thropy of the Legislature for us to here promulgate certain axiomatic principles. which are calculated to operate as a pro- tection to minorities, or to the individual county against the capricious exercise of power I say it is no criticism upon the wisdom or sense of Justice of the Legislature that we place those safe-guards around indi- vidual or vested rights. Who would that it expedient to strike from the Bill of Rights certain principles which we all approve, and all good men accept as just ‘? \Yho would say that it is improljier to invade the domain of the Judicial Department. with the declaration that "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be sus- pended,” saving as accepted, thus lcaving it to the wisdom or caprice of the Judge‘? Who should say that it is not necessary to guard against any great wrong that may occur? It is not only our duty to provide for probabilities, but it is no less essential that we guard against some‘ of the mere possibilities. It may be true that the Legislature will not take upon it- self the responsibility to arbit ‘arily abolish a county or to change a county line. But if it be necessary to protect a portion of a county against the invasion of such a right, in this second section proposed. consist- ency says to us it is necessary that the right should be extended to the whole county itself. The measure we have already adopted says we will refuse it to the whole county, while in this we granted it to a section thereof. The principle is improp- erly applied to the whole, but the protec- tion is properly applied to a few members of that whole. Itis evidently inconsistent; it is improper, and I wish now to protest against such action, because I had not the privilege or opportunity of addressing gen- tlemen present upon that question before it was submitted to vote. We have the courage to promulgate cer- tain principles that will define the rights of Are you not aware that _ out of one hundred and ninety-five sections of the Constitution, that thirty-eight of them are mandatory and addressed to the Legislative body? And still gentlemen say that we should not direct the Legisla- ture how it should act. Over twenty per cent. of the Constitution as it now stands are mandatory clauses concerning important principles. Are we to be considered in our remarks and action about the principles we promulgate ? Do .we say it will cast a re- flection on the wisdom of the Legislature in asserting you must do this, or must not do that. No man can take to himself such a reflection. No member of the Legisla- ture w<;>uld ever consider for a moment that these safeguards that we place around indi- vidual rights in any manner cast an undue reflection upon that body, or that we should have left such things en- tirely to its judgment. If it be not neces- sary to establish principles here, and if we have not the courage to do so, let us ad- journ, go home, and say we have such cou- iidence in human nature, we believe that generations yet unbcrn will be so good and wise that never, in heat of excitement or under any circumstances, will they ex- ercise absolute or arbitrary power against individual rights. If we are will- ing to admit that, there is but little work to do. I undertake to say that our sole object to promulgate prin- ciples and to place around individual rights, the rights of property, the rights of for us here life and of certain liberty restric- tions ; and if we have not the res- olution to invade what gentlemen call the province of legislative author- ity. our mission here will come to naught. To imply that the power to abolish is less important than the right to dismember, is the plain import of the proposition under consideration. I was opposed to the first section and the amendment thereto, as offered by the gentleman from the county of Bullitt, not because I wished to cast any reflection on any one, or to show by my COUNTIES. 15 ' Lewis county. Friday,] PUGH—AUXIER . [October 3 - action that I had not confidence in my kind; not that I would hedge about the rights and privileges of the Legislature, but rather through a sense of duty in behalf of those who are liable to be oppressed; that I would guard against a possible oppression that party strife or passion might occasion The right of a county, thus ‘defined, all men will recognize; and the people in every section of this State will approve it. Referring to the county of Lewis, as most gentlemen here are aware, a large proportion of the area of that county is hilly, rough and uncultivated. Many tracts of land have never been accurately surveyed. As an evidence of that fact, and as indicative of the mistakes that may arise in making an estimate in regard to area, I need only refer to the Auditor’s report for 1888. The acreage of that county. as re- ported by the Assessor for that year, was 293.781. or 459 square miles; in the year 1889, 301,185 470 square miles, speaking in round num- bers, or an increase of 7.404 acres, or about eleven square miles. You see the difiiculty. then, in accurately estimating the area of N 0 one can tell accurately, or within several square miles, of its area. We have about forty-two miles of river frontage. The rear portion of the county is not evenly laid off. I think that a fair estimate, however, would be much less than that given in Band & McNally’s Map, and something more than is indicated by the report of the Auditor. That matter is not certain; but it is of little consequence as to the area of Lewis county. The principle stands here for the consideration of every gentleman upon this floor, the principle whether we shall establish certain defenses for individual rights, shall throw around the rights of counties and municipalities certain protections that from time immemorial have been accepted as wholesome and good. No Legislator, and no judicial oflicer, has ever been confused in the discharge of his duty, or accepted any principle promulgated in ZlC‘l'Q-i, 01‘ the organic law of the land as a criticism upon his wisdom or his tendency to do right, because right itself is presented before him to guide his action between man and man. I hope that such action will be taken by this Convention as will not. present that document in a shape that will appear upon its face as inconsistent. I be- lieve in protecting a county as I would the individual; I believe in protecting each sec-- tion of it. Until that is incorporated in a clause that will not be misunderstood, I cannot yield to it my support. Mr. AUXIER. I live in a county that. contains over 2,000 square miles; and al- lowing 20 miles square to make 400 square miles, which it does, out of the territory of‘ Pike county there can be carved five coun- ties with 400 square miles each. The pop- ulation of that county is 17,300 and some- thing. Under this amendment, which was voted on the other day, no county can be established containing a less population than 12,000, and the creation of no new county should reduce the population of any other county to less than 12,000. Although we have territory enough in one of the counties which I represent out of which could be carved four counties containing 400 square miles each, yet under this reso- lution it will forever be impossible to cre- ate any new county in the territory where I live. Whilst I am not for the creation of new counties, and, as a rule, I oppose the creation of new counties, yet as the Dele- gate of the people of my county, a number of Whom have to travel 55 miles to at- tend our court-house (from the extreme Eastern portion of our ‘county to the county seat it is 55 miles, and from the south-west portions of the county to the county seat it is 37 miles), I could not come to this Convention as their repre- sentative, and support a measure which would forever prevent any section of our county from resolving themselves into a new county for their convenience when the population of our country may 16 ' ' COUNTIES. AUXIER—YOUNG. Friday,] [October 3. creasing Why, the Census show if we hunt them in their power by resolu- that, within the last ten years, the pop; ulation of my county has increased 4,300. They are building a new railroad along the border of my county some 40 mlles. The road is running on the West Virginia side, and only crosses the river once, and runs about one mile in our county. Those people some day will want a new county of their own on that side of our county, and as the expense of creating new counties, as well argued by the gentleman from Pendleton, is not considerable at all, it does not lessen the revenue paid into the State Treasury to create new counties. It is the wealth or the poverty of a comn'iunity, and not the municipal divisions, that make counties wealthy or make them pauper counties. The only additional expense in creating a new county are the reports of the Court of Appeals and the Acts of the Legislature, with which the State furnishes the officers of each county. ‘As well said by the gen- tleman from Pendleton, the cost of record books does not increase one particle by the number of counties. The number of deeds recorded in a small county are not so great as those in a large county, and the same number of books will record them without any regard whatever to the territorialdivis- ions of the county. I think that we are mak- ing one mistake. We havestarted out in that direction, and we have time to cor- rect it. That mistake is to circumscribe, to limit and paralyze the power of one co-ordinate branch of our State Government, and that is the Legislative Department. If every measure is carried that has been introduced in this House, the Legislative Department of this State will not be a co-ordinate department. It will be an inferior branch of the Government, not entitled to respect, and if we curb and limit them as though we were the all-wise peo- ple assembledgin this Convention, and take the position :that ‘the representatives who follow us, elected ‘Eby thedfpeople of this tions, such as have been offered in this body, respectable men will not be members of that Legislature. They will not regard it as a co-ordinate branch of this Government. I am heartily in favor of some limitation be- ing placed upon the Legislative Depart- ment, and my special hobby upon that question is to prevent local legislation. I will go as far as any man in this Conven- tion to restrict the local legislation that has consumed so much time and cost so much money. Weeks and months of the time of the Legislature have been taken up by‘local legislation. As far as we can limit that, I will extend my hand with other Delegates; but to say that the Legislature shall have no power to create a county with less ter- ritorial limit than 400 square miles, and to couple with that the restriction that no county shall be made unless it has 12,000 inhabitants, I shall never vote for it, and cannot consistently support it. _ Mr. YOUNG. I move that the session of the Committee be extended half an hour. The CHAIRMAN. I was just going to suggest that the hour for adjournment had arrived. We are now in Committee of the Whole, and we will have to report back to the Convention in order that our session may be extended. Mr. YOUNG. I move that the Com- mittee rise and report progress. President Clay resumed the Chair. Mr. BLACKBURN. I am directed by the Committee of the Whole to report to this Convention that said Committee has been considering the report of the Commit- tee on Municipalities. They have made progress, and ask leave to sit again. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the report made by the Committee of the Whole. The question being put to the House, was declared adopted. » Mr. YOUNG. I move that ‘the rules be COUNTIES. 17 Friday,] SACHS—YOUNG. [October 3 . ssupended, and the session be extended one hour. Mr. SACHS. I move that the Conven- tion do now adjourn until the regular hour to-morrow morning. Mr. YOUNG. I will withdraw my motion if it is the desire of the gentlemen to adjourn. I have no objection. We took off an hour this morning, and I thought we might put in an hour now. It would save us an hour some other day; but of course if the Convention desires to ad- journ I will not insist upon my motion. I will withdraw my motion. The motion to adjourn was, upon a vote, declared to have been carried, and the Con- vention thereupon adjourned. - ionvention Record ,z-s-e .stand approved. objection, the reference will be had. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. and the proceedings were opened by prayer by the Rev. Mr. Darsie. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read. Mr. BECKNER. Mr. President, I un- ' derstood the Clerk to say that Mr. Petrie 'had been added to the Committee on Print- ing. It is Mr. Pettit. The President designated Mr. Jep. C. Johnson to preside as Temporary Chair- man. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, the minutes as corrected will der. Mr. BURNAM. Mr. President, I have a petition from P. P. Demaree in behalf of the order of Good Templars, saying that there are about twelve thousand voters in the State of Kentucky, and ask this Conven- ‘tion to pass a law requiring the State Leg- islature to submit to the people an act to I prevent the manufacture of liquor used as beverages. I would move that the reading be dispensed with, and that it be referred tothe Committee on Legislative Depart- ment. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without Re- ports from Standing Committees are now in order. , Mr. BURNAM. Mr. President, I have a report from a special Committee, which is one, I suppose, that has the highest priv- . ilege which I have brought to present to the House, and which I think that the House will be glad to hear. I have a re- port from the Committee on the contested ‘electien case of McChord against Lewis. Petitions are now in or- ' J Vol. 1. FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 4, 1890. N0. 21 .SaturdaY’] BECKNER—BURNAM. [October 4. The Convention met at 10 o’clock A. M., The PRESIDENT pro tem. Send up the report. Mr. BURNAM. 1 did not have time to have it reduced to type-writing, and my writing is said to he sometimes very hard reading, so I will, with the permission of the House and the President, read it my- self. The PRESIDENT. WVithout objection, the member from Madison will read the report. Mr. BURNAM read the report in the contested election matter of McChord ver- sus Lewis, which is as follows: IV. C. .l/[c Chord, contestant, vs. J. IV. Lewis, Contestee. The Committee appointed by the Con- vention to hear proof and make report upon the matters in issue between these parties, after a prolonged and careful in- vestigation of the law and facts, submit the following: At the August election, 1890, they were opposing and the only candidates for Dele- gate to this Convention from Washington county, and by the election boards, on the Thursday following the election, contestee was declared the successful candidate, and a certificate duly granted him in legal form, by virtue of which he was sworn in, and has held a seat in this body. Contestant filed exceptions to his certifi- cate, but we regard them as wholly imma- terial and unavailing, and in view of the action already had by the Convention, not now necessary to be disclosed. Contestant also specified various grounds of contest, among them those of alleged illegal votes recorded, and of illegal votes forbidden to be recorded on the poll-books 2 WASHINGTON COUNTY CONTEST. Saturday,] BURNAM. [October 4 _ of different voting districts, and similar charges were made by contestee against the claim of contestant; but of all these the Committee regard one only as necessary to be now reported on, except with one gen- eral remark. Assuming that the boundary lines of Washington county are not changed by the act of the General Assembly approved April 1-5, 1890, entitled “An act to change the lines of Washington, Anderson and Mercer counties” and allowing the votes of electors in the territory detached from Washington county by that act to be counted, so far as not otherwise objected to, and, rejecting all votes on both sides known to be illegal, and allowing to each candidate the votes not counted, to which each is justly enti- tled, contestee Lewis is, in the opinionv of the Committee, elected. By the act aforesaid, a considerable part of the boundary of Washington county was cut off and made parts of Anderson and Mercer counties, and a majority of the votes of electors residing in that territory voted, by permission of the Judges of Election, in Washington county, and of these votes a large majority were cast for contestee, and counted for him by the elec- tion board. Contestee assailed the act of April 15, 1890, as being unconstitutional and of no binding force. In the opinion of the Commit tee that was a valid law. To pass such an act was a matter of legislative discretion, and not of power; nor is the act void for vague- ness and ambiguity in describing the bound- aries of the portion detached. “ Id cerium est quad poiest Teddi certmn.” Nor yet is the act incomplete in requiring, to give it efl'ect,ithe survey and making of the exact boundary lines. The law took complete effect from its passage, and the requisition that the lines be surveyed, and when sur- veyed, that the survey be recorded in the oflice of three counties interested, was emi- nently wise and proper. Contestee further claimed that the act- of April 15, 1890, was repealed by an act- of the General Assembly, approved May’ 20, 1890, entitled “An act to extend the: boundary line of Beattyville, and to repeal chapter 756, local act, approved April 15,. 1890.” This act the Committee regards as clear- ly in violation of the 37th section of the- third article of ‘ the Constitution, and therefore void, and they are further of' opinion that this attempted repealing act- derives no vitality from the subsequent act passed by the General Assembly May 26,. 1890, propoing to amend it. In this view they are ‘supported by many adjudicated cases of similar import by the Court of Appeals of Kentucky and of other States, whose Constitutions have a provision simi~ lar to ours. From these views it results that the votes cast by those electors living in the terri- tory detached from Washington county by the act of April 15, 1890, for the oflice of Delegate to the Constitutional Convention, were improperly counted, and, however hard it may seem to reject votes of men who, in good faith and with the approval of the judges of olection, cast them, and had them recorded in the poll-books, it is our plain duty to so decide, unless that power be de- nied. The denial of this power was claimed by contestee and his very able counsel, who claimed that, in the absence of any adj udica- tion byacourt of competent jurisdiction de- ciding these repealing acts unconstitutional, and with those acts regularly passed signed by the Speakers of the two Houses of the. Legislature and approved by the Governor, that neither the Committee nor the Conven- tion could rightfully say that these acts should be ignored or disregarded. The Committee think otherwise. This Convention, as a deliberative body, by all sound parliamentary law, has a right to de- cide upon the election and qualification of its members. The Committee of the Con- vention act judicially. They are a quas WASHINGTON COUNTY CONTEST. 3 L Saturday,] BURNAM—MCELROY—LEWIS. [October 4. court. They were sworn in the presence of J. PRocToR KNOTT. the Convention to decide this case accord- ing to the law and facts; that is, according to their truest conceptions of what the law and facts require; and the Committee, in this view, are sustained by authorities so many and positive as to admit no argu- ment to the contrary. The parliamentary history of England and America afford numberless decisions to this end, all con- curring. Both Houses of the United States Congress have claimed and exercised judi- cial power in cases like this, construing statutes of States, and even going so far as to pronounce State constitutional provis- ions invalid under the United States Con- stitution; and certainly this body, called to discharge the highest kind of legislative powers in the making of an organic law, is clothed with all the powers of a State Legislature, which enacts statutes to set in motion the ‘machinery needed to give it working; force and, asv it is admitted by both parties that these excluded votes within the excluded Washington county territory will settle the contest, they decide that W. C. McChord, the contestant, is entitled to the seat as Delegate for Washington county. The fact that when the certificate was granted by the election board to Lewis he demanded a recount without then setting up as a reason for a recount the fact of these votes having been cast in the de- tached territory, did not preclude him from making that, by his notice, one of the grounds of contest; and as the notice served on Lewis covered this ground suf- ficiently, and was executed in the time prescribed by law, the motion to strike out and the demurrer to it are overruled. For these reasons the Committee unani- mously recommend the adoption by the Convention of the following resolution: Resolved, That W. C. McChord is en- titled to the seat in this Convention as Delegate from Washington county. CURTIS F. BURNAM, Chairman. EMERY WHITAKER, EDWARD J. MoDERMo'r'r, SAM’L J. PUeH, W. H. MILLER, H. G. PETRIE, J. T. FUNK, F. A. HoPKrNs. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Gentle- men, what is your further pleasure with this report and resolution ? Mr. MCELROY. Mr. President, I move you that the report of the Committee be received, that they be discharged, and that the report be adopted by this House. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I second the mo- tion. The PRESIDENT 277‘0 tem. Is the House ready for the motion ? Mr. LEWIS. Mr. President, the report of the Committee being unanimous, of course, any opposition upon my part would be futile. However, I desire to express my gratification in seeing from the report that the decision turned upon a naked legal question. The complications that have at- tended my advent into this Convention and my short stay here are certainly very un- pleasant; but for none of them is there the least responsibility in the world attached to _ me. However, I am permitted‘ to carry away from here one very pleasant recollection; that is, the uniform courtesy and generous con- sideration accorded to me by the presiding ofiicer of this Convention, the other officers, and every Delegate upon the floor. (Ap- plause.) And the question being taken upon the adoption of said report, it was decided in the affirmative. . Mr. BURNAM. Mr. President, there is one other motion that I have not reduced to writing, but which I would make as the proper one. During the progress of this investigation it became necessary to have brought and laid before the Committee the poll-books of the county of Washington. I will move you that the Sergeant-at-Arms 4 'WASHINGTON COUNTY coNTEsr. Saturday,] K NOTT—BECKNER—MCDERMOTT. [October 4 , be directed to send back to the Clerk of the Washington ‘County Court, by express, those poll-books.-. - . I Mr. SPALDING. ‘I second the motion. And the question being taken thereon, said motion was‘ adopted. Mr. KNOTT. Will the gentleman yield one moment? (To Mr. Beckner, who had risen and been recognized.) I wish to make a motion on this matter. The evi- dence taken in the contest just closed shows very conclusively that both the contestant and contestee had reasonable grounds to believe that they had been legally elected, and were justly entitled to the seat in this Convention. Under that belief, they were under a public obligation each to defend this contest, and in doing so a large amount of testimony, at a great expense, has been taken. This, I do not think, should fall upon either of them personally. I think they ought to be reimbursed out of the pub- lic Treasury; I therefore offer the follow— ing resolution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. resolution, Mr. Secretary. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Knott, which is as follows: Report the VVHEREAs, The evidence taken in the contest between W. C. McChord and John W. Lewis, for the seat in this Convention as Delegate from the county of Washing- ton, discloses the fact that each of them had reasonable grounds to believe himself le- gally elected and entitled thereto, and pros- ecuted his contest therefor in good faith; .and whereas, this Convention has no au- thority to direct that either of them shall be reimbursed by the Commonwealth for the I .‘cost ‘expended by him in said contest; now, therefore, be it Resolved, That this Convention recom- mend that the next General Assembly pass an act requiring the Auditor of Public Ac- counts to draw his warrant on the Treas- ury in favor of said W. C. Mcl'hord and John W. Lewis, respectively, for the sum of three hundred dollars each, to reimburse them from the costs ‘and charges by them laid out and expended in said contest. Mr. KNOTT. I simply desire to say that that recommendation meets the hearty I concurrence of every member of‘ the Board that has just been discharged from its arduous duty. We think it is entirely reasonable in amount as well as in principle. I hope, therefore, there will be no ob- jection. Mr. CLAY here resumed the Chair. And the question being taken upon the adoption of said resolution, it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. BECKNER. Mr. President, I move that the contestant be now sworn as a mem- ber of this body. The PRESIDENT. It is now moved that the contestant appear and be sworn in as a member of this body. And the question being taken upon said motion, the same was adopted. Mr. McChord thereupon came for- ward, and the oath of office was adminis- tered to him by President Clay. Mr. MQDERMOTT. Mr.~ Chairman, I move that during the rest of the session the courtesies of the floor be tendered to Mr. John W. Lewis, of Washington county. And the question being taken upon said motion, same was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Reports from Stand- ing Committees are in order. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Mr. President, is it in order now to report back resolutions that have been referred to the wrong Commit- tees. The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir. Mr. BIRKHEAD. The Committee on Revision, to whom was referred Resolution No. 244, report it back, and suggest that it be referred to the Legislative Committee. The PRESIDENT. The Committee re- port it back, with the request that it be re- ferred to the Committee on Legislative Department. Is there any objection to that request‘? The Chair hears none, and such change of reference will be made. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Also Resolution No. 92. The same Committee instructed me to report it back, with the request that it be REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. ' 5 ' Committee‘? Saturday,] BIRKHEAD—AMIILLER—ALLEN; [October 4. referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT. The Chairman of the Committee requests that it be referred to the Committee on Legislative Depart- ment. Is there objection‘? The Chair hears none, and such change of reference will be made. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Also Resolution No. 21. The same Committee instructed me to report it back, with the request that it be referred to the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The Committee re- quest that the resolution be refemed to the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Is there any objection to the request of the The Chair hears none, and such reference is made. Reports from Stand- ing Committees are in order. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Mr. President, I ask leave of absence indefinitely for the gentleman from Boyle. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the request‘? The Chair hears none, and such leave will be granted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to ask in- definite leave of absence for the Delegate from Bracken. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the request? Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Also leave of ab- sence for the Delegate from Crittenden. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, indefinite leaves of absence are granted to the Delegates named. Mr. AMOS. I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Simpson. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, indefinite leave of absence will be granted to the Delegate from Simpson. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Mr. President, I de- sire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Hopkins. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob. jection, indefinite leave of absence will be granted to the Delegate from Hopkins. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Also the Delegate from Webster. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and indefinite leave of absence is, granted to the Delegate from Webster. If there are no reports from Standing Com- mittees, motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, I have a resolution in regard to an Enrolling Clerk, and ask that it be referred to the Commit- tee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. Read it, Mr. Sec- retary. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Young, which is as follows: Resolved, That the President of this Con- vention be authorized to appoint an Enroll- ing Clerk, whose duty it shall be to prop- erly transcribe and enroll the proof of the proceedings of this Convention, and to read and correct the proof of the proceedings of the Convention; and shall have an office in the Capitol building, which shall be open from 9 A. M. to 4 P. M., and shall keep in said ofiice copies of the printed Journal of the Convention for the examination and correction of the members. The ’PRESIDENT. What disposition does the gentleman wish to have made of the resolution‘? Mr. YOUNG. The Committe on Rules. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such reference is made. Mr. YOUNG. If there is no‘objection, let that reference be changed to the Com- mittee on Enrollment. The PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the change of reference indicated by the gentleman from the Fourth Louisville Dis- trict? Mr. L. T. MOORE. I object. The PRESIDENT. There is objection_ Does the gentleman make a motion to that effect‘? _ Mr. YOUNG. Let it go if there is any objection. Mr. BECKN ER introduced the follow- ing resolution: Resolved, 1. That the Stenographer and 6 . PRINTING. Saturday,] BECKNER—JONSON—ALLEN. [October 4 . Printer are directed to permit no additions to or changes in the report of the daily pro- ceedings and debates, unless it be to correct error or to insert words or matter actually omitted. 2. That the Secretary be, and he is here- by, directed to furnish the Printer at once with a copy of every order or resolution with reference to printing adopted by this body. Mr. BECKN ER. Mr. President, I was added yesterday to the Committee on Print- ing, and went to see the Printer about the situation, and I find from him that he will have the proceedings printed up to the twenty-second day to lay on our desks, and he made the complaint with reference to one or two matters, which I have attempted to correct in that resolution. One is that changes and additions have been made after the report comes from the Stenographer. I do not know the instances, and asked no names or particulars, and I am satisfied that the gentlemen who asked for the changes believed that they had a right to change their remarks; but I think we ought to have some rule about it. The Stenog- rapher, as matters stand at present, has charge of the printing as it goes 'to the printer, and that is right, as some one should be responsible, but there should be no corrections made after it has passed the hands of the Stenographer. I think there should be no corrections or additions made unless it be to correct the sense or to add matter that is actually omitted; because, if we allowed the members to correct their speeches, doubtless many things would be added which had not been spoken in the Convention, and the report does not show that it happened in the Convention, and I offer that resolution for the consideration of the Convention, and would like to have it acted upon; whether matter handed in by the Stenographer, is to be corrected after it reaches the Printer; whether addi- tions shall be made to the speeches and re- marks made by the members of matter not properly reported by the Stenographer and also that the Printer be furnished with each order made by this body with reference to printing, so that there will be no confusion. Mr. J ON SON. I would like to call the attention of the Committee on Printing to this fact. Some days ago there was an order passed directing the Printer to lay upon our desks twenty-five copies of the proceedings, inclosed in one cent wrappers, each morning, and also five copies not so inclosed. The latter part of that require- ment has not been complied with, I believe, except for about two days. I would like to ascertain the reason, and see that it is com- plied with. Mr. BECKNER. I can say to the gen- tleman from McLean that the Printer is now furnishing us with twenty five copies of each day’s proceedings of the Conven- tion; he reserves five copies for future use, to be disposed of as the members see fit, if they should want them bound, or other- wise. Cf each day’s proceedings five copies are reserved. We have at present forty- one hundred and twenty-five copies ordered, and he is printing that number each day, twenty-five to be laid on our tables and five reserved. One thousand copies will be used in bound volumes when the Conven- vention adjourns, and one hundred and twenty-five copies will be laid upon our tables for revision and correction, and for the use of the members here, so that each member is entitled to five copies that are not distributed each day. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Mr. President, either I or the gentleman from Clark is mis- taken about those five copies. Twenty-five copies of the printed proceedings are laid upon our tables every morning, wrapped as you see, and the Printer was instructed by the Convention to retain the other five till the Convention adjourns. We instructed him what to do with them. It was, that the Convention would like to have fifteen huni- dred copies bound instead of a thousand. These five copies are not yet subject to the order of the members of the Convention; but the Printer was ordered to hold them PRINTING. ' 7 £Saturday,] BEcKNER—ALLisN—BULmTT. [October 4 . .subject to the order of the Convention. We had ordered one thousand copies to be ‘bound, and the other five copies are retained ‘for the members of the Convention. Mr. BECKNER. I am giving it just as the Printer understands it at present. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. They are at the order of the Convention? Mr. PUGH. Mr. President, I move to .~.amend the resolution by attaching thereto ‘the following. I will read it and send up the copy. (Reads) “But upon the request 'of any Delegate the Reporter shall submit ‘to any Delegate who may request it, the original transcript of any remarks made by :such Delegate for correction, before same .shall be furnished the Printer for publica- tion. Mr. BECKNER. The difficulty about that is, that the Re_ orter will be compelled, now in a few days, to furnish his report at -once to the Printer, so that it may be printed :for the use of the Convention the next morning. He has a room at the Capital Hotel, where all the Delegates can see him .-and make any corrections; but it would inter- rupt the work of the Convention very much if he was compelled to hunt up the Delegates and let them revise their remarks. I suggest that as the difficulty which would arise under the amendment proposed. Mr. LASSING. Mr. President, I have :‘SOIDB resolutions. The PRESIDENT. They are not in or- der now there is a resolution pending before ‘the Convention. The PRESIDENT again designated Mr. Jonson to take the Chair. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Gentlemen of the Convention, our Secretary desires to make a personal explanation. Without ob- ,jection,vhe will be permitted now to do so. The CLERK. I just want to say this in relation to that report about the Secretary ‘furnishing the Printer with information as to what has been done in the Convention ‘concerning the printing. I want to say that it has been done regularly all the time. The first report that was made here by the Special Committee was made in the pres- ence of the Printer. That was not fur- nished him, but with the exception of that, a copy of every step that has been taken that the Printer is interested in, has been furnished him promptly. Not only that, but every paper that has been ordered printed has been put into the Printer’s hands as soon as it was possible to do. Now, there has been various resolutions con- cernin g the printing that has been offered here and referred to the Committees. I do not consider it my duty to furnish the Printer with that. I have furnished the Committee, just as soon as I could, with copies of those resolutions. I just want to make that explanation, so that the matter can be understood that the Printer has re- ceived promptly from the Secretary every thing concerning his business. Mr. BULLITT. Mr._ President, if I am in order, I would like to offer this as an amendment to the second section of the resolution offered by the gentleman from Clark. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Has there already been an amendment offered to that section? Mr. BECKNER. The gentleman from Lewis offered one. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Pugh. The PRESIDENT pro tem. (To Mr_ Bullitt.) Is yours offered as an amend- ment or substitute? Mr. BULLITT. No, sir; mine is to the second section. I do not know whether I understood what was in the second section. The object of that resolution I offer is to get this matter between the Reporter and Secretary and Printer satisfactorily adjusted. I want the Secretary to have his duty, and the Reporter his, and the Printer his, so as to obviate this conflict. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Secre- tary will report the resolution. The Reading Clerk read the second sec- 8 PRINTING. Saturday,] BULLITT—BECKNER. [October 4 - tion of the resolution ofl'ered by Mr. Beck- ner. Mr. BULLITT. Well, I do not want to alter that. I think that is right; but I think my resolution ought to go in, too. I would ask that it be read. The Reading Clerk read the amendment or resolution offered by Mr. Bullitt, which ' is as follows: Resolved, That the Secretary of this Convention be directed to put in one bun- dle all resolutions, petitions, etc., filed on each day, and the slips of paper on which the proceedings of that day’s business is noted and read in the Journal of this Con- vention, andi ndorse the same as the day’s ' business, the same were enacted, filed, etc., and file the bundle so formed away as that day’s business, and safely keep the same until further orders of this Conventlon. The Reading Clerk thereupon read a sub— stitute for the report of the Committee on Municipalities, offered by Mr. Beckner, which is as follows} SEC. 1. No new county shall be formed or established by the General Assembly of less area than four hundred square miles. Sec. 2. No county seat as now or here- after located, shall be moved, unless two- thirds of those voting, at an election held for that purpose in the county, shall favor same. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair is of the opinion that the resolution is not pertinent. ‘ It will come in at a different time. Mr. BU LLITT. Can I not offer it now‘? The PRESIDENT pro tem. With per— mission you can. Mr. BECKNER. In order that this matter may be properly considered, I move to refer it to the Committee on Printing, with directions to report on Monday. And the question being taken thereon, said motion was adopted. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I ask unani- mous consent to offer an amendment to the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, and ask that it be printed along with the amendments that have been offered. The PRESIDENT pro lam. read for information only. There is another matter pending. 1. Strike out all of subsection 4 of sec- tion 1 of Bill of Rights. 2. Strike from section 8 all that part thereof after the word “time,” in the’ eighth line of said section. 3. Strike out all of section 12 after the word “limb,” in the second line of said sec-- tion, and in lieu of the remainder of said section, and as a separate section, insert the- following, to wit: “ Private property shall- not be taken for public uses without due process of law and without just compensa-~ sation being made to the owner thereof, and no private property shall be con- demned and taken for the use of any pri- vate corporation without due process of ' law and without just compensation having been first paid to the owner thereof or his. representative in money, or paid into court subject to hlS order.” 4. Insert the word “four” between the words “term” and “of,” in third line of ' section twenty-two. 5. Strike out the word “slavery ” in the‘ twenty-fourth section. The PRESIDENT pro-tom. What will you do with the resolution. gentlemen? Mr. BECKN ER. I move that it be re-~ ferred to a Committee of the Whole House. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without. objection, it will be so referred. Mr. WHITAKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to offer a resolution that I have prepared that will finally wind up every thing connected with this contested election case. The PRESIDENT pro tem. tary will report the resolution. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Whitaker’s. resolution, which is as follows: The Score-- WHEREAs,~John W. Lewis, having qual- ified according to law as a Delegate to this. Convention, and has served as a member of ' this Convention from the commendement of the sesssion up to the present time; there-- fore be it, Resolved, That said Lewis is entitled to his mileage and per diem due him for the: time served, and the Auditor be instructed to draw his warrant upon the Treasurer for- the amount thereof. Mr. WHITAKER. 1 might Say here It can be RESOLUTIONS. 9 Saturday,] HENDRICK—BECKNER—BUCKNER [October 4., that Mr. Lewis has said that it requires the action of the Convention before the war- rant can be drawn, or his mileage certified, and I therefore offer that resolution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. What will you do with theresolution‘? Mr. HENDRICK. Will the Secretary please report the resolution ? The Reading Clerk again read the resolu- tion offered by Mr. Whitaker. The PRESIDENT pro tem. the pleasure of the Convention? Mr. WHITAKER. I. move the adop- tion of the resolution. Mr. YOUNG. I second the motion. And the question being taken vthereon, said motion was adopted. Mr. BECKNER. Mr. President, I have a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Beckner, which is as follows: Amend section 15 of the Committee’s re- port by inserting after the word “cruel” the words “or unusual,” and after the word “ worship,” in section _ of the report, the words “ or to send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscien- tiously opposed. Mr. BECKN ER. I desire to say, Mr. President, that the matter referred to in that resolution—that is, the resolution re- ported against by the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure— was fixed as a special order for last Wed- nesday at 11 o’clock. It has not yet come up, and I now move that it be set for next Thursday at 11 o’clock as a special order. What is The PRESIDENT pro tem; Is there any second to that‘? Mr. AUXIER. I second the motion. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Gentlemen, are you ready for the question? And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the afiirmative. ‘ Mr. L. P. V. WILLIAMS. Mr. Presi- dent, I wish to offer a resolution. ' The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Williams, which is as fol-- lows: Resolved, That the following be incor-- ated in the new Constitution: Article . Institutions for the benefit of the insane, blind, deaf, dumb, feeble-minded, and the.‘ poor, shall always be fostered and supported by this State, and shall be subject to such regulations as the General Assembly may direct. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without; objection, the resolution will be referredto- the Committee on Charitable Institutions» Mr. LASSING. I have some resolutions. to offer. One on the subject of Taxation ' believe differs from any which have been - offered on that subject. The PRESIDENT pro tem. tary will report the resolutions. The Reading Clerk read the first resolu--- tion offered by Mr. Lassing, which is as- follows: The Score-- Resolved, That taxajion shall be equal and uniform on all property in this Common~ wealth; except that the General Assembly shall impose an extra tax on the retail traf-~ fic in intoxicating beverages, by license or‘ otherwise, and also upon certain trades and, callings, in the exercise of the police powers; and also except that no tax shall be imposed upon churches. or upon grounds around same for church uses, of moderate dimen-- sions; or upon cemeteries, either public or‘- private, out of which no profit is derived; or upon institutions of a purely charitable- character; or upon State or county build--- ings and grounds, or upon buildings and grounds devoted to the free education of the children of the people. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without. objection the resolution will be referred to- the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. The Reading Clerk read the second, third and fourth resolutions offered by Mr. Las- sing, which are as follows: Resolved, That Section 5, of Article 6, f the Constiiution, be so amended as to read I Constables shall be elected in every Jus“ tice’s district, who shallabe chosen for foul" years, and until his successor be qualiv fied, whose jurisdiction shall be co-extensive. with the county, and he shall not be re- eligible for the succeeding term. 10 RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] PUeH—BEeKNER—DURBIN. [October 4 . Referred to Committe on Executive Offi- ~cers for Counties and Districts. Resolved, That Section 4 of Article 6 of ‘the Constitution be amended so as to read: A Sheriff shall be elected in each county by ‘the qualified voters thereof, whose term of office shall be four years, and until his suc- fcessor be qualified; and he shall not be eligi- ble for a second consecutive term; neither :shall he act as deputy for the succeeding term. Referred to Committee on Executive Ofli- ~eers for Counties and Districts. Resolved, That Section 25 of Article 3 of’ the Constitution be so amended as to read: A Treasurer shall be elected, by the qualified voters of the State, for the term of four years, and he shall not be eligible to ‘election for the succeeding term. Referred to Committee on Executive Offi- Lcers for State at Large. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without ~objection, the references indicated on the :resolutions will be had. Mr. PUGH. I desire to say that I have had a conference with the Committee on 'Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure, and I desire to offer this resolution in lieu of one I formerly offered on the :same subject, and move you now that the :special order for Monday next be post- ‘poned until Thursday at 11 o’clock, and ‘that the Committee on Crimes, Punish- ments and Criminal Procedure be directed ‘to report at that hour. I am satisfied that it will facilitate the work of this Conven- ‘tion, as that Committee and myself are in perfect harmony with regard to the ne- “eessity for an institution of this kind and the propriety of incorporating into the Con- rstitueion a mandatory clause like this. Mr. BECKNER. I would suggest to ‘the gentleman that there is already a spe- ~cial order for Thursday.' Mr. PUGH. Make it a special order _for Friday, at 11 o’cloek, with a request to the Committee to report at that hour. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The See- Tetary will please report the resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Pugh, which is as follows: Resolved, That the Constitution adopted by this Convention shall contain in its ap- propriate order the following section. ARTICLE -. Reformatory Institution. SECTION 1. It shall be the duty of the General Assembly to as soon as practicable for the establish- ment and maintenance of an institution for the correction, instruction and reforma- tion of all children under sixteen years cf age, convicted of such crimes and misde- meanors as shall be designated by legislative enactment. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Will the gentleman from Lewis restate his motion? Mr. PUGH. That this resolution, to— gether with the report of the Committee, and the other resolution offered by me upon this subject, he recommitted to the Commit- tee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure, with request to report at 11 o’clock on Friday next, and that the special order for Monday next be postponed till that hour. And the question being taken thereon, said motion was adopted. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I have a resolution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Secre- tary will report the resolution sent up by the Delegate from Grayson. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Durbin, which is as follows As individuals have suffered so seriously by being on the bonds of defaulting offi- cials, be it therefore Resolved, That the defaleation of State and county officials shall be deemed a felony. Referred to Committee on Crimes, Pun- ishments and Criminal Procedure. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Mr. President, I‘ have a resolution which I desire referred to the Committee on Railroads and Com- merce, and move that the reading be dis- pensed with. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, the reading will be dispensed with, and the reference made. Mr. HANKS. Mr. President, there was make provisio n ' COUN TY INDEBTEDNESS. 11 Saturday,] HANKS—SNITH. [October 4 . a resolution offered by the gentleman from Hardin asking the different members of the House to ascertain the indebtedness of the respective counties and municipalities. I would state to theConvention that I hold in my hand some information upon that sub~ ject. Early in September I took it upon myself to communicate with the County 'Clerks throughout the State and try and ascertain the indebtedness of the various counties and municipalities within the ju- risdiction of the State. Most of the clerks of the counties have answered. They have sent me ansswers in response to the inter- rogatories. The circular that I sent to the different County Clerks is as follows: LAWRENCEBURG, KY., Sept. 3d, 1890. ‘To the Hon. Clerk of the County Court of the County of DEAR SrRz—By answering the questions below .my signature, on this sheet, you, no doubt, will greatly benefit the whole people of this Commonwealth, as well as confer a very great favor upon ‘myself. Respectfully, Tnos. H. Harms, Member Constitutional Convention, 1890, Anderson County. What bonds of indebtedness have been issued by your county now due? Also what amount by your city or town now due? Amount of interest they draw And amount of unpaid interest, if any For what purpose were the bonds or in- debtedness created? Give amount of railroad bonds The interest they bear When they were issued, as near as you can Also give the indebtedness of your coun- ty and municipal governments, if there is any For improvements of any and all kinds, which is not a bonded indebtedness Several have answered, stating that there was no indebtedness on the part of the counties, and four or five have returned the circulars without filling up any of the blanks. If the information here conveyed is received by the Delegates upon their desks it will save them much labor. I de- sire to. offer these circulars filled by the Clerks, or at least returned to me as having been filled by them, to the Convention, and I would suggest that the same be printed. I think that if one circular is printed it will he better, and will save much printing, and have that circular show;the questions, and the answers of the-_; various County Clerks immediately following. I send up the report, and also the list of counties that have reported no indebtedness. I ask that the copy of the report showing the indebt- edness of the counties to the State be print- ed and laid upon the desks of the Delegates, in order that they may know how the mat- ter stands without further troubling them- selves, because I apprehend these state- ments are accurate. I will state that the cities have not answered. I sent no circu- lar to any of the city officers, and therefore none of them have sent any information as to the indebtedness of their cities. Those gentlemen whose questions embrace the cities will know what to do about that bet- ter than myself. I hope the reports of the different County Clerks will be printed, so we will know how the State stand finan- cially so far as heard from. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. Has he ascer— tained the information from all the coun- ties‘? - Mr. HANKS. I have not. The reason I suggested the information, as far as ascer- tained, should be printed, was this: If print- ed, it will show to the Delegates what coun- ties have reported, and what the indebted- ness of those counties are, and it will save the Delegates the trouble of writing to them. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I have no special objection to the resolution, but I really do‘ 12 COUNTY INDEBTEDNESS. Saturday,] BECKHAM—CARROLL——MILLER. [October 4 . not see the necessity of its being printed at this time. The PRESIDENT pro tem. I will say to the Delegate from Hardin, that there is nothing before the House in regard to this matter, as I have heard no motion or second to do any thing with it. Mr. BECKHAM. I have no doubt the matters contained in the papers offered by the Delegate from Anderson will be of value to the Convention in some of the matters to be considered by them. I.do not think, however, that in its present shape it can be utilized. I therefore move that the papers offered by the Delegate from An- derson be received by the Convention, and referred to the Committee on Corparations, with instructions to digest and collate the facts therein stated, and ‘report to the Con- vention. . Mr. CARROLL. I second the motion. Mr. H. H. SMITH. As the Committee on Corporations really have no cognizance of this matter, I move to amend by insert- ing the Committee on Municipalities, in- stead of the Committee on Railroads. The Committee on Municipalities have really the cognizance of this matter, and it ought to go to that Committee. Mr. W. H. MILLER. As a substitute for the motion of the Delegate from Shel- by, I move that these communicatians be referred to a Special Committee, of which the Delegate from Anderson shall be Chair- man, with instructions to tabulate these statements and have them printed, and re- port to the Convention. Mr. BECKHAM. I accept that as a substitute for that motion. The motion being put to the House on the substitue of the Delegate from Lin- coln, the same was declared carried. The PRESIDENT pro tem. With the Delegate from Anderson, I will appoint the Delegate faom Shelby and the Delegate from Hardin upon that Committee. Mr. YOUNG. There seems to be noth- ing else before the House, and I move that . we now go into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of finishing the report of' the Committee on Municipalities. ‘The PRESIDENT pro term. I will ask for information. There is a rule that when the House goes into Committee'of the Whole, the President shall designate some Delegate to act as Chairman. I am in doubt whether that refers to the President. pro fem. as well as the President. Mr. CLAY. I think the temporary President has all the rights and privileges of the President. ' The PRESIDENT pro tem. I will ask the Delegate from Scott to take the Chair. Mr. ASKEW took the Chair. Mr. YOUNG. I would suggest that on yesterday we were discussing the amend-- ment offered, I believe, by the gentleman from Clinton, at the time the Committee arose. I would suggest a reading of the amendment which was offered by the gen-- tleman from Clinton. The CHAIRMAN. Let it be read. The READING CLERK. There have- been some amendments offered this morn- ing. I will read every thing, and the Com- mittee can understand exactly what is be- fore it. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the re-- port of the Committee on Municipalities, and the amendments offered and adopted. The READING CLERK. Section one has been amended by striking out the word “contents,” and inserting the word “area” in lieu thereof. Mr. BECKHAM. Is there any thing" now before the House‘? . The CHAIRMAN. There is. The Clerk is trying to get together and in order the- various amendments offered to the report of the Committee on Municipalities. The Reading Clerk then read the substi- tute of the Delegate from Nelson (Mr Muir) for section one of the Committee’s report; also, the substitute offered by the Delegate from Clark (Mr. Beckner) for sections one and two of the Committee’s COUNTIES. 13 Saturday,] BECKHAM—BECKNER—STRAUS. [October 4. report; also, the substitute for section two of the Committee’s Report, offered by the Delegate from Lincoln (Mr. Miller). The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen of the Committee, the report of the Committee on Municipalities, and 'all the amendments thereto, have been read to you. What is your pleasure ? Mr. BECKHAM. I desire to offer a substitute for the report of the Committee, ' and for the amendments that have been acted upon by the Convention, and all the amendments. My handwriting is some- thing dif‘ficult to read, and I will ask to read it myself, with the permission of the Com- mittee. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman may read it himsetf. Mr. BECKHAM read the substitute, as ‘' follows: % 1. No county shall be created with a less population than eight thousand inhabitants, nor shall any county be reduced below said number of inhabitants. Q2. N 0 county seat shall be removed ex- cept upon a vote‘ of two-thirds of those voting. ' Mr. BECKHAM. I offer that as a sub- .stitute for the report of the Committee I and all the amendments. Mr. BECKNER. I make the point of order that there is now already pending a .substitute for the report of the Committee and all the amendments. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, read the substitute offered by the Delegate from Clark. Mr. BECKHAM. I think, as read by the Reading Clerk, that the paper referred to by the Delegate from Clark was offered ' as a substitute for the first and second sec- tions. That is how I understood it. Mr. BECKNER. It was offered as a substitute for the original report as well as the amendments. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the substitute offered by the Delegate from Clark (Mr. Beekner), as follows: I See. 1. No new county shall be formed or established by the General Assembly of less area than four hundred square miles. Sec. ‘2. No county seat as now or here- after located, shall be removed unless two- thirds of those voting, at an election held for that purpose in the county, shall favor same. Mr. STRAUS. So far as the resolution offered by the gentleman from Shelby af- fects the amendment already adopted by the Convention, it is out of order. The Committee of the Whole has no control over that matter now. The Convention has already adopted that amendment, and it can only be reached by a motion to recon- sider before the Convention. Mr. BEOKHAM. I suppose that could be done after this Committee arises and makes its report to the Convention. Mr. STRAUS. The only way to reach it is upon a motion to reconsider in the Convention, and not before the Committee of the Whole. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of opinion that the point of order of the Del- egate from Bullitt is well taken. Mr. BECKHAM. I suppose, then, that this can be offered as a substitute only in the Convention, and not before this Committee of the Whole, so far as it affects that amendment. Do I understand that to be the ruling of the Chair? ' The CHAIRMAN. In so far as it ap- plies to the amendment. The Convention having taken action upon the amendment of the Delegate from Bullitt, this Commit- tee has no control over it. Mr. BECKHAM. The same ruling, then, I suppose, would apply to the substitute offered by the Delegate from Clark. The CHAIRMAN. If it pretends to go over the ground of the amendment referred to, it is to that extent out of order. Mr.,BECKHAM. Under that ruling of the Chair, I suppose that the substitute that I offered can be got before the Con- vention only by offering it in the Conven- tion, and not before this Committee. 14 CO U N TIES. . Saturday,] APPLEGATE—MIILLER———170UNG. [October 4.. Mr. APPLEGATE. In View of the ruling of the Chair, I move now thaat the Committee rise and make a report, in order to give the gentleman a chance to offer his substitute to the Convention. The motion being seconded, was put to the House, and a division of the vote being called for, it was declared lost. The CHAIRMAN. The Committee re- fuses to rise. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make the point of order that there is no quorum present, as shown by the count just made. Mr. YOUNG. Of course I do not pre- tend to be wiser than anybody else in the Convention, but if we are to go on at this rate, we all had better buy residences at Frankfort and move here permanently. We have now had this matter up for sev- eral days. This is the fourth day, and amendments and substitutes still pour in. If we are going to proceed in this way,‘ there is no question on earth that can be brought before this Convention, in my judgment, and be settled within ten days. It seems to me there are certain gen- eral principles that should regulate this matter. There can be no question that pub- lic sentiment, whatever may be the opinion of this Convention, has declared that there shall be no more new counties; and yet we are met with the extraordinary argument ‘that new counties do not cost the State any thing; and by some sort of process of leger- demain (I don’t know how they do it), these gentlemen have increased some of‘ our counties, by a process of calculation un- known to' me, until they are absolutely em- pires in themselves. I thought Lewis was a reasonable county, yet the Delegate from Nelson, whose figures are always accurate- at least when calculating per cents—has worked out Lewis to be the largest county in the State, through Rand 8: MeNally’s Guide. Rand & McNally get the’ most of their maps through railroad men. I some- times send ;them to them (laughter), and I do not intend to be slandered in that way. I send them correct maps of the State of Kentucky, with railroad lines all drawn upon them, and by what process of mathe— matics they can figure out two hundred and eighty odd thousand acres of land in Lewis county to make 900 square miles, I cannot understand; and if we are going to argue questions before the Convention upon the formation of counties upon these ex- torted figures of Rand & McNally, I do not see how we will ‘ever get to a conclu-- sion. But the Delegate from Pike, deter- mined not to be outdone by the Delegate from Nelson, takes 425,000 acres of land, and he makes it five empires, containing 2000 square miles. It takes just 256,000 acres, in round numbers, to make 400 square miles, and how out of Pike can be made five counties with 2000 square miles it is. difficult to comprehend. We must get- down to some principle to control this thing. First, do we want more counties '? Ken-- tucky stands here to-day with more coun- ties than any State in the Federal Union, except Texas, and yet Kentucky is not a large State. It is rather under the average of the States. The wisdom of the other States is worth something, and all the other States, with almost absolute unanimity, have contracted the number of counties, and have said that no more counties shall be created except under certain conditions, which we have practically inserted in the report of the Committee. Missouri’s states- men certainly has some wisdom, and Illi- nois, New York, Pennsylvania‘; I do not. say that they are wiser than we. My opin~ ion is that this is the wisest body of men that ever sat. It is the wisest body I ever sat in. (Laughter and applause). It is rather like my experience in drinking tea at the Exposition of 1884. I never tasted tea until then, and the man who was brought over, some Japanese, to sell tea to the ladies and children, insisted that I should take a cup of tea. I said, “Mr., that is the best cup of tea I ever tasted.” What was my COUNTIES. 15 Saturday,] YOUNG. [October 4. surprise the next morning to see in broad and glaring type across the face of the Courier- Journal: “The President of the Southern Exposition says Pe-Kong tea is the best tea he ever tasted.” So it was, but I had never tasted any other tea. (Laughter.) We have the experience of other people who have made Constitutions, and they have limited by area and lines the > number and conditions under which coun- ties shall be created. We were met yesterday by the extraordinary statement that it does not cost any thing to make counties. I was surprise d at that statement from a gentle- man so accurate as the Delegate from Pen- dleton. Let us examine this statement carefully. If genltemen will take the Auditor’s report for 1887 and 1888, I will give you the pages and the references, and see whether new counties do not cost the State of Kentucky something. Pulaski is a large county, it shows 425,000 acres. Her valuation is $3,000,000, and she spends $1,810 for juries. The State has to pay for the juries. Lee county, with 142,000 acres, with a value of $561,000, spends $1,931 for juries, or $100 more than the great county of Pulaski. Shelby county, with 234,000 acres, with a valuation of $8,000,000, spends $1,124 for juries; and here is Pow- ell with 84,000 acres, hardly one-fiifth her size, with a valuation of $460,000, spending $1,065 for juries. The juries that are called to protect the property in Shelby county valued at $8,000,000, only cost $1,124, when juries called upon to protect life and property in Powell county, with 84,000 acres, costs $1,065. Let us go to counties in the same neighborhood, and see whether there is any thing wrong with our inductions. One swallow don’t make a spring; one example will not make a law. I admit that, but let us see what is the rule that runs through the regulation of cost to the State. Here is Wayne county, with 272,000 acres, with a valuation of $1,500,000, spends $538 for v juries. Here is Russell county, with 154,000 acres, and a valuation of $1,000,000, spend $778 for Juries. Here is Robertson county, with 61,000 acres, the second smallest. county in the State, with a value of only $852,000, and expends $516 for juries. Anderson, with 115,000 acres, with nearly $2,000,000 taxables, spends $900 for juries.. I cannot go over the whole list; but here is Crittenden, with 206,000 acres, and taxables. $2,000,000, which spends $800 for juries- Jackson, with 187,000 acres, and taxables. $650,000, spends $1,550 for juries, two- thirds as much as the county of Madison, with a valuation of $8,000,000. The gen— tleman said that it was beneficial to these‘ counties to divide them. The Legislature- divided Ballard and Carlisle some years. ago. It cost, before division, Ballard $4,000, and now, divided into two counties, it costs_ $5,100. Neither of these counties pays as much into the State Treasury as it takes out, and the State for juries alone pays over- $5,000, whereas, before the county was di- vided, it only paid $4,000 for that purpose- The counties, conjoined in 1885, required an expenditure of $4,090, and now, as two counties, they require an expenditure of $5,107. Nor is this all. Record books must-5e- supplied to circuitand county courts. Every time you add a county to a circuit it means one-tenth, or one-eighth, or one-fifth of a Cir- cuit J udge’s time. No circuit has more than ten counties. If there be a county in which it is one of five counties in the dis- trict, you take one-fifth of the time of the Circuit Judge. I do not mind the expense. I am not one of the men that is going to figure in this Convention on dol- lars and cents. Whatever is necessary to pretect men’s lives and liberty and property in the State of Kentucky must be expend- ed. If it require a Circuit Judge for every two counties, let us have a Circuit Judge for every two counties. We must enforce justice; have the laws executed; provide prompt remedies for all wrong, and for the enforcement of rights; and whatever is L necessary, in order to do that, should be "16 COUNTIES. fSaturdayJ YOUNG. [October 4 promptly and effectively done. Do not argue ' -on the dollars and cents when it comes to the good name of our State and the welfare > -of the citizen. But if this thing—that is, the ‘creation of new counties—is unnecessary in localities where there are quarrels and trou- bles and commotion, it is far more impor- tant to restrict a. number of counties with that view, than as far as dollars and cents ‘is concerned. ‘ties in which the troubles have occurred— and I say this in no unkind spirit, or a :spirit of antagonism to these counties in which these troubles have occurred, for they are brought about by circumstances that the people of those counties are not alto- gether responsible for--you will find that of- ficers of the county were more or less involved in the troubles. If you will gointo Breathitt, ,you will find that the County Judge, ‘one of the best men in that county, was sacrificed—shot down in the streets. In ‘the county of Rowan you will find it grew “out of antagonism concerning the county government. I say, wherever we find these -difficulties, we observe that these little county organisms are storm centers from which feuds are created, and it is impossi- ble that it should be otherwise. It is not the policy, in my judgment, of this State vto create useless oflicials; and if the officials called for by the Constitution and existing laws are sufficient, we do not want any ‘more; neither do we need to increase the number of citizens called together in the county seats waiting to take their turns in ‘the juries. ' The gentlemen say that the small coun- ties do not cost much. It costs just as much in a small county to summon twenty-four petit jurors and sixteen grand jurors as it does in the largest county in the State; and I have shown you by the figures here, that whatever may be the cause, that in a small county proportionately the expenses for ‘ jurors alone are far greater than in the more populous and wealthy counties, and it will be so wherever you increase the num- If you go into all these coun-‘ ber of counties. Make a county with four or five thousand people, and you will find from the Auditor’s Report that proportion- ately the cost to the State for jurors (I have not considered any thing else) is greater than in the large counties. I was struck with the fact that the coun- ty of Campbell, with only ninety square miles and thirteen millions of property, spends $3,864 for grand and petit juries, while Knox county, with two hundred thousand acres and one million and a half of taxables, spends five thousand five hun- dred and fifty-four dollars for juries. And wherever you create these counties you cre- ate opportunities by which people may put their hands into the State Treasury, and thus become an unnecessary burden upon ‘the Common wealth. I do not sympathize altogether with the idea of some of the Delegates that we are to magnify the Legislature and to resolve that Kentcuky has had the wisest and purest Legislatures ever assembled on earth. It does not detract from patriotism or pride of a Kentuckiaii to say that the opposite is true. The Legislature in Kentucky has done things, from time to time, that have simply disgraced them in the eyes of honest people. They have been guilty of special and personal legislation; they have been subjected to influences that do not command our respect, and it does not enhance our reputation as a State to say, simply because the Legislature did so and so, that is the best thing that could be done, and that they are" going to be the wisest body of men who shall assemble in the fu- ture. I think some very bad men have gone to the Legislature. I ‘do not say my city ‘is any better than others in ‘this regard. If I were to express an opinion, I would say they are just as bad as the average. Let us look at some of the peculiar legis- tion Kentucky has had. Here, in the Acts of 1887 and 1888, chapter 306, page 650, we find “ That the county line between the counties of Allen and Barren be changed, COUNTIES. ' 17 5 Saturday,] YOUNG. [October 4 so as to include the residence of John W. Hunt and the land upon which said Hunt resides, in the county of Barren.” The county lines must be changed to run around a man’s farm! Who has any respect for legislation of that kind‘? County lines must be changed and the map of our State altered because Mr. Hunt, living down between two coun- ties, finds it more convenient to be in one county than in the other! In the same Acts, chapter 427, you find this: “That the coun- ty line of Bell and Whitley counties be so changed as to include the farm and resi- dence of ‘the said James F. Lambdin within said Whitley county.” And so it has gone on. I am informed by the Chief Executive of this State that, at the present time, there are more than two hundred acts of that kind changing county lines, by form lines to convenience somebody. They say that the people of the counties want these changes,. and they should have them. We are here to say when the people of a county want a bad thing they shall not have it. We are here to protect minorities. Maj orities can always protect themselves. That is the reason we make organic laws. That the people in any district, or part of a county, shall be subjected to additional cost and outlay for county government simply be- cause some gentleman wants to lay out a county seat, or somebody wants to name a county after somebody; it is vicious legis- lation, and the public opinion of this State is against it. These small counties do cost money, and the Auditor’s Report shows they cost a great deal of money. They cost more than that. They cause the crea- tion of useless ofiieials. They cause the creation of little centers from which radiate antagonisms, and which I think I could show, if I should enter thoroughly into it, are really at the bottom of nine-tenths of all the difliculties which ever existed in the counties where we have had such seri- ous and hurtful feuds in the eastern portion of the State._ Let us get down to some general prrinei- plc to settle this matter. The Committee have no pride of opinion about this. We have examined other Constitutions. We saw what other people had done. We took advice as to what occurred in various parts of the State. We thought that this report fully coveredfit, but if, in the wisdom of these one hundred wise men. something else is better, let us have that something else but do not go on for four or five days put-; ting in amendments and substitutes. termine upon some general prlnciple upon which this question shall be determined, and then adjustit. In the first place , we are all agreed that four hundred square miles is as small as a county should be, which only makes twenty miles square. Twenty miles square is not an unreasonably small or large county. It makes two hundred and fifty- six thousand acres of land, and that is as lit- tle as we ought to have in a county. I do not care any thing about the distance of county lines from the county seat. I do not think that cuts much figure in it, so long as you maintain the area which shall be in- cluded in county lines. But another ques- tion confronts us, and I think with seven words Ican remove the difficulty of these gentlemen. Take the report of the Com- mittee, and in Section 2, after the word “from,” in second line, say “except in the formation of new counties,” and it will then read : “No county shall be divided, or have any part stricken therefrom, except in the formation of new counties, without submit- ting the question- to a vote of the people of I the county; nor unless the majority of all the legal voters of the county voting on the question shall vote for the same.” Whenever the Legislature wants to make a new county, it can make it irrespective of the votes of the county from which it is taken. But here is another principle which confronts us. Let us settle principles. We are all agreed on four hundred square miles, I think, and with the suggestion of the Committee, that ‘in the formation of new De- . 18 COUNTIES. Saturday,] YOUNG. [October 4. counties the counties themselves {should not be consulted, but that matter may be referred to and rest with the Legislature; that it may take parts from other counties and make a new county, provided that new county contains four hundred square miles, and provided all the counties from which these parts were taken contain four hundred square miles. You have determined the subject wisely and fairly. Whereverijyou dismember a county, by the Committees’s report you shall consult that dismembered county, and the whole county shall have the right to vote upon the question. The Committee is prepared to stand by that principle. The Committee does not believe that a county should be dismembered with- out the consent of the whole county. Because fifteen or thirty or forty people may petition the Legislature that they shall be set apart to some other county, can not make action on this petition wise. The county has as- sumed certain obligations. Associations and traditions exist in regard to a county. There may be a minority in the part pro- posed to be struck off who object to it. They may feel that the history of their families is connected with the county, and for many other reasons may wish to remain. ‘If it is reasonable that a county should be dismem- bered, we can trust the people of that county as well as we can trust the Legislature. They will not be unreasonable about it. If it suits the convenience of the portion pro- posedv to be cut off, and there is good reason for it, I believe the people will vote in the properxway and adjust the matter equita- bly. ple such as this, it simply means, when some gentleman comes up from a county and says to the Legislature, we desire a change of county lines, then this cursed Legisla- tive courtesy which exists in Kentucky, and permits the member from each county to control all legislation which affects such county, comes to his rescue, and‘ lines are run and the county is divided and subdi- vided to suit his convenience, and leaves But if you do not put in some princi- ' the county at the mercy of any man who may be elected to represent it. I hav e nothing to say about past action concerning any .county which may have been. consid- ered by this Convention on this subject. We have come here not to consider particu- lar facts, but general principles, and to decide upon some principle upon which the laws of this State may be made, and it is no insult to the Legislature—it is no deroga- tion of their power—to declare that certain things shall not be done except in a particular way. That is why we are here to restrain and control them, because our experience of forty years shows they have not always done wise things. They have been guilty of outrageous special legislation, and made laws which were not for the benefit of the people at large, but only for the benefit of people who were to be enriched by them. This is our business here; to lay down cer- tain laws and principles which shall regu- late the Legislature in the future. If we can not do that, we had better separate and go home. I do not consider the Legislature such a sacred animal that, like the white cow cf the Hindoo, we should not be allowed to touch, but only to bow down in reverence before it. I want to touch it in a great many places. < There are a great many things the Legislature has done in the last forty years they should not be allowed to do again. Public opinion has demanded the calling of this Convention for this particular pur- pose. We want a new Constitution which shall inhibit the things that have been done in the last forty years to the detriment of the State and its people.- The Commit- tee is of the opinion that there should be some general principle which shall control the dismemberment of counties. That prin- ciple are that the county itself shall consent and the dismembered parts shall. consent. It is immaterial whether you make it two- thirds or three-fourths. We believe that a simple majority should determine that question, and if there is any good reason for such division, that a majority in the COUNTIES. 19 Saturday,] YOUNG—MARTIN. [October 4. county is as safe a body to determine that ' question as the Legislature of the State. For these reasons I suggest that, there- fore, that we conclude this matter in some way. Being the Chairman of the Commit— tee, I suppose I would have the right to close the discussion, but if other gentlemen want to discuss it, I have no objection. We are all agreed about the four hundred square miles, and practically agreed that the right to abolish counties should be left to the Leg‘- islature. The largest vote already cast in . this behalf showed that this is the will of this body. They think that is a proper pro- visionhin the Constitution, that wherever the Legislature believes, under all the circum- stances, it is the wise thing to abolish a county, that the power to do this should re- main in the Legislature. This other prin- ciple is the one upon which most trouble seems to exist in the minds of Delegates, viz., thedismemberment question. If it shall be said that it shall only require the consent of the dismembered portion, let us settle it in that way. We have heard it fully discussed. Every gentleman here has had full opportunity to make up his mind, and if it be determined by the Convention that only the dismembered part of a county shall be consulted in the matter of division of such county, then let such principle be set forth in the clause. Let us - now fix and determine these principles, and decide upon something in regard to this matter after this five days’ discussion. I have additional figures, but I will not weary the Convention with them. I have taken the small counties, and I have com- pared them with other counties, and I think we have seen that they cost the State a good deal of money, proportionately, than larger ones; that they are the source of a great deal of local trouble and antagonism, and that in their formation there is the creation of a number of useless offices. Simply because a given number of peo- ple want a county government is no reason why they should have it. The minority ,shouldbe protected. If you have a county containing four or five thousand people, and have the offices of County Judge, Sheriff, Clerk and others supported by county tax, it is a hurtful expenditure, unless there is some strong reason for such outlay and cost. Having agreed on four hundred square miles as a proper area, so far as the Committee is'concerned they have no pride of opinion about this matter, only they hope that this question may be settled on these general lines which I have indicated, which, in their judgment, ought to govern the formation and the dismemberment of the counties. Mr. MARTIN. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question? What does the gentleman propose to do with a county that has seven hundred and ninety ' square miles‘ ‘? Mr. YOUNG. With a county ‘with seven hundred and ninety square miles, I would say, if there was no particular incon- venience to the inhabitants of that county, under no circumstances divide it. With seven hundred and ninety square miles any citizen would not be further than twenty- five miles from his county seat. Mr. MARTIN. That would depend on the shape of the county. Mr. YOUNG. Of course, that would depend on the shape of the county and the - geographical conditions under which the particular section found itself. Some coun- ties ought to be divided. I think, perhaps, Pike county should be divided, and Pulaski county should be divided. There are four or five counties in the State that ought to be divided, and _when they have a sufficient population, and the people and the Legisla- ture wishes to divide them, let the Legisla- ture do so. With this provision here, 'the Legislature can do so whenever the people demand it, provided it does not decrease it less than four hundred square miles. Mr. MAR'I IN. Seven hundred and ninety won’t divide right. Mr. YOUNG. Then I would not divide it; but let them bear the ills they have. Mr,- BULLITT. I do not know how 2'0 COUNTIES. Saturday,] BULLITT. [October 4. this question comes up, but the gentleman from Louisville is arguing on the main proposition, as I understand. If the orig- inal proposition is before the Convention, I desire to say something on the subject. The CHAIRMAN. This is the Com- mittee of the Whole. ‘ Mr. BULLITT. I desire to say some- thing on the main question if it is before the Committee. I think counties of four hundred square miles are very convenient sized counties, for I believe it is the duty of the Commonwealth to so arrange it that every citizen in the county will have an op- portunity of going to his county seat and serving the Commonwealth either as a wit- ness or as a juror, and returning home on the same day. The counties ought not to be so large as to prevent him from having that opportunity of going to his county seat and serving the Commonwealth as a juror or as a witness, or in any other capacity in which he may be called upon to serve, with- out being compelled to pay the cost of a night’s lodging for the performance of a day’s service. I do not know whether four hundred square miles or whether, as was suggested by my friend over here, if a county contains seven hun- - dred square miles, and the county seat is inconveniently located, it would take those from the fartherest sections a day to get to the county seat and a day to get back ; but it is the duty of the Commonwealth to so arrange counties as to make it conven- ient for every citizen to go to the county seat to perform his duty to the Common- wealth. But that is not the most serious objection that I have to the passage of this report. Here is saddled upon us a restric- tion for doing good, and for the accommo- dation of the people, and no restriction upon the doing of that which will injure the rights of the, people. The Legis- lature is restrained from performing that which is to accommodate the in- terest and welfare of the people, but left wholly unrestrained as to its power to in- flict punishment. The principle of our gov- ernment is the division of the powers of government between the Legislative, Ex- ecutive and Judiciary, and it has been the boast of every freeman in this land that no man shall be punished except upon a trial before the courts of justice. Yet, accord- ing to the resolution offered by the gentle- man from Bullitt and passed by this Con- vention, the Legislature has the power, as expressed by some of the advocates of that measure, of inflicting a punishment, and a punishment upon whom? Not upon the guilty, but upon the innocent citizens of a county, because there are some violators of the law in that county. Can we sustain ourselves before the people of this Common- wealth, or before the enlightened world, if we go before it with that sort of declaration in the fundamental organic laws of this Commonwealth? I have no objection to some of the features embodied in the report of the Committee, but I do object to that going before the world as the action of this Convention—a principle which denies the very vital spark upon which the govern- ment is established, and destroys the right of every man, before he shall be put in jeopardy of his life, person or property, of being heard before a court of justice. Can we sustain such a view? I admit I am not acquainted with parliamentary usages, but it strikes me the only way to get rid of the resolution adopted by the Convention is to defeat the whole thing and let the resolution go with it. Now, this is only a declaration that we intend to authorize the abrogation of the Constitu- tion itself by transferring the control of the people’s rights from the courts to the Legislature; and how can we expect a a Con stitntion that is thus provided to be respected by the people and obeyed. We declare to the world that we have people in counties that we cannot compel to obey the laws. If we have not the power to compel them to obey the laws, we ought to turn the government over to someone who knows how to handle COUNTIES. . 21 Saturday,] BULLITT—BECKNER. [October 4, it. Now, I conceive that it would be im- proper for us to say that the Legislature could not annihilate counties. There are circumstances under which they should be ‘annihilated, and if you run back the his- tory of the law upon municipal corpora- tions, away back into the earlier history of England, you will find there are circum- stances under which municipalities have been wiped out. How have they generally been wiped out? It was by the people ad- mitting themselves that they were useless; and whenever they become useless the ‘Legislature ought to have power to wipe vthem out, not in the way of punishing in- nocent people because a lawless neighbor lives in the county; not punish a good citi- zen because there is a bad citizen living in the county; but when the municipality ceases to be subservient to the interests of the people, the Legislature ought to have the power to wipe it out. If, as was con- tended by some gentlemen here yesterday, it might be brought to the minds of the court that the motive for the obliteration of the county was punishment, the court might say it could not be done, but the Legislature, having the power, it would not be within the province of the court to inquire into the motive. The Legislature might have a good motive or a bad one, but the court would be bound to suppose it acted on the good one; but if the courts, upon inquiry, ascertained that it was for the purpose of punishment that the county had been annihilated by the act of the Legislature, they could declare the law un- constitutional. Unless this thing can be gotten rid of, I shall vote against the whole thing. Mr. BECKNER. I do not desire to see any new counties formed, and I do not at present understand that any Delegate is prepared to say that there will ever be any necessity for the formation of another county, but I am opposed to having so many conditions put in the Constitution, that it would be impossible for a future General Assembly if they thought proper to organize new counties. There are coun- ties in the State which it seems to me will We will have The fact that Legislatures have made mistakes in creat- some day require division. to have some new counties. ing counties where they were not needed should not affect this question. If we are going to allow Assemblies that may come after us to create new counties,‘ we ought to make conditions such that they could do that thing; but if all these amendments and the report of the Committee are adept- ed it will be utterly impossible to create new counties. If we are to have a condi- tion, it should be fixed on area or popula- tion. There is pending a proposition to make a condition'of twelve thousand popu- lation, which I think has been accepted by the Committee of the Whole, that no county shall be formed having a less popu- lation than twelve thousand. If that be adopted, I am in favor of standing to that. There is proposed by the Committee four hundred square miles in territory. If the Convention sees fit to accept that, we should stand on that and not add the other to it. I am in favor of accepting one or the other—either the surface contents or the population—and not fix it so that fu- ture General Assemblies will find it impos- sible to create new counties if it is found nec- essary, and therefore I am opposed to all the amendments to the report of Commit- tee, and I also would like to see this portion of the report struck out: “Nor shall any line thereof pass within ten miles of any county seat.” That is a condition that may make it impracticable or quite difficult to make a new county. I am anx- ious to see the Convention adopt some prin- ciple which will give the General Assem- bly opportunity to create new counties without hampering them with conditions which will prevent such a thing. Either put the condition, “there shall be no new county,” or make it practicable to create them when the time comes for them. 22 COUNTIES. Saturday] Moons. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I do not under- stand the statement of the gentlemen who say if this report is adopted it will be im- possible ever to make a new county. There are provisions made for the establishment of new counties, and the mode and manner of dismemberment provided. How it is they get to the conclusion that it will be impossible to make a new county, I do not understand. It is also said that the county of Pike has a very large area, and that seems to be the county on which most of them dwell as ar- gument why we ought not to encumber the Legislature whenever it desired to make a new county. I desire to say to these gen- tlemen that there is the State ofNew York; I have the red book of that ‘State, and I would like to read for their information from that book the area of some counties in the State of New York. St. Lawrence has 2,880 odd square miles. There are six- teen other counties that have' over 150,000 square miles in them, and yet for the last ten years the State of New York has never discovered it was necessary to make a new county. If there is one thing upon which I think the people have at least a general, if not an almost universal, sentiment, itis in opposition to the creation new counties. Now, I do not appre- ciate the statement of the Delegate from Mc- Cracken, that a man should be in such con- dition that he could go to the county seat and home in a day, so that he could act the part of juror or oflicer. I do not under- stand that this is the convenience in form- ing counties, and I am not at all alarmed by the fact that Pike county has two thou- sand square miles in it. In my judgment it would be better for a great many people 111 Pike that it should never have an area 0 a mile less. I do not like to say any thing disparaging of that honorable profession to which I belong, but I say it would be vast- ly better for a great many people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky if they were more remote from the seats of justice. A little oceuronce happens, some slight tres fire incapable of holding population - pass is committed, and if the man is within the reach of the county seat he goes and brings a suit. If he has to go twenty-five or thirty miles he has a long time to think, and before he gets to the county seat he con- cludes he had better abandon his supposed cause-of action; and it prevents the bring- ing of a good deal of litigation of the kind ~ all lawyers condemn, or ought to. I am not opposed to giving" the county of Pike the right to have a division of that county whenever population demands it; and I believe that the good people of Pike county, whenever it becomes necessary to have a division, a majority of them will vote for it; but 1 do not believe it is proper to leave this question to a few men who may live remote from the county seat, or some man who has a farm that they want to have laid out for a county seat, to come down to the Legislature, and by a process of log-rolling, that all of us who have been in the Legislature know, get counties made when there is no neces- sity whatever for it; and I know of no scheme that is so favorable to log-rolling, that causes as much vicious legislation, as thisformation of new counties. I confess to have voted for one when I was in the Senate, and_I think I ought have been ex- pelled from the Senate. I am not at all alarmed by the large area of Pike, Pulaski or some other counties. It was suggested by some Delegate the other day that in looking over counties that he found the smaller counties were more prosperous in the matter of population than some larger ones. They are more eligibly situated. They gather population easier than those otherwise not so favorably situated. And , it is not to be accounted for by the fact that they are small counties, but simply be- cause they are legibly situated for the gathering of wealth and population. If the Delegates here knew the topographical features of a great many counties with a large area, they would find that they [October 4, i COUNTIES. 23 Saturday,] MILLER. [October 4 . and gathering population. And ’ that is the reason why many of the coun- ties have such large area, because there is not population enough gathered in the par- ticular county to make two counties. The Delegate from Lewis tells you a great portion of this county is in that condition, that it can never hold population. And I think it is not only a question of area, but a question of population that should be con- sidered in the formation of counties. Not area alone, because there may be four hun- dred square miles that has not population enough to fit it to become a county. Popu- lation and area ought both to be considered by us. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I am quite will ing to indorse some of the provisions re- ported by the Committee, but I am of the same opinion 'I was on yesterday. If we are going to permit the Legislature to form new counties at all, we must not hedge it around with provisions which make the formation of new counties an impossibility. The report of the Committee, it seems to me, closely follows the constitutional provi- sions of the State or Illinois upon this sub- ject. The CHAIRMAN. the Committee. Mr. MILLER. That was 'my under- standing. It seems to me that the provis- ion of the Constitution of Georgia on this subject suits our Constitution much better than the provision reported by the Com- mittee, and that is the General Assembly may alter boundaries of or lay ofl‘ or estab- lish new counties, or abolish counties and attach them to contiguous counties, but no new county shall be established except by a vote of two-thirds of each House. I am quite willing to vote for that por- tion of the report which says there shall be no new counties formed of less than four hundred square miles. I think that is small enough for any county. It is argued on all sides now that we need no new counties. They may be true. But we are not going It was so stated by / to make a Constitution alone for the pres- ent, but undertaking to make a Constitu- tion to govern in the future I do not take much to myself of the argument made in regard to lawlessness in ‘the State 0 Kentucky. has argued upon this floor in supportvof the report of the Committee incidentally throws out insinuation and makes bloody impeachment against certain portions of the State. I have had lawlessness in my county, and I appeal to the distinguished Chairman of the Committee if he has not had lawlessness in the past in the city of Louisville‘? If we are to decide matters by occurence of that kind, blot out the Jefferson county municipality, for I de- clare that the most disgraceful affair to be found in the criminal annals of the State of Kentucky came right from the city of Louisville. I suppose the gentleman—4f he has read the history of the State of Ken- tucky-recalls bloody Monday thirty-five years ago. We have had lawlessness every- where, and I do not intend to stand here and have the bloody impeachment hurled at us in that manner while we are engaged in forming a new Constitution without re- plying. It is true, in the mountain portion of the State there has been lawlesssness, but there has been lawlessness all over the blue-grass section; and right here in the shadow of the Capital misdeeds have been done that startled the world; and for that reason are we to blot out the State of Ken- tucky or municipality of Frankfort‘? Go to the city of Lexington. We have a declaration in the present Constitution that printing presses are to be respected as a medium of communicating thought; but in the City of Lexington we have the Transylvania University, the first institu- tion of learning ever established in this State. Printing-presses have been mobbed, and in that city murders have been com- mitted, and that in recent days, that have startled the civilized world, And yet Almost every Delegate who ‘these gentlemen will argue we shall 24 ' COUNTIES. Saturday,] . MILLER—APPLEGATE. [October 4. blot out and abolish that municipality. Those kind of arguments go for naught. They ought to make no impression on the Convention when considering this matter. Take the history of the murders in the State in the so-ealled lawless counties. As a general thing, they are done in the largest counties of the State, and the eonstabulary forces of the counties were insuflicient to meet the action when this lawlessness was existing; and my opinion is, that if this State has been laid off into small counties, we must make a government to meet that existing state of things. It is true that they have large counties in the States of New York and Pennsylvania, and in vari- ous other States of this Union, but their governments have been formed to meet that condition of affairs. But the constab- ulary force which we have in Kentucky is not suflicient to meet the condition ~ of lawlessness in these large counties. Now the Delegate from Pike informed the Con- vention on yesterday that portions of his county were fifty-five miles from the county seat. It is a week’s march for a constable and posse to go that far and make an arrest; and yet we say we must have cer- ‘ tain sheriff forces and constable forces in each county in the State of Kentucky. Andif we are only to have that force, it seems to me we should have the counties uniform throughout the State; otherwise we should do as we would do for the city of Louisville. We should make a principal form of government for a county of large area and not require that county three or four times as large as Franklin, Fayette, or Woodford to be controlled by simply a constabulary force-that those counties are controlled by. And, therefore, while I am willing to go with the report of the Com- mittee and adopt many of the provisions, it occurs to me it ought to be recommitted to that Committee and let them reconsider the work together with the amendments and make another report. Mr. APPLEGATE. It is said that fig- j ures will not lie, and for that reason we have heard gentlemen quoting figures ex- tensively. The Delegate from Jefferson has gone elaborately into the financial con- dition of various counties of the State, and he proposes from that basis to establish the fact that the changing of county lines and dividing counties is chiefly because of this evil. I notice from the Auditor’s report in the county of Jefferson in 1888 the total expenses of the jury fund was $20,980, and in the year 1889 it was $24,120. There has not been a county line changed in that section, and the increase was about one- sixth of what it was the year before, and I do not believe the Delegate will assume that population had increased that much. The changes of counties have nothing to do with those various expenses of govern- ment. For instance, in some of those counties in which we have had so much trouble, and in which the State has been at so much expense in enforcing the law. It is not on account of the size of the county, but on account of the lawlessness, and the public sentiment, and the trouble the ofiicers had to deal with in enforcing the law. The gentleman alludes to the fact that is enough to bring the blush of shame to all of us—that Judges have been shot down; but that is no reason for keeping the county larger. If that be true—if you want to blot out a county for that reason—you must blot out the State of Kentucky, because we all know that in the City of Frankfort, the seat of government, within the shadow, almost, of these walls, a Judge of the high- est Court of the State was shot down in cold blood, and the man went unwhipped of justice. Mr. YCUNG. But he was a lunatic. Mr. APPLEGATE. Yes, after a great many years they succeeded in finding him a lunatic who was permitted to escape from the asylum, he was watched so slight- ly, and permitted to die in the woods. We must confine ourselves to logical facts. COUNTIES. 25 Saturday,] APPLEGATE—YOUNG. [October 4, The recitation of figures can not convince the human mind unless applicable to the facts under consideration. How does the division of a county increase the burden upon the State? I propounded the ques- tion yesterday, and I hoped the Delegate would answer it. The law of the land is that the State only meets certain expenses. Mr. YOUNG. If the gentleman will permit me I will answer it now. Mr. APPLEGATE. Certainly. Mr. YOUNG. You misapprehended the scope of my argument. When you organize other courts you increase ex- penses. You can not organize a circuit court without you have grand and petit jurors, and whenever you do it you open an avenue by which money can be taken without value returned. If you-will look at the figures you will find that to be true. Mr. MOORE. I would like to ask, in the county where they form grand juries if they do not remain in session just as long as they possibly can. Mr. APPLEGATE. The fault is in the Legislature. If you arrange the juries upon some other system, it might possibly be remedied. A grand jury of sixteen men can indict a man as quickly in Pulaski as in Jefl'erson, and a jury of twelve men can try him. I think we could largely reduce the expenses by a change in the jury system. There are a greater number of exceptions taken than are necessary, consequently you have a greater accumulation of men there who are drawing expenses out of the gov- ernment. N ow, the Delegate from Boyd has alluded to the fact that in other States they have fewer counties. As has been cor- rectly stated by one gentleman in answer to that, the jurisprudence of that State is adapted to that system; in ours it is not- Let us present this phase of case under the laws of Kentucky. I do not know what they are in other States, and therefore I cannot compare them with the laws of Kentucky. _ But here we have chattel mortgages, and a man who wants to buy property has con- ‘ for litigation. structive notice of all chattel mortgages. Now, suppose a man is forty or fifty miles from acounty seat, and wants to buy a. piece of real estate or some personal prop- erty. He is put toan enormous expense of taking a journey of forty or fifty miles for the purpose of investigating the title. Now is it not a fact, if you create a county, with the county seat within fifteen or twenty miles of this individual, the conveniences that are brought to him will certainly advance his property, and the State will recover a greater revenue than it did before. The Delegate from Boyd says the larger the county the better If that philosophy is good the State owes it to herself to abolish all counties, and require every body to come here to'Frankfort to try their cases. We would only have a higher order of litiga- tion then. Now, on the question of the number of Judges it takes to try the cases, the policy of the law is, and the Constitu- tion requires that, it shall have so many Circuit Judges to try the cases in the State. If a judge has 24 cases in one county, won’t he try them with a great deal less expense by trying them near home than if‘ . he had to go a distance? Court of Appenls sit in Paducah and Lex-- ington and Cattlettsburg and try as many cases in a year as they try in the city of" Frankfort; but inasmuch as the Court of' Appeals trys upon records, it is more con- venient and less expensive to the State to have all the records sent here, than to di- vide the court and carry it around over the State. But that is not true as to the other courts, and the expenses in the coun- ty are much greater where there is a large county, than if you divide it and make smaller counties of convenient size. There- fore, I cannot vote for the proposition of the Committee, which practically says we will have no more new counties. It does pretend on its face that there is a provision by which a new county can be formed, but practically you can not cre- ate another ' county in Kentucky Could not the- 26 COUNTIES. Saturdz-iy,] SMITH. under that provision. It is some- thing like a man going to get married speaking of what kind of a woman he wants to marry, and saying, in the first place, she must be rich; in the next, tal- ented; in the next, beautiful, and, in the next place, she must live in my county. It might be utterly impossible to find all these attributes in any one woman. Sothey put three conditions here. 15,000 inhabitants, have 400 square miles, and she must have her seat of government not within ten miles ofthe boundary of any other county. When you say that, it is impracticable. Why, in some localities, if a man wants to go and qualify and ad- minister on an estate of $150, it will cost him more than his commissions to make the journey to the county-seat. You change the provision of the Bill of Rights which says Courts must be open and justice ' free. This vreport practically repeals that provision; and, therefore, as the Delegate. from Lincoln says, I think you ought to recommit this report. to the Committee’ and see if they can not formulate a propo- sition—and, with, the intelligence they pos- sess, I know they can do it—which will - enable the Legislature to create a new county when, under the circumstances, a county should be created. Mr. SHITH. As a member of the Committee on Municipalities I submitted a few remarks on last Wednesday, but from the fact the'Committee on Municipalities ‘ in their report stirs up such feeling, I feel called upon to answer a few remarks. The gentleman from Pendleton is more of a meta-physician than he is a logician on the subject of counties. I favor and urge the adoption of the report of the Committee on Municipalities from the fact that there ' has been an unusual demand in Kentucky for ‘the reconstruction of counties. The Committee considered all the matters that have been suggested in the amendment and they were unanimous. lieve there was a dissenting v'oice upon the She must be worth» ’ of Executive officers that Arkansas they have 53,450 square miles- I do not be-' [October 4. report that we have submitted to the Con- vention. We got our information from various sources. We examined the differ- ent States and found that this was the best remedy for the evil. Now, I will read from the Auditor’s report of 1889. total assessed value of Ballard county for 1889 was $1,589,866, the county of Bour- bon $10,275,125. Also the county of Car- roll assessed value was $1,198,362. Now, I find in 1886 from the Auditor’s report that Ballardand‘ Carroll being in onecounty ‘the expense was only $15,016, but I find that under the new organization, Carroll being cut off, the expense is over $20,000. 1 Yet the Delegate says that the organization of new counties entails no expense what- ever on the State. The counties of Ballard and Carlisle have drawn out considerably more money, according to the Auditor’s report, than ‘they did when they were in one county, showing that the cost of one county is nothing like the cost of two. As to the comparison one gentleman has made be- tween some other States and Kentucky, I say it is no argument why the State of Kentucky should not be restricted in such a manner. We have different systems of courts. ‘the other States where they have the same system of jurisprudence, the same system we have. In and 77 counties; Missouri 68,150 square miles, 115 counties‘;~ Minnesota, 79,000 square miles, 80 counties; Illinois, 36,000 square miles, 102 counties; Indiana, 35,000 square miles mile, 64 counties; while the’ poor old State of Kentucky, with ‘89,000 square miles, has piled up 119 .-counties. There is but one State in the Union which has more counties than the State of Ken- tucky, and the reason for that .isthe exten- sive area of that State. ' Why, the county‘ of Tom Green, out of counties in the statefhas 1,000 square miles more than the whole State of Kentucky ;., yet. We have " i The ,, Take a comparison with some of‘ COUNTIES. 27 1. Saturday,] SMITH—TWYMAN. [Octobee 4 . over one-half the number the State of Texas has with, perhaps, not over one- -eighth the square mileage. I support most emphatically the report of the Committee, because in all respects, it lessens the expenses of the State, and facilitates the busi- ness of its citizens. There have been various amendments offered to the report, but I want especially to pay attention to one; that is, the objection to the provision that no line of a new county shall pass within ten miles of a county seat. Now, the ob- ject in that was, that no county seat should be put on one side of a county, but that it .should be centrally located. The Commit- tee reported that 400 square miles was necessary for the formation of a new county; and I believe the amendment was adopted in the Committee of the Whole Wednesday, and that no county should be formed unless .it contained 12,000 inhabitants. I say the pur-pose of the Committee was, that the county should be located centrally, and, when a county was formed of 400 square miles, no oiti- Zens should be over twenty miles from the county-seat. We are not to prepare for fencing oif Jones in the east end or Smith in the west end; we are not here to deal with particular cases, but to accommo- date the whole people of Kentucky, and facilitate the government in the best man- ner. I~shall, therefore, insist upon the adoption of the report of the Committee. Mr. TWYMAN. It seems to me that we are wasting a good deal of time with- out determining on any particular course to pursue. It seems to me that the main question for this Convention is to decide upon a course whether we shall adopt the number of square miles contained, or the population and then leave it to the Legis- lature or the people when and where they shall establish a new county. I think if twelve thousand has been adopted, it virtu- ally puts an end to us ever having a new , county in the State, at least for many years :to come. Should the time come when there were twelve thousand persons in one part of a county with an area of four hun- dred square miles, it would be highly proper and right that that people, if they were self-sustaining, should have‘ a county of their own. But there is a provision in the report of the Committee that I am op- posed to, and that is, not to all a county to subdivide, that is, that a part of the county cut off and joined to another county without the vote of the whole county from which itis taken. It is not infrequently the case that there is a strip of land lying in one county which, if joined to another county, would greatly convenience the inhabitants of that strip without any additional expense to the Commonwealth or discommoding the coun- ty from which it is taken, which would not increase or decrease, or at all affect the burden of taxation. There is another provision that if there is a county debt they shall still pay their proportion of that debt, consequently, it will not affect the county from which taken inj urionsly. It seems to me that the county from which they are taken should not be allowed to vote on their going. There is a county pride to retain all we have; we don’t like to have any part of our counties taken off, even although there may be a portion sulfering because they are so far from'the county seat. I can speak now with reference to the county of my friend from Nelson, which will show exactly what I mean. There is a part of his county which lies near to my county, in which the citizens ‘of the district are twenty-five miles from their county seat, and at the same time only ten miles‘ from our county seat. It would be to the accommodation of those people to be attached'to my county. I am not speaking through any personal inter- est, but only to illustrate my point‘. If they- were joined to the county or _Laru'e they would be within ten miles of the county seat, which would be no injustice to Nelson; but if the question of join- ing was submitted to the voters of Nelson county, having that county pride against as COUNTIES. Saturday,] YTUNG—BECKNER—BECKHAM. [October 4 .. loss of territory, they would vote against it. Therefore, I favor the amendment of the Delegate on the other side of the house, that the voters of the district to be cut off should be the only ones permitted to vote, as it does not affect the financial condition of the county from which it is taken nor to which it goes, but is simply an arrangement be- tween the two counties adjusting affairs so the people of a remote ‘district of the one county is accommodated. I see no reason why the whole county should be consulted on the question of cutting off, but think only those affected by it should have a voice in the matter. Therefore, I shall vote against the third section of this report. I have no objection to the remainder. Mr. YOUNG. I move that the Com- mittee now rise and report the bill, with all amendments, to the Convention without any expression of opinion. Mr. BECKN ER. I offer a substitute for that motion. That the. Committee of the Whole recommend for the adoption of the Convention the report of the Com- mittee on Municipalities, with so much thereof as is contained in the fifth line of section 1, stricken out. Mr. YOUNG. I still adhere to my motion. I think we are satisfied now that the Committeee of the Whole is not an advantageous place to discuss these things. In the Convention you can move the previous question, and get rid of a good deal of debate. I am free to say that my object in making the motion is to have the matter considered in the Convention. The question being put on the motion of the Delegate from Louisville, it was de- clared carried, and the President took the Chair. ,The PRESIDENT. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole will make report to the Convention. The CHAIRMAN. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the Committee on Munici- palities with various amendments, and re- port the same back without recommenda- tion. The question being put on the adoption of the report of the Committee of the Whole, the ‘same was declared to have been adopted. Mr. CLARDY. I move the previous question. Mr. BECKHAM. I will ask the Dele- gate to withdraw that motion one moment. In the Committee of the whole I offered a substitute for the report of the Committee and all the amendments. “It was held by the Chairman that as some amendments had been adopted, it could not at that time be considered by the Committee of the Whole. I ask now to offer that substitute as a substitute for the report of the Com- mittee and all the amendments. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate witthdraw his motion for the previous ques tion? Mr. CLARDY. I do for that purpose. Mr. BECKAM. I ask the Secretary to report the substitute. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Beckham’s substitute‘. Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to adjourn. Mr. STRAUS. I would ask leave for the Sergeant-at-Arms as he is compelled to attend the United States Court at Louis- ville under summons. Mr. SPALDING. I ask leave of ab- sence for the Delegate from Pendleton. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the leaves are granted. The question being put on the motion to adjourn was carried, and the Convention adjourned. ‘ tionuention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1. FRANKFORT, OCTOBER 6. 1890. No. 22 Monday,] CoKE. [October 6, The SECRETARY. I was instructed by the President, if he was not here this morning, to call Mr. Jep. C. Jonson in his place. Mr. JONSON took the Chair and called ‘the Convention ‘to order, and the proceed- ings were opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Henderson. The Journal of Saturday’s proceeding ‘was read. The PRESIDENT pro zfem. The Com- 'mittee appointed by the Chair last Satur- day consisted of Messrs. Hanks, Beckham, H. H. Smith, and not W. H. Miller. The ‘adjournment was to 10 o’clock, and not to 11. Make those corrections, and without further corrections the Journal is approved. Petitions are now in order. Mr. COKE. I am requested to present ~to this Convention the petition of the Ken- tucky Baptist Ministers. They claim they are as loyal and law-abiding as any other- .~citizens of the State of Kentucky, and are ‘entitled to equal rights and privileges with others. They claim that under article 2, section 27, of the present Constitution, they ‘are deprived of the right of holding oflice of Representative, and under article 3, section 6, of the same Constitution, they are prohibited from ever holding the ofi‘ice of Governor. They ask this Convention, in forming a new Constitution, to relieve 'them from those disabilities, and to permit them to enjoy all the rights, privileges and immunities of other citizens of the Com- monwealth of Kentucky. As article 2, section 27, comes under the head of the Legislative Department, and the other section under the head of the Execu- ‘tive, I ask that this petition be re- ferred to the Committee on the Legislative Department, and also to the Committee on the Executive Department. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, the reference will be made. The petition was as follows: To the Honorable gentlemen composing the Constitutional Convent-ion of the State of Kentucky: - MEssns:-ln the annual session of the Kentucky Baptist Ministers’ Meeting, held in Owensboro, Ky., June 19—21, 1890, the following resolution was adopted : WHEREAS, Every Minister of the Gos- pel is a citizen in the full sense of the term, and should be faithful to all the du- ties of a citizen; and whereas, the State has nothing to do with a man’s call of God to the Gospel; therefore, Resolved, That the Constitutional Con- vention, soon to assemble, be requested to remove the present restrictions against mlnlsters’ holding certain oflices, because it is not right to impose political disabilities on any class of citizens, and the Clerk of this body he requested to memorialize‘ the Convention respecting this matter In accordance with the above resolution 1 address you, by request, and in the name 0 ‘ the Baptist Ministers of Kentucky we respectfully call the attention of your hon- orable body to certain clauses in the Con- stitution of our State, declaring ministers ineligible to certain public ofiices in our Commonwealth, and denying certain rights to ministers which are enjoyed by other citizens of our State. 1. We believe the design of the framers of our Constitution, was right and praise- worthy in guarding against legislation for any religious body, and against the possible blending of Church and State to 2 PETITIONS. Monday,] any purpose, religious or political, which principles the Baptists have ever held and _ maintained, and have ever been among the foremost to inculcate and defend. The very principles which make them Baptists forbid them to hold an opinion favoring the interference of any church or churches with civil affairs, and to deny the right of civil authority in matters pertaining to conscience and religion. We believe, if the time ever was when we were in danger from this source, that time is past, and there is no further excuse for denying to a large, worthy, capable and influential class of citizens their full and equal rights because of their relation to the various churches within our Common- wealth. 2. We believe the Constitution contra— diets itself in prohibiting ministers from holding certain oflices in Kentucky. ART. 11. Sec. 27. “ No clergymampries', or teacher of any religious persuasion, society or sect. etc., shall be eligible to the General Assembly.” ART. III. 1 6. “N 0 member of Congress, or minis’er of any religious society, shall _ be eligible to the office of Governor.” In contradiction to these we find the fol- lowing: ART. X111. 2 2. “ That absolute, arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a Republic, not even in the largest majority.” Sec. 6. “That the civil rights, privileges or capacities of any citizen shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion.” In accordance with the above, we simply ask your honorable body that the new Constitution shall guarantee to, and pro- tect us in, equal rights and privileges with vother citizens of our State, that our “ civil _ rights,lprivileges or capacities shall in no- wise be diminished or enlarged on account of (our) religion.” ' . Respectfully submitted, ' J. G. Bow, Clerk Kentucky Baptist Ministers Meeting. BUssELLvILLE, KY., Sept. 29, 1890. Conn—W001). [October 6 Mr. WOOD. I have a petition signed by a large number of citizens of the tax-- oppressed and tax-ridden county of Green, which discloses the startling fact here of an indebtedness exceeding one-third of the- assessed value of all the property in the- county. I ask that this petition go to the- Committee on General Provisions, as there‘ is a. resolution before that Committee to- which the petition refers. I think this- petition contains facts, and the relief sought in the same is worthv the serious consideration of that Committee and this Convention. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without- objection, the reference will be made as suggested. The petition is as follows: Resolution introduced by L. T. Moore, of Boyd county, and advocated by J. M. Wood, of Taylor, and A. D. James, of Muhlenberg. WHEREAS, In a number of count'es and subdivisions of counties in this State an indebtedness or apparent indebtedness ex- ists, which threat-ms bankruptcy and ruin to said counties or subdivisions of coun- _ ties; and whereas, said indebtedness was incurred by unjust and unconstitutional legislation enacted by the begislat ve De- partment of this State, authorizing a ma- ,jqrity of the citizens and voters of said counties and subdivisions to impose a tax upon the people and property of said coun- ties and subdivisions of counties in aid of railroads and private corporations. which legislation has been approved by the Judi- cial Department of this Government, and its agents are engage‘: in or threatening to collect the same, which, if preceded in, will be mere diastrous than flood or cyclone to the people of sin counties or subdivisions; and for which condition of‘ threatened dieaster this State is respon- sible; therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the duty of this State to assume the responsibility of su h indebtedness, or supposed indebtedness, PETITIONS. 3 Monday,] WOOD—MILLER. and in behalf of said counties or sub- divisions of counties to resist payment thereof; but if this can not be successfully done, then the State should pay such in- debtedness, or such an amount as can he agreed upon with the holders of such in- debtedness, and that a clause be inserted in the draft of a Constitution providing the means of ascertaining such indebtedness and the payment of the same. We, the undersigned, petitioners and citizens of Green county, Ken- tucky, do most earnestly ask the Constitutional Convention now assem- bled at Frankfort, Kentucky, to give within resolution serious and favorable consideration, and, if possible, do some- thing to relieve our tax-ridden and op- pressed county. The county railroad indebtedness aggre- gates about $425,000. The assessed value of all the property in the county is $1,123,- 518 in 1889. W. H. Milby, Judge, A. M. Heizer, A. K. Workman, James Haskins, H.T. Larimore, Cl’ k, Rose Haskins, S. W. Moore, Cap ., S. H. Hudson, Sidney Cofi‘ey, M. V. Hudson, J. P. G. C., T. W. Sullivan, Elizabeth Cofl‘ey, L. E McGinnis, H. T. Hogan, S. B. Moore, Mary J. H gan, V. Gupton, J. R. Wilson, L. Gupton, I. R. Wilson, I. S. Cofley, C. G. Paxton, Arabell C »fl'ey, ‘ E. J. Pax=on, H. H. Moody, J. V. Hezer, J. H. Eubank, H. W. Hopkins, J. H. Despain, William McGinnis, W. F. Cox, Celista McGinnis, Wash Cofioy, John I. Hudson, M. A. Early, S. W. Paxton, M. J. Early. N. E Paxton, M. E. Est s, D. T Lowe, D. T. Towles, S. C. Lowe, Jos ph Perry,‘ W. W. Hopkins, B. W. Penick, T. Lowe, W. L. M udd _ W. C. Penick, John Thompson, H. C. Sullivan, Susan E. Hudson, M. A. Buchanan, M. V. Jefl‘r-es, J. W. Dickerson, George H. Wilson, J. T. Frazer, _S. S. Wilson, J. D. Spillman, Wm. Williams’, Emily P. Hood, A. W. Paxton, proper Committees. [October 6. S. I. Lane, S. G. Paxton, M. B. Lane, Nanie A. Paxton, Wat Taylor, Tisia Taylor, Sam Pitmans, ()rel Stultz, Milo Blakeman, W. D. Marshall, Emma Marshall, H. M. Paxton, E. C. Harmon, E. L. Harmon, C. A. McKinney, M. R. McKinney, J. W. Jeflreys, Lou C. Jefi'reys, David B. Carter, Mary E. Carter, James M. Jefireys, Creed Harkings. W. A. Jeffreys. B. F. Hamilion, G. W. Towles, A. J. Perkins, . R. L. Ester, Geo. W. Workman, J. A. Spitzer, W. T. Buckner, C. E. Sp tzer, A. L. Patton, J. G. Toles, H. M. King. C. E. Vaughan, J. Lenard Hamilton, R. W. Moore, (‘has. D Allen, J. L. Wilson, E. R. Van Meter, T. S. Mitchell, J seph Ham, W. P. Tucker, Wash. L sle, H. C. Altman, R. T. Dowdy, Jno H.Alden, F. J. Taylor, J J. Durham W. B. Heizer, H. E. Hubbard, Boaker Penick, B. B. Scott, John Toomey, Levi W. Moore, J. Altman, M. A. Vaughn, 8. W. A len, S. M. Bottom. Jeff. Henry, Mr. MILLER. I have two communi- cations which I ask to be referred to the I ask that the first be referred to the Committee on Educa- tion, and the second to the Committee on Circuit Courts. The two communications were as fol- low.~: ' Hon. W. H. Miller, Lincoln Cozmh/ Dele- ‘ gm'e to Convenfion tvifor'm a New 00n- stitution for the State of Kentucky: DEAR SIR: In response to your r quest for an expression of opinion from the edu- cators of Lincoln countv as to w ‘at the best interests of the public school system demands Iro'n the framers of the Consti- tution. the Educational Association of Lin- coln C uoty through its Committee makes the to lowing ~uggestions, viz: 1. That allthe runds on which the State is now paving interest out of its sinking fund should be consolidated into one fund, in order to simplify administration and 4 ' ‘ PETITIONS. Monday,] MILLER. save expense in the oflice of administra- tion. 2. Training schools for teachers are an integral part of the systems of public schools in al most every State of the United States; and hence we recommend that the new Constitution permit such schools for this State to be supported out of the funds for public schools. I 3. The most serious defect of our pres- ent public school systeniis the want of local interest in the public school, and the want of sufficient money to pay for the services of competent teachers. Hence, we recommend that each district or each county be required by the Constitution to levy, collect and use, for the public schools thereof,-as high a rate of tax, at least, as is now paid by the State, as a cm’lition and qualification for receiving their pro rata part of the Sfiate school fund each year. 4. The Constitution should require a County School Superintendent, whose ap- pointment should be by popular vote, by the School Trustees of the county, or by the Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State. ' 5. It is a question for consideration, whether the State Superintendent of Pub- lic Instruction should not be appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the Senats. Our association is not a unit on this subject. 6. The Constitution should require the State Board of Education to be composed of the Governor, State Superintendent and the Superintendents of the seven largest cities or counties or‘ the State, so that the same may be more representative than as at present constituted. 7. The question of Trustees for districts or School Boards for counties should be ‘left to the Legislature, to be provided for »by statutes. 8. If not a unit, the prevailing opinion of the association is, that the present tax ‘of twenty-two cents per $100 should be made permanent by ‘the Constitution, with a provision that no more shall be levied by the State as a whole, but further support should come from counties or districts. It is the opinion of some that each Magis- trate’s District should have a High School, managed by a competent Frincipal, with a sufiicient number of primary schools un- der his supervision. for all children of such a district. 9. The Constitution should require sep- arate schools for the white and the colored children of the State. All of which is respectfully submitted for your consideration, with the hope that you will bring the same before the Con- vention and urge the adoption of_ these measures. A Signed by the Committee: J. W. SMITH, R. L. DAVIS, JAs‘. H. ALLEN, G. N. FRY, T. M. Goonxurenr: Referred to the Committee on Educa- tion. ‘ HARRODSBURG, KY., Oct. 3, 1890. DEAR SIR: According to promise, I herewith present amendment for the con- sideration of Committee on Circuit Courts. They are substantially the same as the Illinois system. On the margin I have noted the sections of the Illinois Constitu- tion from which the matter I present are chiefly drawn. In the 15th section of the 6th article of Constitution of 1870, you will observe that the system I present is left with the Legislature to adopt or not, thereafter. It was, therefore, by legisla- tive enactment under that section that the present Circuit and intermediate Appellate Court system of Illinois was brought into being. I have not its statute laws before me, and I have therefore drawn the sys- tem herewith presented largely from mem- ory. As to the feature 'of minority repre- sentation, that is taken verbatim from arti- cle 4, sections 7 and 8, of said Constitution, which applies to'Representatives in the [October 6 . PETITIONS. 5 Monday,] MILLER. [October 6, Legislature of that State. Under article 6, section 15, the Statutes of Illinois adopts the minority feature in the Court system. In order that you may understand the working of the system, the whole State is divided into not less than seven Circuits, in each of which three Judges are to be elected at the same time, with certain qualifications. As each elector would have three votes which he can cast all for one candidate or “divide the same or equal parts thereof among the candidates as he may see fit,” it follows that no one party could secure all the Judges unless it had over two-thirds of all the votes of the dis- trict. This rarely occurs. In fact, I know of no casein Illinois where it has occurred, and I do not think a Circuit Court district could be found in Kentucky where all the Judges could be of the same party. The system suggested, in [my judgment, has many features superior to our present sys- tem. 1st. The minority feature gives to each party due representation in the execution of the law, which has the tendency to ele- vate both thejbench and the people. (at) It elevai es the bench in that it forces each party to put forth its best men. This is brought about in two ways: First,.the district being much larger than ordinary Circuit Courtgdistricts, a person to secure the party nomination has to have a much wider reputation. Second, each elector having three votes to wield, the power of the independent voter is largely increased, and if parties are so forgetful as to nomi- nate an inefiicient man, there will be enough independent voters to unite on an independent and defeat such nominee. It thus puts each party on its good be- havior, and forces the selection of the best men. This has been the effect in Illinois in the eighteen years trial of the system. (6.) It elevates the citizen in this, that every one feels that, in the execution of the law, he has a chosen representation, and thus all become satisfied, and a spirit of emula- tion permeates the people to see that the law is executed. 2d. ~The system proposed of three Cir- cuit Judges for each district, even though the minority idea is eliminated, is better than the old system in many respects, some of which are as follows: (a.) As the Judges are each preceded and followed by another, each is stimu- lated to put forth his best efiorts, as the- people are continually comparing one with the other. (6.) Rotating as they do, and never com- ing back to the place he starts for quite a long time, rings and favoritism is pre-- vented. - (0.) Ineligibility, while not peculiar to any system ought to be adopted, as thereby independency is created—a feature sadly needed in our present system. 3d. The Appellate feature of the system proposed I regard as most important. This likewise could be adopted without- the minority representation feature. This feature, it Circuit Court districts have three Judges, would, without additional costs, do away with any necessity for a Superior Court, and having the decision of three Judges, the Legislature could limit the character of appeals to the Court of Ap- peals in such way as to lighten the Court of final resort. The feature of certifying to the Supreme Court the tacts where the Judges differ, would lighten the labors of that Court very much, and at the same time give litigants the right to have the law of their case passed upon by the high- est'Court in the land where the interme- diate Court differed, quite as efiectually as to take up the whole record. In addition to all this, the cost of Appel- late litigation could be largely diminished, as the Legislature could provide for the District Appellate Court to try cases on original records in each county. I have not presented any separate system for Louisville. As to Chicago, the Illinois Constitution, article. 6, section 23, etc., 6 PETITION S. Monday,] FARMER. [October 6 . provide a little different system from the balance of the State. A separate clause, so as to provide for Louisville on the same plan, can be inserted if deemed wise. In conclusion, permit me to say that I strongly favor the minority representative feature, both in the law-making and judi- cial departments of the government. It is just and fair, whatever may be the strength or whatever changes may occur. It gives to each due and fair representation The system in all its surroundings tends to elevate both ‘the citizens and the charac- ter of the oflice-holder. Perhaps, with the rancor existing between the parties in the State, the time is not yet ripe to extend the system futther than our Courts. It, how- ever, ought to be, in my judgment, adopted, both in the Circuit and Appellate Court system, by electing six Appellate Judges for two districts ; the minority system could be easily adopted then. Hoping that some such system may meet with favor from your Committee, I beg to subscribe myself, Your humble servant, Tnos. O. BELL. To Hon. W. W. MILLER, Frankfort, Ky. Mr. FARM ER. Ihave apetition which I do not advocate, but file it so that the Committee can pass on it. It is in refer- ence to the occupancy and use of lands un- occupied. HENDERSON COUNTY, KY., October, 1890. } To the Presiding Ofiicer and Members of the Convention engaged in framing a New Constitution for the State of Ken- tacky: . v The undersigned petitioner, relying upon the unquestioned right of petition on the part of a citizen for redress of grievances respectfully represent: We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with cer- tain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happi- ness. That to secure these rights govern- ments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that when any form of govern- ment becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new govern- ment, laying its foundation on such prin- ciples, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to efl'ect their safety and happiness. That when a long train of abuses, sustained by vicious legislation and a governmental policy founded on absolute injustice, which neither time, law nor custom can sanctify, and which constantly and inevitably tends to a denial of the. right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, reducing the great body of the people under the abso- lute despotism of a grasping monopoly, it ' is their right, it is their duty, to throw ofi‘ such government, and provide new guards for their future security. Such is the condition of the people of this State to-day, and such is now the ne- cessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The his- tory of our :present land laws is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having, in direct tendency and inevitable result, the establishment of absolute tyr- anny over the people of this country. To prove this, 1 submit to your honorable body the following propositions and facts : Land is not the product of labor, but is the natural opportunity for all the children of men. Man is a land animal. If you take him from the land, he dies; he can not live without land. ‘ All the land of the State is for all the people of the State. Man has a right to live somewhere, or he has no right to live at all. If the laws ‘permit, a man to hold paper title to one acre of vacant land out of occupancy and use, they permit him to hold a million. He is thus necessarily a robber, and the State permits the robbery, PETITIONS. 7 ff .Monday,] FARMER. [October 6 , and compels the landless man to beg or 'starve, or work for such wages as the land- lord may dictate. ' By land monopoly there are, in the .State, thousands of acres of vacant land held out of use, and there are thousands crowding the wage labor market, and making laborers "the slaves of capital. Our landv laws and other vicious legislation are fast building up a plutocracy on one hand, and wage slavery on the other, which tendency, if not soon checked, will inevitably lead to revolution and bloodshed and the over- "throw of the government. Thus is demon- strated that occupancy and use is the only of homeless families, ‘righteous title to land. 'If compensation he demanded by the landlords for the restitution of unused land to the people, it ‘will be as absurd as for the slave-holder to demand compensation for his freed-slave. If compensation is due in either case, it is 'due to the slave who was robbed of hi8 liberty. and to the landless man who had been deprived of his natural right. But as elaborate reasoning, in support of self- -evident propositions, may be regarded as .a reflection upon your intelligence, we re- speetfully and confidently petition that _you will formulate a clause, in the new Constitution, abolishing ownership of vacant land and restoring unused land to ‘the people to whom it rightfully belongs. - SAM’L W. LANGLEY. The PRESIDENT pro tem. What do you desire to be done with it? Mr. FARMER. Refer it to the proper Committee. The PRESIDENT pro tem Is there .-any suggestion made? Mr. FARME R. 1 would not know un -der what head to put it. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair ‘is at sea on that subject. Mr. FARMER. Refer it to the Com- :mittee on Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, such reference will be made. Mr. BECKNER. 1 would like to enter the Presbyterian ministers in the race for Governor with Brother Coke’s preachers The PRESIDENT pro tem. I have a partial report, in answer to a resolution heretofore passed, requiring certain infor- mation from the Commissioner on Census. Mr. FUNK. .I would like to have it read. ' The Reading Clerk thereupon read the report, the whole of which is as follows: CENsUs OrrIcE, WASHINGTOM, D. C., Oct. 1, 1890. SIR: Responding to ' your request of September 17th, I have the honor to in- close herewith copies of the official count of the Fourth and Fifth Supervisor's Dis- tricts of Kentucky, as announced from this office. Copies of the remaining dis- tricts will be furnished you as soon as they are completed. Very respectfully, ' A. F. CHILDs, Acting Superintendent of Census. Hon. JAB. B. MCCREARY, M. C., House of Representatives, Washing- ton, D. C. DEPARTMENT or THE INTERIOR,} FOURTH KENT] TCK Y. 5 s’ E? 2;’ Se at g '1 as as » Q COUNTIES, Ere. : 5.’; : Z, 3 g ' 5' ' 8' 9 -" . p . _a . Boone County . 12,226 11,996 230 Bourbon Co . . 16,930 15,956 974 Paris . . . . 5,505 3,204 2,301 71.82 Bracken Co . . 12,343 13,509 *-1,166 Campbell Co . . 44,134 37,440 6,694 Newport .. . 24,938 20,433 4,505 22.05 Clark County . 15,360 12,115 3,245 Fayette County 35,653 29,023 6,630 Lexington.. 22,355 16,656 5,699 84.22 Franklin Co. . 21,226 18,699 2,527 Gallatin Co . . 4,601 4,832 *—231 Grant County . 12,675 13,083 *—408 Harrison Co. . 16,820 16,504 316 Jessamine Co . 11,237 10,864 373 Kenton County 54,074 43,983 10,091 Covington. 37,375 29,720 7,655 25.76 Owen County . 17,602 17,401 201 Pendleton Co . 16,312 16,702 *—390 Scott County . 16,532 14,965 1,567 Woodford Co . 12,369 11,800 569 Total . . . . 320,094 288,872 31,222 10.81 8 THE CENSUS. Monday,] SMITH—FUNK. [October 6 .- FIFTH KENTUCKY. Bath County. . 12,724 11,982 742 Boyd County. 14,020 12,165 1,855 Carter County. 17,168 12,345 4,823 Elliott County. 9,190 6,567 2,623 Fleming Co.. . 16,073 15,221 852 Floyd County. 11,243 10,176 1,067 Johnson ()0 . . 11,013 9,155 1,858 Lawrence Co . 17,633 13,262 4,371 Lewis County . 14,768 13,154 1,614 Magoflin Co . . 9,186 6,944 2,242 Martin County 4,206 3,057 1,149 Mason County. 20,749 20,469. 280 Maysville . . 5,350 5,220 130 2 49 Menefee County 4,650 3,755 895 Montgomery Co 12,357 10 566 1,791 ‘ Mt. Sterling . 3,627 2,087 1,540 73.79 Morgan County 11,220 8,455 2,765 Nicholas 00 10,742 11,869 ‘—1,127 Pike County. . 17,327 13,001 4,326 Powell County. 4,689 3,639 1,050 Robertson Co . 4,682 5,814 ‘—1,132 Rowan County. 6,429 4,420 2,009 Wolfe County . 7,163 5,638 1,525 Greenup C0,. . 11,880 13,371 *—1,491 Total . . . 249,112 215,025 34,087 15.85 *Decrease. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I move that the reading be dispensed with. and the petition be referred to the Committee on Munici- palities. Mr. FUNK. It occurs to me that that is a very important matter. The question of population has been discussed herein the past week a great deal, and there are many reasons why we should have that information, and for that reason I call for -it. However, I am perfectly willing for it to be printed and placed upon the desk of each member. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Do you offer that as an amendment to the motion. Mr. FUNK. Yes, sir. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Is the amendment accepted? 'Mr. H. H. SMITH. Yes. sir. The question being taken upon the adop- tion of the motion as amended, was de- clared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT pro iem. I have a communication from the Railroad Commis- sioners in response to a resolution requir- ing them to furnish certain information. What will you do with it ? OFFICE OF RAILROAD COMMISSIONERS, } , FRANKFOBT, KY., Sept. 26, 1890. . , Hon. 0. M. Clay, J72, President Constant-- tional Convention: SIR: In response to resolution‘ request-- ing the Railroad Commissioners to report. “the number and nature ofcomplaints that have been made to it against the railroads of this State within the last three fiscal’ years, for violations of the act approvedf Aprilfith, 1882,” the Board of Railroad Commissioners respectfully submit report“ as follows: That complaints made to the Commie-s sioners during the year 1887 are sum- marized in Eighth Report of the Railroad.’ Commissioners, pages 50 to 112, inclusive.. The following is an abstract of the points.- involved in complaints: 1. Complaint scarcity of cars ‘by coal. dealers in Lexington. ‘ 2. Complaint of merchants and shippers- at Mt. Sterling: Delays in delivery of merchandise and inadequacy of car service‘.- to transact business of dealers in and ship» pers of coal. lumber and stone. 3. Complaint of similar nature by' shippers at Ewington, Olive Hill, Carlisle. and Ashland. 4. Complaint of coal dealers at Rich- mond of extortion in charges by Kentucky.— Central road for freight on coal—Rowland and Livingston to Richmond. 5. Complaint of sundry merchants and shippers of Mayfiold; a, excessive rates; I), delays in delivery; 0, inadequate depots and yard facilities; unfair classification of” wool. 6. Of inadequate depot facilities at Paducah. ' 1 7. Of excessive freight rates, lack of switching accommodation, delays in ship-- ping and receiving freights, and inadequate supply of freight cars at Franklin, 8. Complaints of discriminations in freight charges against shipping and D1181‘: ness interests of Hopkinsville. 9. Complaint concerning unsafe condie RAILROAD S. 9 ._ Overcharge on omnibus. ' M onday,] RESPONSE or COMMISSIONERS. [October 6 .. tion of Salt river bridge, N. ‘N. & M. V. Co. ' 10. Complaint overcharge, J. V. Kim- brough vs. E. L. & B. S. R. R. " 11. Complaint of Mining Company, Hopkins county, of failure of L. & N. R R. to furnish cars, and discrimination in service. 12. Citizens of Commercial Point vs- Ohio Valley Railway Company. Inade- quate depot and shipping facilitiesg .J'n 13. Tobacco shippers, Mt. Sterling-ive. E. L. & B. S. R. R. Refusal to receive tobacco consignments to certain Louisville houses. 14. Citizens of Chicago, Ky., vs. L. a N. R. R. Lack of strck pens. 15. John Hardesty vs. 16. Citizons east of Lexington. Com- plaints that trains were not ‘being run to’ connect at Lexington with Louisville and Nashville trains, to the detriment and in-_ convenience ofthe public. For the year 1888, the number and char- acter of complaints appear, in Ninth Report of the Commission, pages 54 to 70., inclusive. The pointsinvolved are briefly summarized as fOllOWSZ 1. D. B. Wallace vs. Co. Complaint of overcharge. showed clerical error in billing. Settled. 2. Citizens of Taylorsvil’e vs. L. & N. R. L.& N. R. R. R. Co. Excessive freight charges on coal. Re- sponse made communicated to complain- ants, and further. prosecution abandoned- 3. Forbes & Bros. vs. L. 8: N. R. R. Co. Discrimination in freight charges against Hopkinsville. Response furnished com- plainants, and complaint abandoned. 4. R. R. Baker vs. L. & N. R. R. Exces-V sive freight charges. _ Response made and ad- justment made satisfactory to complainant. 5. Alex. R. Denny, 860. vs. Kentucky Cen- tral R. R. Co. Excessive freight charges on coal. Correspondence, pages 64 to 69, inclusive. Formal complaint instituted, and tried in 1889, L. a N. Ry." Response T s. T. o. Wingfield vs. L. a n. n. R- ' Refusal to stop passenger trains for passen- ger. Investigation showed complaint not‘ 1 well founded, and complainant so advised.. 7. A. Brooks vs. L. & N. R. R. Dis- crimination freight charges against Rob- ards, Ky. Case stated within the principle of long and short haul clause of Inter- State Commerce Act, but not covered by- the Kentucky statute. Charges of lesser sums for transportation to Henderson; longer haul than to Robards; shorter haul -jfisti'fiéd: Ofi Ithe- ground that Henderson is. competitivb aiidi'r'lR‘ohards is non-com- pei'titiv e point. During the year11889 the most important. cases before‘ the Commission were those- Y of— I - 1. H. A. Burdettvs. 1 Kentucky Central». f-Railwa‘y. I " *‘2."VJ-. Wesley West vs. Kentucky Cen-- tral Railway Co. ‘ 3. West Bros. vs. Same. '4. -Ward & Bro. vs. Same. ' "Complaints: Extortion in coal rates—F» Rowland to Lancaster and Paint Lick.. The report and opinion of the Commission appears at pages 41 to 59, inclusive, Tenth Report. The Commission, on hearing, found in favor of the complainants, award-- ing in favor of Ward & Bro., $441.79; in ' favor of J. Wesley West, $775.35; H. A. ' Burdett, $61.42, including costs and alter-l neys’ fees. The case of West Bros. was . adjudged in favor of railway company, on plea of limitation of one year, interpo ed‘- by the company. . 5. W. J. Clemerson & Co. vs. Kentucky Central Railway Company. Willful ex- tortion in rates on coal. 12th, 1889, claiming 35794.16. Pending hearing, case was compromised and discon- tin ued by complainant. . 6. Same vs. L. & N. R. R. Willfully charging excessive weights on car-load lots _ of coal. . Filed August 12th, and compromised with defendant by complainant before. formal hearing. ‘ Filed August_ 10 RAILROADS. .Monday,] SPALDING—HENDRICK. [October 6 . 7. H. T. Herron, Dixon, Ky., vs. L. & N. R. R. Extortion in freight charges—Cin- ~cinnati to Slaughtersville. Not An ' Response made justifying rates. ‘further pressed by complainants. Inter-State matter. 8. George C. Smith vs. L. &N. R. R. Complaint greater charge for short than long haul in rates from Kentucky points to "Cincinnati. Case stated is not within the power or :authority of the Commission to determine, and complainant so advised. 9. Citizens of Owlngsville vs. N. N. & M. V. Co. Failure to accommodate citi- zens with facilities for travel. Case stated complains that failure to stop fast trains at Preston station is an unjust discrimination against Owingsville. So far, the efforts of the Commission to =secure this service have been unavailing. 10. Citizens of Columbus vs. Mobile & ‘Ohio Railroad Company. Suspension of traflic through Columbus. Complainants state that the subscription -of $30,000 was made‘by citizens on condition that a road should be run through Colum- bus ; and that the company have suspended operation of road through said town, and diverged to another point. The President of the Mobile & Ohio Railroad Company has been notified by the Commission of the ‘complaint, but no response has been re- ceived as yet. 11. J. C. Tapp, Slaughtersville, vs. L. 8: _N. R. R. Co. Extortion in freight charges -—Providence to Slaughtersville. Response made justifying rates, and the matter not pressed further' by complain- nut. 12. Complaint, shippers, etc., of Four- teenth street, Louisville, vs. Louisville Bridge Company, and Others. Reported at length, pages 378-408, inclusive, Tenth Report of Commission. ' Refusal of Bridge ‘Company to receive or deliver on Four- teenth street freights from connecting railroads using Kentucky and Indiana bridge. 13. J. A. Royston vs. Kentucky Central Railway. Complaint extortion freight charges on coal--Rowland to Lancaster. Petition filed August, 1889. The case, in substance, is identical with that of West Bros. vs. same defendant, before referred to. The Commission awarded $629.25 to complainant, with costs and counsel fees added. Very respectfully, I. A. SPALDING, Chairman,‘ W. B. FLEMING, JOHN F. HAGER. - Mr. SPALDING. I suggest, after be- ing reported, it go to the Committee on Railroads. I think it had better be printed. V The question being taken on the motion, it was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT pro tem. I have a communication, in response to a resolution, from our Commissioner on Agriculture. Mr. HENDRICK. I call for the read- ing of it. ‘ _ The Reading Clerk then partly read the communication, the whole of which is as follows: Hon. Cassius M Clay, Jr., President of Constitutional Convention: DEAR SIR: In compliance with a resolu- tion adopted by your honorable body on September 12th, I herewith submit the fol- lowing report: 1st. “A tabulated statement of all the Judges and Chancellors. Commonwealth’s Attorneys and J ailers, who are drawing salaries from the Treasury, and how much each one is drawing per year; also what amount has been paid out of the Treasury during the five years last, ending July 1, 1890, to Special Judges, and in what dis- tricts said Special Judges served.” SALARY OF JUDGES. 11 Monday] RESPONSE or AUDITOR. [October 6 , Names of the Judges, Chancellors and Commonwealth’s Attorneys who are Drawing Salaries fromv the Treasury, and amount of each Salar , also amount Drawn from Treasury for five Years Ending July 1, 1890, by Special Judges. 55! ‘L’. .2. "4 3:, Names or JUDGES AND CHANCELLORB,ETC. '3 g '1 s4 ' Q a: I" 1 C. L Randle . . . . . . . $3,000 2 John R. Grace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 3 liLC Givens . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 4 L. P Little . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 -5 W. L. Reeves . . . - - . . . . . . . . 3,000 -6_ ‘LB. McBeath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ 3,000 7 D.B.Carr.... . . . . . . . . 3,000 8 '1‘. J. Morrow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 9 W.L Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 10 J R Morton . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 11 W. Montiort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,000 12 W.E Arthur . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 13 J. E Cooper . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 14 A. ‘ Cole . . . . . . . . - - . . . . . . . 3,000 15 B. Boyd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 16 John M. Burns . . . . . . . 3,000 17 S. E DeHaven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 18 W. E. Russell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 19 H. C. Lilly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 J.W.Menzies........... 3,000 ,I.W.Edwards.............. 3,000 i 8.13. Toney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 ? Emmett Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 :W.S.Bish0p......... 3,000 §IraJulian.......... . . . . . .. 3,000 ,-= Geo-G. Perkins . . . . . . . . . - . . . 3,000 iJohnM.B.ice...... .. 3,000 , Thos. J. Scott . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . 3,000 2 J. H. Tinsley . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . 3,000 ‘gJ.W.McPherson............. 600 J.R.Thomas . . . . 500 W.R.Thompson............. 1,500 ..., > 3 5” s o o as s 3 a; as Rrusnxs. a "U ‘4:12. ‘’ . a. 9 o s m 8 $534 Circuit Court. t t t c l 6 I l 1 876 ‘ ‘ “ t I t C 623 ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ 1,491 :: :: '1 C C l l t t l l (6 I l t‘ 6' 6 1,871 “ ' “ 4,174 ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ t C t t C l 6 I 2,037 ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ 2,004 ‘ ‘ 224 Kenton Chancery Court. 1 001 Louisville Chancery Court.. 1:365 Louisville Law and Equity. 231 Louisville Common Pleas. 651 Common Pleas. 392 Common Pleas. 339 Criminal. 1, 372 Criminal. 112 Common Pleas. 812 Common Pleas. 83 Christian County Common Pleas Marion County Criminal. Louisville City Court. Amount paid Special Criminal and Common Pleas Judges . . . . . Add amount paid Special Circuit Judges $7,510 22,140 0 Q 0 I I 0 a I e 0 O I Total amount paid Special J udgesfor five years, ending July 1, 1890. $29, 650. Commouwealth’s Attorneys who are now Drawing Salaries from the State, the Salary of each one being $2,500 per Year. _First Di~.trict-—S. H. Crossland. :Second District-J. B. Garnett. Third District—J. H. Powell. Fourth District-John T. Noe. Fifth District—N. A. Porter. .‘Sixth District—Chapeze Wathen. 4 Seventh District—J. G. Craddock. Eighth District—Wm. Herndon. Ninth District—Frank Parsons. Tenth District—C. J . Bronston. Eleventh District—J. S. Gaunt. Twelfth District—W. W. Cleary. Thirteenth District-M. M. Redwine. Fourteenth District—J. H. Sallee. Fifteenth District—A. H. Clarke. Sixteenth District—S. G. Kinner. Seventeenth District—J. S. Morris. Eighteenth District—F. D. Shuck. Nineteenth District—J. P. Marrs. As no J ailer draws any salary from the' ' Treasury, but is only paid for dieting pris- 12 ‘ RESOLUTIONS. p Monday,] k oners, I do not include that ofl‘icer in fore- going statement. The Common Pleas and Criminal Court Districts are not numbered, as they are composed, sometimes, of parts of several Circuit Court .Districts. That part of the information asked for in sections 2 and 3 of said resolution was furnished your honorable body on the 4th instant. Information asked for in section 4 of said resolution is as follows: Witnesses-Amount paid for 5 years ending July 1, 1890 . . $269,049 08 Jailers—Amount paid for 5 ‘years ending July 1, 1890 . . Grand Jurors—Amount paid for 5 years ending July 1, 1890. . . . . . Petit J urors—Amount paid for 5 years ending July 1, 1890. 949,275 52 I think it but just to state that the amounts set out as paid to Special Judges in the various districts for five years end' ing July 1, 1890, were not paid in every instance during the term of the present in- cumbent—some of said districts having changed the Judges during that time. All of which is respectfully submitted. L. C. NORMAN, Auditor. October 6, 1890. The PRESIDENT pro tern. 483,816 49 305,689 00 It seems to me that that is not a report from the. Commissioner on Agriculture, but from the Auditor. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that the fur- ther reading be dispensed with, the commu- nication printed,and referred to the Com- mittee on Circuit Courts. ‘The question being taken upon the adop- tion of the motion, the same was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT pro iem. Reports of Standing Committees are now in order. Reports from Select Committees are in order. Motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. BECKN ER. ' I have an amend- A LLEN—PHELPS—BOLES. ment to the report of the Committee. on Municipalities. The amendment was read by the Read» ing Clerk, as follows: i The Delegate from Clark moves to- strike out so much of first section as fol- lows the word “contents,” in fifth line. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. I have a resolu~ tion which I desire to be referred to the- Committee on Rules. The Reading Clerk thereupon read Mr- Allen’s resolution, which is as follows: Resolved, That rule 50 be so amended as; to read,after the words “standard time,” in the third line, excepting on Saturdays, then the adjournment shall be until Mon-v day morning at 11 o’clock A. M., standard time. Referred to the Committee on Rules. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. I offer a reso-- . lution. Resolution read, as follows: WHEREAS, Experience has shown that. the contesting of seats in the Legislature» have always been rather their disadvan— tage, viz: That the‘member entitled to his seat is oten deprived of same for a great. part of the session, and the people are de» prived of their true representative for the‘ same time; therefore, Resolved, That all contested seats in: the General Assembly shall be tried in the Court of Appeals in surh manner as- shallzbe provided by law, and not later- ' than the beginning of the regular session of‘ the Legislature, and shall have precedence. of all other causes in said court. Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr.LBOLES. I have a resolution, No- 64, which was referred to the Committee" on Corporations. A majority of the Com- mittee have instructed me to report it back to the Convention, and ask that it be re- ferred to the Committee on Railroads and. Commerce. The PRESIDENT pro tern. Without- objection, the change will be made. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I have a resolu~ tion to offer, and give notice that I will. call it up to-morrow morning immediately- after roll-call. Resolution read, as follows: [October 6 RESOLUTIONS. 13 ’ Monday,] TWYMAN—JO NSON—MARTIN. [Octobe r . Resolved. That, beginning on Monday, October 13, 1890, and continuing each day thereafter, except on Saturdays, this Con- vention shall, in addition to the morning session now provided for by the rules, hold an afternoon session, commencing at 13 o’clock P. M., and adjourning at 6 o’clock P. M. Mr. TWYMAN. I have a resolution which I desire to be referred to the Com- mittee on Judicial Department and Court - of Appeals. The resolution was read, as follows: Resolved, That section 2, article 4, be amended by adding thereto the following: All cases, unless the Court otherwise di- rect, shall be taken up as nearly as prac- ticable in the order in which'they are sub- mitted, and no opinion shall be valid un- less indorsed by two of the Judges that they have personally examined the record in the case. Referred to the Committee on J udicial Department and Court of Appeals. President Clay here took the Chair. Mr. JONSON. 1 have a resolution. Resolution read, as follows: WHaREAs. Many communications are being received by the President and Dale- gates to this Convention from the women of this State; therefore Relolved, That a Committee, consisting of members, be appointed by the President, to whom shall be referred all such communications for appropriate con- sideration and action thereon. The PRESIDENT. The resolution is in the nature of an amendment to the rules, and under the rules will lie over one day. The Chair will now: appoint the Delegate from Washington a member of :the Committee on the aLegislativehDepart. ment, and also the Committee on Revision, ‘Titles and Arrangement. - Mr. MARTIN. I have a substitute for section one of the report of the Committee on Municipalities. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous consent, said amendment can be offered. I .As the report is'not before the Convention, it can only go in by unanimous consent. ‘ Mr. MARTIN. My ‘reason for;ofi'ering it was, I was afraid the previous question would be called, and I would be cut off. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will now lay before the Convention the following communication from the Auditor. Mr. AYRES. I wish to offer an amend- ment to the report :of the :Committee on Municipalities. The PRESIDENT. It can 'the offered by unanimous consent. rl‘he Chair hears no objection, but first, the Secretary will read the communication from the Auditor. Mr. BRONSTON. I move the further reading be dispensed with; that the com- munication be printed and referred to the Committee on County Courts. The motion being put, it was declared to have been carried, and the communica- tion so referred. The PRESIDENT. Report the substi- tute offered by the Delegate from Cal- loway. The substitute read, as follows : No new county shall be formed contain- ing a less population than twelve thousand, nor shall the county or counties from which it is taken be reduced to a less num- ber than twelve thousand: Provided, That any county with an area of more than seven hundred square miles may be di- vided, when the population exceeds twenty thousand, int) two counties, Mr. BLACKBURN. I offer a resolu- tion. Resolution read, as follows: ,All existing charters or grants under which a bona fide organization shall not have taken place and business been begun in good faith at the time ofthe ratification of dthis Constitution, shall thereafter be V01 . The PRESIDENT. If there are no motions and resolutions the Chair will call the Orders of the Day; but the Chair would prefer to have that done by motion. Mr. CLARDY. I move we take up the Orders of the Day, and I claim the floor, as 1 had it when we adjourned. - The question being put, the motion was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will 14 COUNTIES. Mon day] CLARDY—JOHNSTON—MILLER. [October 6, please report the matter in the Orders of the Day. The SECRETARY. The report of the Committee on Municipalities. Mr. CLARDY. I move the previous question on that subject. The PRESIDENT. The previous question is moved on the pending report and all amendments. The question being put, was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the report and pending amend- ments. The SECRETARY. The first amend- ment in order is one ofiered by the Dele- gate lrom Crark, Mr. Beokner. The amendment was r' ad. The PRESIDENT. That amen d nt is not in parliamentary shape. but the Delegate, by unanimous consent, can cor- rect. We are not in Committee of the , Whole. Mr. JOHNSTON. I make the point i that the first secti~~n has been adopted by the Convention. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks the Delegate isin error. There have been a few amendments, but never on the orig- inal report. care to correct his amendment‘? Mr. BECKNER. What is it? The PRESIDENT. Your amendment was drafted for the Committee of the Whole, and as we are not in Convention now, it is not In proper shape. Mr. BECKN ER. If it is sent to me I will correct it. Mr. W. H. MILLER. It seems to me, ' under the rule adopted off the 30th of September, that. this report shall be consid- ered by sectior s. The report of Septem- temher 30 provides each section and para- graph of the report of the Committee con taining matters in reference to the Consti» tution shall be treated as independent propositions. The PRESIDENT. That is in case a Does the Delegate from Clark - Delegate calls for that separation. There has been no call for the separation of the report. ' Mr. W. H. MILLER. I call for a vote by sections on this bill. That is required under that rule. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will or- der the separation, and the vote will be on- the first section. of the Delegate. Mr. BECKN ER. That portion struck out is that in relation to the line coming; within ten miles of the county seat. The vote being taken, the amendment- was declared rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next~ amendment. Mr. Ayres’ amendment was read, as fol- lows: . In section one, after the word “'divided,’ in line 7. insert, Provided, That in the location of county seats. due egard shall at all times be had to local advantages. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the amendment, the same was de- clared rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next. amendment. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I would like to- have the original resolution read. Mr. BRONSTON. I object. printed. Mr. J. L PHELPS. I have not seen it. Mr. BRONSTON. I will send you one. The PRESIDENT. Report the next. amendment. The Clerk read the amendment offered by the Delegate from Nelson. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the amendment, it was declared re-- jected. ' The PRESIDENT. Report the next; amendment to paragraph one. The Clerk read the substitute offered by the Delegate from Shelby. The PRESIDENT. That is a substie tute for the whole report, and not alone for- the first section. It is Report the amendment- COUNTIES. 15 Mohday,] YoUNe-BoLEs. [October 6. The substitute offered by the Delegate from Harrison was read. The question being putupon the adop- tion of the substitute, was declared to have been rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment to section one. The SECRETARY. There are no more. The PRESIDENT. Report ment to sel'tion two. The amendment oflered'by the Delegate from Simpson for section two was read. The question being put on the ad ption of the :- mendment. it was declared to have been reje ted. The PRESIDENT. Report amendment. The amendment of “the Delegate from Oldham was read. Mr. YOUNG. There was a suggestion made by the Committee during the discus- sion which I think removed the objection to the second section. The PR ESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent the D legato can proceed. Mr YOUNG. In the first line of sec- tion 2, after the word “ divided,” there was propos‘ d to be added, except in the forma- tion of new counties, which would allow the L‘ gislature to form new counties w thout submitting the question to a vote. As an ende-i, the section would read, “No counties shall be divided, except in the formation of new counties, or have any part stricken therefrom, without submit- tingr the question to a vote of the people of the county, nor unle=s the majority of all the legal v ters of the county voting on the question shall vote for the same.” The PRESIDENT. The Secretary in- forms the Chair that no such amendment has been sent up. Mr. YOUNG. It was made. If gen- tlemen w ill permit me, I will write it. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, it can be presented. The previous que~tion having been ordered, it can only amend- the next be presented by unanimous consent. The Chair bears no objection, and the gentle» man can send up the amendment. Report the next a’mendment, Mr. Secretary. The Reading Clerk read the amendment proposed by Mr. C. T. Allen, and the- question being taken upon the adoption thereof, same was rejected. The Reading Clerk read the amendment proposed by Mr. W. H. Miller, and the- question being taken upon the adoption thereof, same was rejected, on division, by a vote of thirty-nine to twenty-three. The Reading Clerk read the amendment. to Section 2, proposed by Mr. Young, and- stated verbally by him. And the question being taken upon the- adoption of Mr. Young’s amendment, same was adopted. Mr. BOLES. Mr. President, just one moment. I regarded lb at the timev of the vote upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lincoln, as a very im- portant one, and I would suggest to the Chair that aquorum did not vote upon that. question at all. There were only fifty five-votes cast. The PRESIDENT. It is a good point, but the gentleman did not make it at the time. Mr. BOLES. Well, I did not make it at the time. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is in - clined to think that the point was made too late. The Secretary will report the next amendment. The Reading Clerk read the substitute for section two of the report offered by Mr.. Miller, and the question being taken upon the adoption of said amendment, same was. rejected. The Reading Clerk read the substitute- for section two offered by Mr. Brents, and ‘the vote being taken upon the adoption of said substitute, same was rejected. The Reading Clerk read the amendment. offered by Mr. Muir. Mr. MUIR. Now, Mr. President, will 16 COUNTIES. Monday,] BLACKBURN—MUIR—BRONSTON. [October 6. ~the Secretary please report that in connec- tion with the report. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please read the addition in connection with “the original paragraph. This was done. And the question being taken upon the adoption of said amendment, same was re- jected. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make the point that there was no quroum voting on ‘that amendment. The PRESIDENT. The point is well ~taken, and, by parliamentary usage, the bill goes into the Orders of the Day, unless some Delegate calls for the yeas and nays. Mr. FUNK. I call for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDENT. Who seconds the call? Mr. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I would like to ask the Delegate who offered that amendment what would become of it in case that indebtedness was not due by the county. I want to vote for this ‘amendment. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous consent, the question can be answered. Mr. -BLACKBURN. According to the amendment, although the indebted- ness might not be due for years, yet it must be collected before the division. Mr. MUIR. The section reads thus: “There shall be no territory stricken from any county unless a majority of the voters living in such territory shall petition for such division. But the portion so stricken off and added to another county, or formed ‘in whole or in part into a new county, shall be holden for and obliged to pay its proportion of the bonded indebtedness of the county from which it has been taken.” Now, my amendment states that it is to be assessed and collected in the manner provided by the law existing prior to the division. That is, that the law in operation upon that portion of the county before it is stricken ofl' be con- tinued and carried out tillv it is paid, and not of that portion of the county relegated to a new county to collect and pay a debt that that county has never assumed. For instance, the county of Nelson, as sug- gested by the gentleman from Larue, has a portion lying away over next to his county, and more convenient to his county than to mine. My county, say, has assumed a railroad debt of two hundred thousand or three hundred thousand dollars, and there comes an arrangement by which there is a part of my county stricken ed and carried into his county. Now, the county of Nel- son is bound by the whole debt, and let the county of Nelson, by her assessment,’ just continue that, and still assess and collect from the portion stricken off. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. What objection would there be in case the laws in ex- istence at the time of the division were inefficient, to allowing the Legislature to pass other laws? The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the gentleman can ask the question. Mr. BRONSTON. The question I ask is, what objection would there be, if the laws at the time proved ineflicient to col- lect the indebtedness, to permitting the Legislature to enact such laws as would be efiicient'? Mr. MUIR. The law being 11 existence for eight or ten years, it would not be pre- sumed that it would be inefiicient. I just propose to keep the same arrangement by which the debt has been paid in part until the debt is finally adjusted, by the same ofiicers, and, as I say, if’ it is the county of Nelson, let that county collect the debt; let her ofl‘icers colleit it and report it, The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please call the roll. Who demanded the yeas and nays? Mr. YOUNG. I did, sir. The PRESIDENT. The call is see- onded by the gentleman from the Seventh Louisville District. (Mr. Funk.) Mr. BECKHAM. (During the calling COUNTIES. 17 ~— Mon day,] tion : question. additional remedy to the county for the collection of a bonded debt, do I under- stand that this proposition denies the Legislature the power to make that rem- ' edy applicable to the part of the county detached ? - Mr. MUIR. I will answer by saying this: If the bonded debt exists upon this part of the county stricken off, and if the Leg'slature should never make any pro- vision for the collection of th» debt of that part of the State, it goes scot free, because the county to which it is added has no law by which it can take up the matter, unless there is legislation; but the county from which it is taken, having acted upon it, and having had the law in force for years, it is presumed that the Legislature will not take away from it that power. It collects the taxes or interest to be collected, and it will collect and apply that to the payment of the original indebtedness. There would be no need of legislation. The result of the vote was announced, as follows: YEAS—17. Allen, M. K. Jonson. Jep. C. Auxier, A. J. Muir, J. W. Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J. Cox, H. Petrie, H. G.’ DeHaven, S E Rodes, Robert Farmer, H. H. Twyman, I. W. Forgy, J. M. Whitaker,Emery Hanks, Thos. H. Wood, J. M. James, A. D. liars—57. Allen, 0- T, Johnston, P. P. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. Forrester, J. G. Fun k, J. T. Graham, Samuel Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J- W. Jacobs, R. P. BECKHAM—MUIR. [October 6. of the roll.) Mr. President, I would like Amos, D. C. Kennedy, Hanson t k h D1 t f N 1 a s_ Askew, J. F‘, Kirwan, E. E. O a: 2”‘; t; ega. e 5.3m .eion ifq‘tIEi, Ayres, W. W. Knott, J. Proctor 8. Br’ m_ ‘S 0pm on’ ” Beckham, J. C. Lassing, L. W. amendment 1s passed— Beckner, W. M. Lewis, W. W. - Bennett B. F. Martin W. H. . h - i 7 ' The PRESIDENT. 1st erevany obJec Birkhead, B‘ To Mm, John S. tion to the question belng asked . Blackburn, James McChord W_ O’ The Chair hears none, and the gentleman Blackwell, Joseph McDermott, E, J_ will proceed. Boles, S. H. McElroy, W. J. x . =~ ; Brents, J. A. McHenry, H. D. Mr. BECKHAM. I de_1re to ask th s Bronston, C. J. Miller, W1],- If the amendment proposed by Brown, J_ S‘ Miller, W_ H_ ‘the Delegate from Nelson is passed, and Brummal, J. M. Montgomery, J. F. the Legislature thereafter furnishes an Buckner, s- 3- MOOI‘P, Laban T~ Bullitt, W. G. Parsons, Rob’t T. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall. J. E. Ramsey. W. R. Sachs, Morris A Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Spalding, I. A. Trusdell, George’ Young, B. IL Mr. President Clay._ ABSENT -25 Applegate, Leslie T. Hopkins, F. A. Berkele, Wm. Bourland, H. R. Buchanan, Nathan‘ Burnam, Curtis F, Carroll, John D. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Field, W. W. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Harris, Geo. C. Hines, J. S. Hogg, S. P. Mackoy, 'W. H. Moore, J. H. O’Hara, R. H. Pettit, Thos. S. Straus, F. P. Swango, G. B. Washington, George West, J. F. Williams, L.P.V. Woolfolk, J. 13‘. And the amendment was rejebted. Mr. JONSON. Mr. President, I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Madison. The PRESIDE NT. Without objection, such leave is granted, Mr. BECKNER. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Henry. The PRESIDENT. If there is no objection, the leave is granted. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I desire to ask leave of absence for the gentleman from Wayne county. 18 COUNTIES. Monday,] MCELROY —-—AUXIER—MCHENRY. [October 6. Mr. McELROY. I desire to ask leave of absence for the gentleman from Leslie. The PRESIDENT. Without objec- tion. such leaves are granted. Mr. AUXIER. I desire to ask leave of absence. for the Delegate from Floyd and a‘so the Delegate from Owsley. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, indefinite leaves of absence are granted to the gentlemen from Floyd and Owsley. Mr. McHENRY. Mr. President, I wish to make a parliamentary inquiry. How long are these leaves of absence for? No time is indicated by either of the gen- tlemen. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that these leaves can be revoked when necessary, but as granted, the leaves are indefinite. The Reading Clerk read the amendment to the report of the Committee on Munici- pilities oflered by Mr. Beckham. The PRESIDENT. ' This amendment is proposed as a substitute for the whole re- port. The question is upon the adoption of the substitute just read. The Chair will request all the members to vote. Mr. BECKHAM. I ask that the sub- stitute be again reported. The Reading Clerk again read the sub- stitute offered by Mr. Beckham. The PRESIDENT. The Chair state that there is a quorum present. Mr. TWYMAN. I ask for a division of this question as to the two propositions. The PRESIDENT. It is a substitute for the whole report, and cannot be divided- The Chair will state that there is a quorum present but a very slim one, and requests all members to vote. And the question being taken upon the adoption of Mr. Beckham’s substitute, same was rejected. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Beckner, offered as a sub stitute for the report. Mr. BECKNER. amendment, will I Withdraw the l The PRESIDENT. The question is now upon the adoption of the report of the Committee of the Whole, and before vot- ing upon it the Secretary had better re- port it. ' Mr. LASSING. Mr. President, if it is in order, I desire to offer a resolution and ask the adoption of it. The PRESIDENT. If the Delegate has an amendment, it is not in order. Mr. LASSING. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment of Mr. Straus to the bill reported by the Com- mittee was adopted. Being one who voted in the affirmative the other day, and having, after mature deliberation upon the matter, concluded to change, and have changed my opinion—- The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion has been ordered, and cuts oft" all motions whatever. Therefore, the gentle- man's motion is not in order. The gen- tleman can not get the floor when the previous question has been ordered. Mr. LASSING. I move to reconsider the vote by which the previous question was ordered. The PRESIDENT. The motion can not be made unless by unanimous consent of the House. Mr. LASSING, I ask the unanimous consent of the House to make the motion. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman asks the unanimous consent of the House to make a motion to reconsider the vote by ' which the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Bullitt was adopted.‘ Is there any objection ? SEVERAL DELEGATES. Object. The PRESIDENT. There is objection. The Secretary was misinformedI he has another amendment pending. ' The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Bullitt. _ Mr. L. T. MOORE. That has been adopted. The PRESIDENT. Mr. Secretary,please OOUN TIES. ‘ 19 Monday,] MILLLR—DEHAvEN—McHENRY. [October 6 read the report as amended—as it stands at present. The Reading Clerk read the report as amended. The PRESIDENT. Does the gentle- man from Lincoln still insist upon a di- vision of the report into sections‘? Under the rule the gentleman has the right to have the parts separately considered, and the vote will be first upon section 1. ' Mr. MILLER. I do. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of section 1 of the re- port. The question being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative, and said section adopted. ‘ The PRESIDENT. The question is now upon the adoption of section 2 of the report. The Reading Clerk read section 2 of the report as amended. Mr. DEHAVEN. Have we voted upon the first section yet ? . The PRESIDENT. Section first has been adopted. . Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. President, I wanted, by unanimous consent, to call at- tention- The PRESIDENT. Is there objection? Is there any objection to the gentleman making a statement? The Chair hears no objection. Mr. McHENRY. I want to call atten- tion to the fact that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Bullitt is a proviso. ( Reads.) “ Provided, That nothing con- tained herein shall prevent the Legislature from abolishing any cuunty or counties.” That was added by the Convention. Now, I submit to the Convention whether it is not better to strike out the word ‘-pro- vided.” I do not think any proviso ought to be put'in the Constitution, and I submit to the Convention whether we ought not strike out that word “provided,” so that it will read at-the end of the section “that nothing contained herein shall prevent the Legislature from abolishing any county or counties.” I think it important. instead of putting in the word “provided,” that we simply leave it out and put the substitute in there. - The PRESIDENT. The matter is now under the operation of the previous ques- tion. The previous question has not been exhausted, but it will be in order to move to reconsider the vote by which that was adopted after the execution of the order for. the previous question. The yeas and nays being demanded by Mr. DeHaven and seconded by Mr. Beck- ham, the votewas taken upon the adoption of the second section of the report of the Committee, which vote resulted as follows : YEAS—56. Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Allen, M. K. Johnston, I’. I’. Amos, D. C. Kennedy, Hanson Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. Ayres, W. W. Lassing, L. W. Birkhead, B. T. Lewis, W. W. Blackwell, Joseph Martin, W. H. Boles, S. H. May, John S. Bronstop, C. J. McChord, Wm. C. Brown, J. S. McDermott, E. J. Brummal, J. M. McElroy, W. J. Buckner, S. B. MeHenry, H. D. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, Will. Clardy, John D. Miller, WV. H. Coke. J. Guthrie Montgomery, J. F. Cox, H. Moo e, Laban T. Edrington, 'W. J. Muir, J. W. Elmore, T. J. Parsons, Rob’t T. English, Sam. E. Petrie, H. G. Farmer, H. H. Phelps, Zack Forrester, J. G. Rodes, Robert Forgy, J. M. Sachs, Morris A. Funk. J. T. Smith, H. H. Graham, Samuel Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W.. Jacobs, R. P. Smith, W. Scott Spalding, I. A. Trusdell, George Whitaker, Emery Young, Bennett H. HAYS—19. Auxier, A. J. Knott, J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. Nunn, T. J. Beckner, W. M. Phelps, John L. Bennett, B. F. Pugh, Sam‘l J. Blackburn, James Q licksall, J. E. Brents, J. A. Ramsey, W. R. Chambers, G. D. De‘laven, S. Hanks, Thos. H. J onscn, J ep. 0. Twyman, I. W. Wooi, J. H. MraPresiclent Clay 2'0 COUNTIES.’ Monday,] DEHAVEN—LASSING. ABSENT—25. Applegate, Leslie T. Hogg, S. P. Berkele, Wm. Hopkins, F. A. Bourland, H. R. Mackoy, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Burnam, Curtis E. O’Hara R. H. Carroll. John D. Pettit, Thos. S. Doris, W. F. Straus, F. P. Durbin, Charles ‘Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Washington, George Field, W. W. West, J. F. Goebel, William Harris, Geo. C. Hines, J. S. The PRESIDENT. Section 2 is adopt- ed, and the Secretary will please report section 3. ‘ The Reading Clerk read section 8 of the report of the Committee on Municipalities. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of section 3. And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative, and said section adopted. The PRESIDENT. The whole report is adopted. Mr. DEHAVEN. Mr. President, is it in order to have a vote on the whole bill? The PRESIDENT. This is the final vote. The Delegate from Lincoln called for a division of the question upon its final discussion, and the report ofthe Com- mittee was read by sections and voted upon, and is now finally adopted. Mr. LASSING. Is it in order to offer my resolution or amendment now‘? It is a motion to reconsider the vote by which Mr. Straus’ amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks that the proper procedure would be to move to reconsider the vote by which sec- tion 1 was adopted, and then the vote by which the amendment to section 1 was adopted, in order to get at that amend- ment. Mr. LASSING. Then, Mr. President, I'make such motion. I voted for Mr. Straus’ amendment, since which, I have ghen the matter mature consideration, and have concluded that I made a mis- take. ‘ Williams, L. P. V. Woolfolk, J. F. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will , first ask the Delegate whether he voted for or against the first section ? Mr. LASSING. I voted for it. The PRESIDENT. rI‘hen it is in or- der. ’ Mr. LASSING. - I think the power gr inted to the Legislature under Mr. Straus’ amendment to abolish counties is a dangerous power, although I believe there are too many counties in the State, and that it would be better for us if there were less; still I consider the. amendment a danger- ous one, and I believe that we had better preserve the vested rights and privileges of the counties as established, and if possible avoid constructing any new ones. I be- lieve that we had better, in good faith, “ bear the evils we have than fly to those we know not of,” by the granting of un- equal and dangerous powers. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the motion to reconsider the vote by which section one was adopted. Mr. LASSIN‘G. (During the division on the question.) Mr. President, I call for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDENT. Who seconds the call? Mr. MARTIN. I second it. Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point of order that it is too late. The PRESIDENT. In the opinion of the Chair it is not too late, as the resu‘t has not yet been announced' And the vote being taken on said ques- tion, resulted as follows : YEAS—27. . Auxier, A. J. Martin, W. H. Beckner, W. M. Miller, W. H. Bennett B. F. Montgomery, J. F. Birkhead, B. T. Nunn, T. J. Blackburn, James Phelps, Jean L. Brents, J. A. . Pugh, Sam’l J. Bullitt, W. G. Quicksall, J .E. Clardy, John D. Ramsey. W. R. Elmore, T. J. Sachs, Morris A. Farmer, H. H. Smith. H; H. Forgy, J. M. S nith, W. Scott Graham, S-unuel Twyman, I. W, [October 6 , COUNTIES. 21 J‘ M ILLER—HENDRICK—DEHAVEN. [October 6. Monday,] James, A. D. Wood, J. M. Lassing, L. W. SAYS—~47. Allen, C. T. Jacobs, R. P. Allen, M. K. Jonson, Jep. C. Amos, D. C. Johnston, P. P. Askew, J. F. Kennedy, Hanson Ayres, W W. Kirwan, E. E. Beckham, J. C. Knott, J. Proctor Blackwell, Joseph Lewis, W. W. Boles, S. H. May, John S. Bronston, C. J. McDermott, E. J. Brown, J. S. McElroy, W. J. Brummal, J. M. McHenry, H. D. Buckner, S. B. Miller, Will, Chambers, G. D. Moore, Laban T. Coke, J. Guthrie Muir, J. W. Cox, H. Parsons, Rob’t T. DeHaven, S. E. Petrie, H. G. Edrington, W. J. Phelps, Zack English, Sam. E. Rodes Robert Forrester, J. G. Spalding, I. A. Funk, J T. Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, T. H. Holloway, J. W. ABSENT—25. Applegate, Leslie T. Hogg, S. P. Trusdell, George Whitaker, Emery Young, Bennett H. Mr President Clay. Berkele, Wm. Hopkins, F. A. Bourland, H. R. Mackoy, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Burnam, Curtis F. O’Hara, R. H. Carroll, John D. Pettit, Thos. S. Diris, W. F. Straus, F. P. Durbin, Charles Swango, G. B. FieldW. W. Washington, George Glenn, Dudley A. West, J. F. Goebe', Wm. Williams L. P. V. Harris, Geo. C. Woolfolk, J. F. Hines, J. S. The PRESIDENT. Is there anything further in the Orders of the Day? Mr. W. H. MILLER. Mr. President, I move that the amendments just adopted be remanded or recommitted to the Committee to perfect the phraseology of them, and only for that purpise. Some of the amend- ments proposed come in awkardly, and I move to recommit the bill for that purpose. Mr. HENDRICK. I want to ask the Delegate if it was not the purpose of the Convention in appointing this Committee on Revision to have that very thing done, It seems to me, Mr. President, that that was the object of the appointment of that Co nmittee; that each section adopted into this Constitution might be referred to that Committee for the very purpose indicated by the Delegate from Ohio, and by the Delegate from Lincoln, and so vrefer it to the proper Committee, who shall correct the phraseology; but I think it would be an exceedingly unparliamentary proceeding to recommit it to that same Committee from which the bill was originally reported for any other purpose except re-reporting the bill, and as the whole matter has been adopted by the Convention, I think it ought to be re’erred to the proper Com- mittee. " Mr. DeHAVFN. Is not the Committee on Division,’ Title and Arrangement the proper Committe‘? Mr. HENDRICK. I have just been discussing that question, and it seems to me that the Committee on Division, Title and Arrangement has charge of another matter. Mr. DEHAVEN. Revision is what you would refer it for. Mr. HENDRICK. That seems to be the view of some of the Delegates, and then it does not seem to be that of others. I have no objection. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state for the information of the Conven- tion that the Committee on Rules had the creation of such a Committee, that is, a Committee on Style, under consideration, but thought that such a Committee was not necessary, so just the Committee on Division, Title and Arrangement was ap- pointed. The duties of that Committee do not inc‘ude a revision of the text, but a Special Committee would have to be cre- aied for that, and a motion to that effect will he in order. Mr. HEN DRICK. Then I move, Mr. Chairman, the appointment of a Special Committee, [ (are not by, what title you call it, to which every section of the Con- 22 ' COUNTIES. Monday,] HENDRICK—J onNsToN—CLARnY. [October 6. stitution adopted by this Convention may be referred. The PRESIDENT. Will it be a Stand- ing Committee? ‘ Mr.HENDRICK. I make the motion that it be a Standing Committee. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate will please indicate the number of the Com- mittee? Mr. HENDRICK. I should think sev- en or nine would be a proper number. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman must write out his motion, for it is an amendment to the rules, and under the rules will have to lie over one day. Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to suspend the rules and put the resolution on its pas- ~ sage. Mr. CLARDY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask for information whether such a Comm‘ttee would have the right to really change the wording or phraseology of a report of a Committee after it has been adopted by this Convention? The PRESIDENT. Not unless so or- dered by the Convention. Mr. CLARDY. It would be simply the arrangement as to paragraphs and sec- tions? The PRESIDENT. The Chair will an- swer that, although it is not a strictly parliamentary inquiry; that a Commit- tee has already been appointed with regard to the arrangement of Titles and Divisions, and if the Convention desires a Committee to have charge of the revision of the style without changing the substance, that Com- mittee will have to be created. Mr. SACHS. Mr. President, I would like to be informed whether or not there is a motion pending. I understood Mr. Mil- ler, the gentleman from Lincoln, offered a resolution that this matter be referrei to - a Committee, and had, it in writing. Is not that motion pending? I rose to sec- ond it. The PRESIDENT. That motion is not strictly in order. By unanimous con- sent it might be in order, but not otherwise, because after a bill has been adopted, it is certainly not in order to refer it back to the Committee that reported it. It is then adopted. Mr. SACHS. Could not it be referred back to that Committee for thisjspecial pur- pose‘? The PRESIDENT. pension of the rules. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to make this suggestion upon the point made by the Chair, and that is, that this did not come in the form of the adoption of a complete measure at all, but it was merely It could by sus- adopted as part of the Constitution of ' Kentucky. We can have but one bill here, and that is the bill adopting the Whole Constitution, and this is only one section, and I think till it comes up in complete form, as I have indieated, that the Conven- tion has complete control over it, and can remand or recommit it to any Committee. -The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that legitimately it goes to the Committee on Enrollment, and unless a:suspension of the rules is voted, it can not be referred to any other Committee. The question is upon the suspension of the rules and referring back the report which has just been adopted to the Committee on Munici- palities, tor the purpose of correcting any inadvertence in regard to style. Mr. SACHS. Now, Mr. President,I would like to be heard. The PRESIDENT. A motion to sus- pend the rules does not admit of debate. Mr. HENDRICK. What is the ques- tion? The PRESIDENT. To suspend the rules and refer the report back to the Com- mittee on Municipalities to correct any mistakes in style. Mr. HENDRICK. Mr. President, ] call for a diyision of the proposition. The PRESIDENT. It does not admit of divis‘on, because it is a suspension 0 RESOLUTIONS. 23 Monday,] HENDRICK—COKE—MCHENRY. [October 6- the rules, and no suspension of the rules admits of any division. And the question being taken upon the adoption of said motion, it was decided in the negative. Mr. HENDRICK. I move the adop- tion of the resolution which I send to the Clerk’s desk, and ask a suspension of the rules for its passage. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the Chair appoint a Com- mittee of seven, to be known as the Com- mittee on Style, to which shall be referred each section of the Constitution as adopted by this Convention, and it shall be the duty of said Committee to revise the gram- matical arrangement, and correct the ver- biage of each section so adopted; and they shall make report to the Convention. Mr. COKE. Do I understand that that Committee is to make these alterations without reporting back to this Convention? The changing of a word makes a good deal of difference. Mr. HENDRICK. I wish to suggest to the Delegate from Logan that the entire purpose in appointing this Committee is, that it shall make this revision and report back to the Convention. Of course, nothing can be done by that Committee unless the Convention adopt it. It reports back like any other Committee. Mr. McHENRY. I move that this be referred to the Committee on Rules. I think the Committee on Rules ought'to report another Committee. There ought to be a Committee, consisting of three of the best scholars in this Convention, to be known as the Committee on Revision and Style. The Committee on Rules contem- plated reporting such a Committee. We had some controversy about it, but I think there is a necessity for such a Committee; and I think every single provision in the Constitution, when it has been adopted by the Convention, should go to some such Committee as that. This matter can be very well deferred for awhile, __however, and I move, therefore, that it be referred to the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. Of course, before the resolution can come before the House for the appointment of a Committee, the rules will have to be suspended, and then your motion will be in order. The ques- tion is on the suspension of the rules, in order that the resolution indicated may come before the House. The question was put to the House, and was declared carried. Mr. HENDRICK. I wish to say, in response to the suggestion made by the Deleg te from Ohio, that I do not suppose there is a Delegate upon this floor has any more regard for the scholarship and the ability of the Committee on Rules than I have; but we have now adopted a sec- tion in the Constitution we propose to make, and I presume it would be in the province of the Chiir to select gentle- men upon the floor of sufiicient knowledge and education to perform this work. I want to say,in advance, that I have no personal ambition in the matter, as I cer- tainly do not desire the chairmanship of it, but I think, however, whi‘e we are at, it we can efi'et this matter without the inter- vention of’ the Committee on Rules. That Committee has been very hard worked, and has done this Convention very great service; but it seems to me that this Com- mittee might be appointed now, and re- main a Committee of this Convention without the intervention of another Com- mittee. I hope the Convention will adopt the resolution. The PRESIDENT. Did the Delegate from Ohio make a motion? Mr. MCHENRY. No, sir, I have not. It was merely a suggestion. As I under- stood the motion of the gentleman from Fleming, it was to be a Special Committee. I should think it ought to be a Standing Committee. Mr. HENDRICK. At the suggestion of 24 RESOLUTION S. Monday,] MCHENBY—JOHNSTON—HENDRICK. [October 6. the President, I made it a Standing Com- mittee, Mr. MCHEN RY. I have no objection to it, and I make no motion. Mr. JOHNSTON. I want to move to strike out “ seven ” and insert“ five ;” I think five is enough. Mr. HENDRICK. ment. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the resolution as it stands, which was done. Mr. BECKNER. I move to amend by saying: “To be called the Committee on Revision and Style.” Mr. HENDRICK. I accept that amend- ment. Mr. BULLITT. Remembering the difiiculty and the controversy that grew out of the result of the Committee on Style in the formation of the Federal Constitution, I hope that it may be amended by requiring that Committee to report back to the Convention before any of their work shall pass. I move an amendment that the resolution require the Committee to report their work to the Con- venfion. Mr. COKE. I second the motion. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate had better put his amendment in writing. The question is on the adoption of the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Mc- Cracken. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to ask whether, under the rule. all Committees do not have to report to the Convention be- fore their work is accepted? The PRESIDENT. That is not a par- liamentary question; it is a question for the Convention to decide. Mr. BRONSTON. If it is not a parlia- mentary question, I certainly do not ex- pect the Chair to answer it. The question being put upon the adop- tion of the amendment of Mr. Bullitt’s, the same was declared adopted. Mr. BECKNERJ With the'i'permission I accept the amend- of the House, I will ask that my motion to amend be changed so as to make the name of the Committee “Committee on Style.” The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, that change will be made. The Sec- retarv will please report the amendment now. The Reading Clerk read the resolution as amended, as follows: Resolved, That the Chair appoint a Com- mittee of five, to be known as the Commit- tee on Style, to which shall be referred each section of the Constitution as ad \pted by this Convention; and it shall be the duty of said Committee to revise the grammatical arrangement, and correct the verbiage of each section so adopted,and they shall make a report to the Convention. ' The question being put on the adoption of said resolution, the same was declared adopted, The PRESIDENT. The Chair will now lay before the Convention the following communication from the Auditor. The communication was read by the- Reading Clerk, as follows : AUDI'roR’s OFFICE, FRANKFORT, KY., Oct. 6th, 1890. Hon. Cassius ill. Clay, Jr. President of Constitufional Convention: DEAR SIR: In compliance with a reso- lution adopted by your honorable body on September 26th, I herewith submit the fol- lowing: 1st. The total amount paid Assessors for their their services for the year ending June, 30, 1890,is... And the total value of the taxable property listed by them for that year is 501,676,267 00 2d. The total amount paid Sheriffs as their commis- sions for collecting taxes for the year ending June 30, 1890, is. . .. . . $95,963 64 128,446 46 ASSESSORS. 25 Monday,] BRENTS—MILLER. [October 6 And the total amount of taxes collected by them for that year is . . . . 3d. The total amount paid Trustees of the Jury Fund for their services for the year ending June 3i),1890,is. . . . . . 4th. The total amount pai Circuit and County Clerks as commissions or per cent. for collect- ing fines, forfeitures, licenses and special taxes for the year ending June 30, 1890, is— Circuit Clerks. . . . . County Clerks. . . . . 2,152,044 53 7,813 01 19.475 54 Respectfully submitted, L. C. NORMAN, Auditor. Mr. BREN TS. I move that 125 copies of the report be printed and laid upon the desks of the Delegates, and that the report be referred to the Committee on Executive and Ministerial Oflicers for Counties and Districts. The question being put upon the said motion, the same was declared to have been carried. _ The PRESIDENT. TheCrders of the Day are exhausted. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the Convention do now adjourn. Mr. SPALDING. I second the motion The question being put on said motion, it was carried. And the Convention journed. thereupon ad- - iomaention Record " KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 7, 1890. [No. 23 'Tuesday,] _ COKE—FIELD—STRAUS—MILLER—SACHS. [October 7 . The Convention was called to order at 10 1 o’clock A. M., by the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Henderson. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read. Mr. COKE. In the minutes the petition of the Baptist Ministers was referred to the Committee on the Legislative Depart- ment alone. It was referred to that and the Committee on the Executive Depart- ment also. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will make the correction. If there are no more ‘corrections, the Journal will be considered as approved. The first thing in order is petitions. Mr. FIELD. I saw the Delegate from Grant in Cineinnati, and his physician has directed him not to attend the Convention for some days. I ask leave of absence for him. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and such leave is granted. Mr. STRAUS. I ask indefinite leave of absence for the Delegate from Meade. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and such leave is granted. Mr: H. MILLER. I ask indefinite leave of absence for the Delegate from Boyle, who is called away by the illness of his family. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the leave is granted. Are there any reports from Standing Com- mittees‘? If not, motions and resolutions are in order. . Mr. SACHS. I have a resolution which I desire to offer. Resolution read, as follows: WHEREAS, It is reasonably certain that much of the business on the civil dockets of the Circuit Courts of Kentucky can be transacted out of term time and in the ab- sence of the Judge, by the enactment of the code provisions and adoption of iules of court similar to those now governing the courts of the city of Louisville, and by empowering the clerk of the court to enter consent judgments and decrees, as well as orders, judgments and decrees in uncontested matters, the extent of which delegated judicial power can be fixed and limited by law and rules of court; and, whereas, the power of the court to authorize the clerk to act for it in a quasi-judicial capacity may be questioned on the ground of consti- tutionality; therefore, be it Resolved, That a limited constitutional authority be given to the General Assembly to provide and establish, by general law, a system of code provisions under which rules of court may be adopted by the Circuit Courts, empowering within their scope the delegation of authority to the clerk of the court to enter default judgments, consent orders, judgments and decrees, and similar orders and judgments, whenever the court is not in session. Mr. COKE here took the Chair. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I offer a resolu- tion. Resolution read, as follows : Resolved, That upon the call of the special order at 11 o’clock, being the con- sideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, the Conven- tion go into the Committee of the Whole for the consideration of said report, and that the Chairman of said Committee have the‘ floor to make remarks upon the whole thereof, and that he have such time as he may desire; and thereafter that the report be considered by sections and consecu- tively, beginning with the first, and that speeches or general debates be limited to ten minutes each, with five minutes to the 2 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] MILLER—JONSON—STRAUS—BULLITT. J [October 7, Chairman of the Committee, or to such Del‘ egate as he may name, to close the debate on each section. _ Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move immediate consideration of the resolution. Mr. J ONSON. I ask for a report of the resolution. The PRESIDENT pro tem. will again read the resolution. This was done. Mr. J ONSON. I am opposed to all gag laws. I believe this is one that will cut our throats, not only stop our mouths. I believe our debates ought to be free and full. We are not here for the purpose of voting these things through like a man in a hurry to catch the train eating his dinner. We should consider every thing full and freely. Mr. STRAUS. I desire to make the point that that motion is in the nature of an amendment to the rules, and will have to go over one day. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The resolution does not provide for any amendment to the rules, it only applies to the conduct of this single proposition in the Committee of the Whole, and this House has the right to make an order outside of the rules in refer- ence to that matter. Thatis the parliamen- tary practice universally; and it is entirely competent, under our rules, to make that order in reference to this matter. It does not interfere with any rule. There is a rule which provides there shall be debate on amendments. It does not interfere with that rule at all; it only makes provision for controlling this Con- vention in the consideration of this single proposition. If I am permitted to respond to the Delegate on the other side of the House, it is not intended to limit debate at all, because after this it comes before the Convention again, and can be debated in the Convention. It is only to give direc- tion to the conduct of this matter in the Committee of the Whole, and so far as gag law is concerned, I do not think the gen— tleman ought to complain. I do not think The Clerk any gag law on the face of the earth could gag him. Mr. BULLITT. I think it is of the highest importance that the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights should be considered freely and openly, and to any extent that the Convention may desire to consider it; and I hope that the Delegate, I do not mean to apply to him any desire to gag or suppress discussion, but the Bill of Rights and the Preamble to the Constitution is, as it were, the sub- ject nominative to the Constitution itself. All provisions of the Constitutions will be construed subject to the control, and to be controlled, by the Preamble and Bill of Rights, and I hope that the Convention will not suppress the consideration of any part of it that any gentleman in the Conven- tion may Want to discuss. I thinkwe should patiently listen to the speeches, although we- may not think there is much in them. We ought to listen to them, and give every Delegate on the floor a right to be heard. This is the great index, the controlling feature of the Constitution, and we may throw away the most valuable protection and safeguard to the rights of the people by permitting an improper Preamble and Bill of Rights to go forth to the world as controlling these different provisions; and I hope that nothing will be done which will suppress the free discussion and con- sideration of the Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. WHITAKER. This is a matter of great importance, as has been said by the Delegate who just addressed the Chair, and it comes before this body as the report of the Committee, and without difi‘erent views being expressed or amendments offered, it was crystalized into the Bill of Rights as it now is. It is the full expression of that Committee, and I can see no reason why the Chairman should have extra privileges when he does not need any at all. I do not believe in giving one man any more privileges to discuss questions on this floor BILL OF RIGHTS. - i ' 3 Tuesday] Cox—H ENDRICK~ PH ELPS. [October 7 . than another. Ninety-nine men may have as good reasons to present as the Chairman himself, and he needs to present none until some different view is taken from the re- sults of the production of that Committee. Therefore, it seems to me, to reduce a man to ten minutes on a question of such impor- tance as that in giving his view, is too short a time, and if it is a question to save time, time will be lost in wrangling over a ques- tion that might be of some use tq this Con- vention. I hope the resolution will be voted down. Mr. COX. I fully and heartily concur in the remarks of the Delegate from Mason. I do not think any Delegate should have the preference over another, even although he is the Chairman of a Committee. I do not think any Chairman of any Committee should be accorded any more privileges or rights than any other Delegate in the dis- cussion of matters on this floor. This reso- lution provides that the Chairman of the Committee shall speak as long as he pleases, and then, after the other Delegates discuss the various amendments, he shall have five minutes more. I think that will be taking from the members of the Convention time and rights that should not be accorded to anyjmember of the Convention. Hence, I hope the resolution will be voted down. Mr. HENDRICK. I call your atten- tion to Rule 26, taken in connection with the rules governing the Committee of the Whole, and make the point of order under them that the discussion of this resolution now is entirely out of order. Rule 46 is: . “Every motion to alter, change or add to the standing rules of the Convention shall lie one day on the table.” Now, by Rule 55 it is provided: “It shall be in order to introduce and discuss any resolution when in the Committee of the Whole, with a view to test the sense of the Convention upon the question proposed.” This cer- tainly alters, adds to or amendsthat rule. It is not in order Without the unanimous con- ‘ sent of the House, or a suspension of the rules by a two-thirds vote, to consider this at this time. It must be laid over for one day. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair is of the opinion that the point 'ofiorder is well taken, and the resolution is out of or- der. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. On yesterday I offered a resolution, and, under the rules, gave notice that I would call it up to-day. At the suggestion of several Delegates, and at the request of two members who are necessarily absent to-day, I ask leave to have it lay on the table until Saturday, with leave to call it up at that time. The PRESIDENT pro tem. If there is no objection, such leave is granted.' Mr. W. H. MILLER. ‘ I ' now offer the resolution just read as an amendment to the Rules of the Convention, and ask that it be referred to the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT pro tem. If there is no objection, such disposition will be made of the resolution. Mr. H. H. SMITH. It is certain that some day we will conclude our labors, and we will have to prepare an address to the people of Kentucky. I have a resolution in that line. Resolution read, as follows : Resolved, That a Committee of five be appointed to prepare an address to the peo- ple of Kentucky on the occasion of the submission of this Constitution. - Mr. BOLES. As it has not yet been de- termined by this Convention that the Con- stitution We will make will be submitted to- the people, I think that resolution is pre-- mature, and I move to refer it to the Com- mittee on Rules. The question being put on the motion to- refer, it was carried, and the resolution so.. referred. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to offer some amendments to the Preamble and Bill of Rights, and ask that they be referred to the Committee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Do you de—- sire them read? 4 ' RESOLUTIONS. f Tuesday] PHELPS—BOLES—MCD snmo'r'r. [October 6. Mr. PHELPS. I am not particular. They can be read in Committee of the Whole. Mr. BOLES. I have an amendment to the report of the Committee‘ on Preamble and Bill of Rights, which I desire to have referred to the Committee of the Whole. Mr. McDERMOTT. I have a resolu- tion to offer as an amendment to the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights; it can be referred to the Committee of the Whole with the other amendments. Mr. NUNN. I have two amendments I desire to offer to the report of the Commit- tee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, it can be disposed of as the others. Mr. WASHINGTON. I desire to offer an amendment to the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, which can be'referred to the Committee of the Whole. Mr. FUNK. I have an amendment to the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, which I desire to have roferred to that Committee. Mr. PETTIT. I move the House re’- solve itself into Committee of the Whole on special order. Mr. WOOD. I would like the Delegate to hold up that until I can ofi'er an amend- ment. Mr. PETTIT. I have no objection to that, but I would state that these amend- ments can be offered in Committee of the Whole as well as in the House itself. I have no objection to withdrawing the mo- tion. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I want to offer some resolutions, and wish to have them ‘ referred to the Legislative Department and Circuit Courts without reading. Said resolutions were as follows: Resolved, 1. That the Legislative Commit- tee be requested to inquire and report, whether or not some plan can be devised by which a political party in the majority can always secure the election of its candi- dates at the polls, without the use of prima- ries or conventions to make nominations; and, if so, whether the Legislature could adopt such system of elections without any thing being added to the Constitution on that subject. 2. That said Committee be instructed to report, if possible. some system of repre- sentation by which the political parties in the'minority may have fair representation in the House and Senate in proportion to their numbers. Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be requested to report, if pos- sible, a plan by which Judges may be selected, without nomination, from political parties; or, if they are to be so chosen, that the strongest party in the minority shall have on the bench fair representation in proportion to its numbers. Referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. KNOTT. I had the honor to offer, the other day, an amendment to the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, which I understood at the time was ruled out of order. I observe that it has, since that time, been printed, and referred to the Committee of the Whole Conven- tion. It was done without my knowledge. I desire, therefore, to withdraw that amend- ment, and offer another in lieu thereof, for reference to the Committee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT pro tem. If there is no objection, the Delegate has permission to withdraw his original amendment of- fered, and substitute the one he now offers. Mr. HANKS. I desire to offer a resolu- tion, and have it referred to the Committee on Railroads and Commerce. Mr. PETTIT. Without additional amendments are to be offered, I renew my motion. The question being put on the motion of the Delegate from Dav eiss to go into Committee of the Whole, it was declared carried. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Mr. Mc- Henry as Chairman. , The CHAIRMAN. The Committee of BILL OF RIGHTS. 5' vthe House. Tuesday,] RonEs. the Whole is now in session, and has under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The Delegate from Warren has the floor. . Mr. RODES. There are so many amendments and emendations offered to this report of the Committee on Bill of Rights that I shall not venture to take them up seriatim, or to discuss any of them singly. It would take too long, and exhaust what physical strength I have to do ‘so, besides being wearisome to the House. I expect to take another course by advocating the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights as presented, and thereby to show that that is an accept- able paper, which ought to be adopted by If I succeed in that, it will answer all my purposes and dispose of all the exceptions to it. I ought further to say, that, upon reflection, I am prepared to accept some of the amendments (although I say that individually, and not with the consent of the Committee), particularly one to section 12. I do not know that any one has intimated exactly the amendment I would accept, but I will state it before I get through. i - . The first thing demanding the consider- ation of this body is the Preamble. In all Preambles heretofore made in the Constitu- tion of this State and of the United States any thing like gratitude expressed to a Supreme Being has been omitted. I sup- pose it was owing to the reverential feelings of the Committee that they thought some- thing of that kind might be gracefully interpolated in the Preamble we offer. Professor Brice, who lately. published a work on America, in the second volume somewhere, said about this: That stand- ing in the midst of one of our large cities, and seeing the immense throngs and crowds passing along of "arious degrees of wealth, poverty and nationali- ties, one-half of the earth being represent—- ed, a ghastly and startling reflection took possession of his mind, and he said to him- self, “What if the foundations of this country fall out? In a short time there will be one hundred million of people in this country, extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and what if the foundations were to go?” “And what ARE the founda- tions?” said he. “The foundations are a belief in a Supreme Being, in the future before us, and in individual responsibility. Now, take these away, ‘or take the belief in the Supreme Being away, and what have you left?” I could not but help thinking, when I have heard these venerable gentle- men in this hall uttering prayers and rais- ing petitions in our behalf in opening our session, “What of all this, what are we?” I reflect that we are not merely one hundred men, but we are the people of Kentucky; we are two millions of people. We are the occupants and owners of forty thousand geographical miles. We are no insignifi- cant _quota of the earth’s surface. Repre- seiiting that much, it can not but be that the Supreme Being looks upon us, and-I take it for granted it would be nothing but a grateful appreciation on our part of His kindly providence that we should ex- press some sense our obligations to Him for the care and protection He has exercised over us. Passing over that, and not taking up too much time with things of this kind—for I can not pretend to notice except in a gen- eral way the objections to this report—the first objection that has been taken to it came from my kind and genial friend from MarionXGoy-Yernor Knott). He has another substitute this morning, and without ask-. ing what all those are, I think I can gen- eralize the objections that may be taken. The first section in this bill reads‘: “That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare;” and then comes in the general principle: “All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain in- herent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned—.’’ [Octeber 7.“ BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] Room. [October 7. Those two lines are not in our previou Constitution, but they are in the Declara- tion of Independence, and in the Constitu- tion of Virginia madein the year 1776, and emanating from the hands of Thomas J ef- ferson, or, if not, clearly evincing the hand- iwork of George Mason. But any how, they are the principles on which the Amer- ican people have relied. That is the gen- eral principle. Now, what are the specifi- cations‘? The Bill of Rights of Virginia in 1776, almost coeval with the Declaration of Independence, says: “Allnnen are by nature equal, free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they can not be deprived.” Then, it is stated in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are en- dowed by their Creator with certain in- alienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happi- ness.” Whenever any government fails in this, what then? Clearly intimated but not fully stated. It was not necessary for Mr. Jefl'erson to reveal his hand too clearly, because the sentiment of the American people then was, that they held the reserved power, and it was not neces- sary to say what was the actual duty of the people when these ends were destroyed. The Declaration of Independence was the greatest and most glorious declaration of human rights that was ever created. The bell of St. Marks at Venice never gave out tones of greater power to the people of that city calling them across the Rialto in that venerable city to their cathedral, than the Declaration of Independence did in 1776 when it created our nation and called it into life. Having said that much, what are the specifications under that clause? They are seven, and it is due to my friend from Caldwell county (Mr. C. T. Allen) to say that it is attributable to him and his artistic eye that these seven clauses are so arrayed beneath that general ‘principle. He ar- ranged them thus : First. The right of enjoying and defend- ing their lives and liberties. . Second, The right of worshiping Al- mighty God according to the dictates of their consciences. This is taken from Section 5 of the pres- ent Consfitution. Third. The right of seeking and pursu- ing their safety and happiness. This is taken from section 4 of the pres- ent Constitution. ‘ Fourth. The right of freely communi- cating their thoughts and opinions. This is taken from section 9 of the pres- ent Constitution. ' Fifth. The right of acquiring and pro- tecting property. This is taken from section 4 of the pres- ent Constitution. Sixth. The right of assembling together in a peaceable- manner for their common good, and of applying, to those invested with the power of government for redress of grievances or other proper purpose, by petition, address or remonstrance. . Seventh. The right to bear arms in de- fense of themselves, their families and of the State, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, subject to. the power of the General Assembly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying con- cealed arms. There you have a general statement of our rights, the seven different subdivisions specifying in what those rights are, and they are taken not only from your Constitution, but from those great symbols of freedom I re- ferred to a moment ago, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of Vir- ginia of 1776. Do you wish to abolish them? Will any man be prepared to say they are not so? Will you drive them out of your Constitution‘? The fact that he has advanced these seven distinct proposi- tions into the front column, abreast with this main idea, this central proposition of the whole Bill of Rights, certainly ‘ought not to be attributed to any weakness in them; on the contrary, we know very well BILL or RIGHTS. 7" 'Tuesday,] BoEFs. [October 7. ‘that while the light, shining on the earth, is mere white light, when concentrated on any object it makes a photograph. This presents a picture here. Apicture of what? A picture of free men with certain inalien- able and 1ndefeasible rights which :can not be taken away; and you see them a living picture before you, and I ask you, as a matter of taste, will you drive that out, ex- pel it from your Constitution? I appre- hend you will not. New section 2 comes up for consideration. Upon that proposition, our friend from Marion, who intimated the other day that he wished to define “public services,” I ap- prehend will waive his objection when he reflects upon the history connected with all 'these propositions. But with regard to this second section, whether any one shall at any time have certain immunities, priv- ileges or franchises, except in considera- ‘Lion of public services, whether that should be stricken out in part or in whole, I leave it to the Convention to say. There are one or two Delegates who have made prop- wositions, the Delegate from Allen (Mr. McElroy) is one of them, to strike out the latter clause altogether in regard to public services, so that there shall be no privi- leges, immunities or franchises granted Whatever. _My friend from Marion seems ‘to have gone a little further in making this intimation, and that was, to define it. He seems to say we shall retain that right, but restricts it by adding, “for the per- formance of some public service required by law.” If you strike out that phrase, ~“ in consideration of public services,” I .shall have no regrets; I shall shed no tears of disappointment ; but really and truly we should retain some shred of power for the Legislature of -Kentucky. You are going ‘to strip her of almost every shred of sov- ereignty she now has or once had. She -ought to have some discretion, not only to punish, but at times to reward. Let me ,give you an illustration:_ Forty years or more ago, just after the close of the Mexi- can war, when Kentucky, grateful to a gal- lant citizen who had fought in that war, wished to honor him, the Legislature voted to give a sword to General William 0. Butler, of the United States Army. He was a Major-General appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and in the pay of the Federal Government. Now, was he acting in the discharge or perform- ance of any public duty required of him by the laws of this State? I appre- hend not. The State gave him that fine sword, embellished and embossed, and doubtless the family have it yet. Was that right or wrong‘? Was the giving of that sword tantamount to giving him a horse or a farm or a large amount of money? Was it worse or better than either of these‘? And if it was, I ask you all now to con- sider whether it is not the graceful part of this Convention, when they are stripping the Governor of almost all of his power, and the Legislature of a large part of hers, whether there should not be left a little of that shred of sovereignty by which the State may hereafter perform a useful and appropriate act in rewarding services ren- dered to the public by her distinguished sons. It may happen in the future that we have a warrior in the battle-field who renders illustrious services. They attract attention, and the world turns her eyes upon us. Sometimes we may turn our eyes on a man far removed from the mad- ding world in some sequestered valley, who ' has performed deeds of kindness that en— title him to recognition, or in the vast field of literature some one may render ser- vices which the State of Kentucky may be proud to own and claim; in that event, what is Kentucky to do? Nothing. She CAN do nothing; her hands are tied. She. can pass some empty resolution, but the- testimonial she might give is gone forever. I say, that little discretion might well be retained; and when you come to consider it, I do not think you will take that provision from the Constitution. S BILL OF RIGHTS. enough ‘2 Tuesday ,] Ronns. [October 7. My friend from Henderson (Mr. Farmer) has gone farther than that. He has intro- duced a resolution that no one shall be pro- hibited from practicing any trade or profes- sion because of not having a license. With all deference to him, I cannot think that any such thing can pass. That will enable any one to become a clerk, or a drug- gist, or a; lawyer in a court-house, or a judge on the bench, and if the people hap- pen in any spell of caprice to elect them to any office without regard to qualification, they can take it. I simply mention this to show some of the kinds of amendments being offered in this House. Now let me pass on. . The third section reads as follows: ' “ All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness, and‘ the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper.” One gentleman has introduced an amend- ment, that you should interline after the word “of,” the words, “life, liberty and.” What is the use of being redundant? Why use so many words when we have words We have our inelienable rights ascertained. We show what our ‘indefeasi- ble rights are. We show what are inher- ent. Now, why particularize all these? Why add those words after “of” when we have enough‘? Men who have good taste and style, the best writers in the English language, know that superabundant lan- guage is never useful. Indeed, tautology will make any thing thesubject of ridicule. Let us, therefore, keep within reasonable bounds when we use language of this kind. And here is section 4: “No man shall be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry against his consent; no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and ‘modes of worship.” ‘con science. no preferences shall ever begiven by law to any religious societies, denominations, or‘ And right here the Delegate from Union has introduced a prop-e osition which is right, and to which I make- no objection. That amendment is to the ef-- feet that no one shall ever be compelled to- attend a school, or to send his child to a school, contrary to the conviction vof his. As this Constitution is de- signed to protect a man in his con-- scientions convictions, and as liberty is- involved more or less in that right, and as I, for one, am against compulé- sory education in any and every light,. knowing and believing that we are not in the days of Plato’s Republic any more, but. living under the sunshine of American lib— erty, I hold there is enough inducement for any one to send his child to school without using any thing like compulsion; and will, therefore, favor the incorporation of ' this amendment. Passing on: “ But the liberty of con-- science hereby secured shall not be con- strued to dispense with oaths or aflirmation s, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State, or opposed to the civil authority thereof. The civil rights,. privileges and capacities of any. person. shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion.” Some gentleman has moved to strike out. _ the words “or opposed to the civil author— ity thereof.” I simply call attention to that, and say I do not see any reason why, and I have heard no valid argument ad-- vanced why, that should be done. We grant all liberty of conscience; all free- dom of worship. We recognize that a man’s conscience can not be bound; but. when a man attempts to put his acts into practice and live up to his conscience, he- must be particular—not like/the Mormons, who want to shield their acts of licentious-~ ness under the pretended plea that they are: obeying the monitors of conscience within ‘them. BILL OF RIGHTS. 9 Tuesday,] Ronns. [October 7. But leaving that, we come to section 5. “All elections shall be free and equal.” I do not know of any objection to that; but I think I heard one intelligent gentle— man from Louisville say “equal” ought to be struck out. That is an old phrase. In the Bill ot Rights two hundred years ago it is said, “All elections shall be free,” and the word “equal” was not used—not be- cause they did not want to use it, but because they could not. There ‘was a time in England when elections were free, but they were not equal. In En- gland, the Sheriff sometimes kept the polls open five weeks;_ and even here, in this country (it was mentioned by Gov. Stevenson in the former Convention). in the State of Virginia, they were held open for several days by the Sheriff, and you will recollect before this Constitution was formed we had three days elections in this State. This proposition being old and time-honored and hoary-headed, I take it, for that reason alone, it should be kept, and the word “equal,” which implies “equal- ity,” just and honorable dealing, should stand; and let no one strike it out. ' That is my voice, and I believe the voice of this Convention. Section six, which is equivalent to sec- tion eight of the present Bill of Rights, is untouched. “ The ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, subject to such modifications as may be authorized by this Convention.” Section seven reads: “Printing presses shall be free to every person who under- takes to examine the proceedings of the General Assembly, or any branch of gov- ernment, and no law shall ever be made to restrain the right thereof. Every person may freely and fully speak, write and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.” That is untouched, and it is equivalent to section nine of the present Constitution. The eighth and tenth I shall defer for the present, because I shall have something further to say about them hereafter, and to- section nine which is the equivalent of sec- tion eleven, I do not understand there is any objection from any source. If there is, it has been introduced this morning. I imagine if there are, they will be unavail- ing before this Convention, because they are but the reiteration of time-honored princi- ples which has helped us to defend and vin- dicate the liberties we have; and we feel se- cure in the enjoyment of them. And now, in section eleven: “ No per- son for an indictable offense shall be pro- ceeded against criminally by information, except in such cases as do not amount to felony, and except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger, or by leave of Court for op- pression or misdemeanor in office.” I saw it stated the other day, by the in- telligent correspondent of the Courier-Jour- nal, that that would probably affect the question of indictments as to all misde- meanors. Iapprehend not. That is not the meaning of the section. The section merely says that no person for any indicta- ble ofl‘ense shall be proceeded against crim- inally by information, except in such cases. as do not amount to felony, showing that the Legislature has a certain discretion and alarge amount of boundary, margin and control over the matter given to it. So that they can remedy it if there be anyevil in it any time. But all felonies must be, an‘ misdemeanors may or may not be, indict ed. We have hundreds of them now which are not indictable. They are prosecuted by warrant, or by information, which is tanta- mount to the same thing; and inasmuch as a great many States in the Union are hesi- tating, and some of them are proceeding to’ the length of abolishing the Grand Jury system altogether, we think it right to look at the subject in that way, and ask our- selves seriously whether it is really necessary that a Grand Jury should act upon the numerous misdemeanor cases we have in this country before they shall be tried. We say not, and I think ll) BILL OF RIG HTS. g "TuesdayJ Ronns. [October 7. you will say so, and coincide with us, that none of these numerous misdemeanor cases rise to that dignity or importance which the =Grand Jury ought to take hold of. Here is one in No. 12, one that I alluded to awhile ago. I am perfectly willing, i; any gentleman offers the amendment, to accept it. I' would make it myself, except that I have not called the Commit- vtee together: “No person shall, for the same offense, be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall any man’s property he taken or applied to public use without ‘the consent of himself or his representa- tives, and without just compensation being previously made to him in money, or paid ‘into court subject to the order of the .owner ‘thereof. And no special tax against the owner of such property shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the vproperty so taken; nor shall any person be ‘deprived of his property without due pro- *cess of law.” I can not understand what those words, “‘ without the consent of himself or his representatives,” may mean. I do not know that the word “representatives” has “ever been construed by our courts. I asked ‘our able friend from Franklin county— who was a Judge on the Court of Appeals ‘bench for eight years—if he recollected ‘that word having been construed, and asked him to give-us the benefit of his experience, and say whether or not it would be safe to use the words: “No man’s property shall ‘be taken or applied to public use without just compensation,” and stop. I am will- ing to stop there, and if this Convention will authorize it, we will erase and elimi- mate those words, “without the consent of himself or his representatives.” It is pre- rsumed that if ,he demands pay it is against his consent; and if he gives his consent, it is presumed he has secured compensation. And, in regard to these words, “twice ‘put in jeopardy.” It is due the gentleman ‘from Boyd to define what “twice in jeop- rardy” means. Our courts have passed upon it, but no scientific definition has ever been given; and if any man feels adequate to the task, or if the definition of my friend is deemed adequate by the Convention, I will accept it; but what it exactly means I do not know. I am not prepared to say. I can have an idea, but nothing more than a supposition. Then, as to the word “limb.” I have heard some objec- ion to that; I hold on to it beeause it is old. I love old things, and believe in old expressions. I wish we had more of them than we have. There are some beautiful things in old ZVIa-gna Charm, which have passed out of use, which I wish were used again. As long as we can hold that old ex- pression, I say retain it. In former times, when they branded men and cut off their ears, they understood it. Then it meant more than it does now; but at the present time “limb ” means liberty for any part of your body. Therefore, I say keep it, retain it, never let the word escape, beeause it is an expression indicative of what our fore- fathers had to pass through; such words and similar language are the words and language they used in times and ages long since gone by, when their souls were tried by fire, and they had to rely sometimes upon their swords. Well, the thirteenth section—- “All courts shall be open, and every per- son. for an injury done him in his lands, goods, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and right and justice administered without sale, denial or delay.” That is unobjected to, and is the equiva- lent of section fifteen of the present Con- stitution. “No power of suspending laws shall be exercised, unless by the General Assembly or its authority.” ‘ That is equal to section sixteen of the present Constitution. “All prisoners shall be bailable by suffi— cient securities, unless for capital offenses,v -when the proof is evident or the presump; BILL OF RIGHTS. ' i 11 \ Tuesday,] RonEs. [October 7. tion great; and the privilege of the writ of .habeas corpus shall not be suspended, un- less when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it.” That is equivalent to section 18. There is no objection to that, that I know of. “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel pun- ishmen ts inflicted.” That is unobjected to, except by the gen- tleman from Clark, who has introduced an amendment recommending the insertion of the word “unusual ” after the word “cruel.” The answer to that is, that none of our Constitutions in this State use the word “unusual,” but all of them use the word “cruel.” I believe the Constitution of the United States does use the word “unusual,” and the Bill of Rights two hundred years ago used it also; but the word “cruel” em- braces all we desire to have in it. The word “unusual” would be regarded as “ cruel ” at this time, and nothingniore. Cer- tainly, “ cruel ” is sufficient. “Noe'c post facto law, nor any law im- pairing the obligation of contracts, nor a law making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises or immuni- ties, shall be passed by the General As- sembly.” That section, number eighteen, in the first part of it, is equivalent to section 20 of the present Constitution. The Commit- tee has added the last clause, “nor a law making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities shall be passed by the General Assembly.” And right here, perhaps, I ought to notice an indication upon the part of some gentleman to again introduce section 2 of the present Constitution, which has been eliminated by this Committee, and that says: “No abso- lute arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists any where in a Republic-n ot even in the largest majority.” I object to the introduction of that section; and nobody pretends to ask section 3 shall be introduced. That was known as the Garrett Davis clause. This section (3) has more plausibility in it, but I imagine it ought not to be introduced; and why‘? My suggestion amounts to nothing unless I can give a reason. My reason, in plain terms, is this: That our government is a Republic, and that a Republic means noth- ing more than saying ‘we shall not intro— duce nor live in a Monarchy. Sir George McKenzie, the great Scotch Advocate, in 1684 wrote a book on royal rights, in which he maintained that Monarchy is necessarily absolute. That being so, the contrary is also true, that a Republic is never absolute. The very things we attempt to inculcate and establish by this Constitution (and there‘ is scarcely a section in it wherein we do not touch upon the inalienable, inherent and indefeasible rights of man) are utterly opposed to, and inconsistent with, the idea of arbitrary power, and when you talk about absolute or arbitrary power existing in a Republic, it looks like a solecism, and by the terms of the words themseves it is beyond supposition misleading and inad- missible. What would be meant by saying a “ Re- publican despotism?” We can not for a moment concede the propriety in using the language or terms of those two sections, in making a statement regarding the neces- sary safeguard to our liberties, or in stating our fears as to the points and sources from whence assaults and dangers may come. The proposition, with all deference to the gentlemen who make it, is not true. In the last Convention, in 1849, when this proposition was up, notwithstanding the immense excitement and agitation pro- duced by the most momentous question of the age-—the abolition of slavery—and these two sections (two and three) were drawn to secure its existence and make its tenure permanent, the vote, on adopting section 2, was 55 for and 34 against it. The opposition was headed by James Guth- rie and Ben Hardin and others, the strong- est and ablest men in the Convention, and of the day. It is a question of disputation, 12 ' _ BILL or RIGHTS. Tuesday,] RODES. [October 7 and in the Bill of Rights, as far as possi- ble, there should be no disputation.’ Its propositions ought to be clear as light, and as a basis on which to stand as strong as a rock, because, if we build on the truth, we are founded on a rock. These questions are not new. In the forepart of the seventeenth century Sir Robert Filmer published a dissertation on government, in which he advocated what was called the Patriarchal Theory—deduc- ing all power from the King alone. After his time—about 1680—the great University of Oxford published its views on the sub- ject, laying down twenty propositions, in which the learned and gowned men of that celebrated institution undertook to teach that the people had no power—that none emanated from the people, and that there was no contract between the people and the sovereign. They did not adopt Fil- mer’s theory, but held to abject submission to the Monarch. They shamefully asserted such propositions, but no punishment they ever received was equal to the shame of their publication. What became of them‘? The revolution of 1690 paid no special at- tention to them, but in 1709 the odious char- acter of such publications had grown so great—emanating from a body so learned and standing so high—that the House of Lords, without the aid of the Commons, publicly ordered those propositions to be burned, and they were burned, and we have had no knowledge of them since. Let them go, and let all this discussion, abstract and metaphysical, pass away. We have no need of them Thereis no arbitrary power claimed or asserted here in this bill. There never can be. Whenever we come to that, we have revolution. Whenever you pass beyond that line you encounter revolution, and your talk about arbitrary power will be as futile as it was in 1849, when, looking at the dark shadow creeping over the country and trying to avoid it, and to stem the tide of events and drive that dark gulf back, they failed to do it; events took their course in spite of them, and they will take them now. Do not let us waste our time 011 such a thing; let me pass on.- “ N 0 person shall he attainted of treason or felony by the General Assembly, and no attainder shall work corruption of blood nor, except during the life of the offender, forfeiture of estate to the Commonwealth.” Some one has filed an amendment to that. I believe it is our friend from McCracken, who wishes to add the words “ except dur- ing the life of the offender.” There is no danger in the section as it is reported. I take- it it had better stand. There is danger in it as amended. The State has no right to- pass a bill of attainder. Neither has Con: gress. .The Legislature cannot do it, but- for some cause or other may authorize a' jury to do something equivalent, and there may be such an enemy at some future time- to you and your rights, that the Legislature- would wish to punish him in that way. Such cases are not likely to arise, but as that is an old phrase indicating an old war- fare, a sign of an old contest, in the name of conscience I appeal to this Convention to let those old things remain as they are. Section nineteen embraces sections twenty- one and twenty-two of the present Consti- tution. ‘ “The estates of such persons as shall de- stroy their own lives shall descend or vest- as in cases of natural death; and if any person shall be killed by casualty, there shall be no forfeiture by reason thereof.” That is the equivalent of section twenty-~ three of the present Constitution. “No standing army shall, in time of peace, be maintained without the consent of the General Assembly; and the military shall, in all cases, and at all times, be in strict subordination to the civil power; nor shall any soldier, in time of peace, be quar- tered in any house Without the consent of the owner, nor in time of War but ‘in a manner prescribed by law.” That section is equivalent to sections 26 and 27 of the present Constitution, and there have been no objections filed to them that I know of. BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 13 V'Tuesday,] ' stand as it is. ;to the Bill up to that number. ‘out that section altogether. Bonus. [October 7. “The General Assembly shall not grant .any title of nobility or hereditary distinc- tion; nor create any oflice the appointment 'of which shall be for a longer time than a .term of years,” My friend from Adair has asked the Cons "vention to say “for a longer time than four years.” I think that this had better The Legislature ought cer- tainly to have some discretion about the matter, and I believe they will not use it wrongfully or indiscreetly. I pass to the next. I “ Emigration from the State shall not be prohibited.” That was section 29 of the present Con- ;stitution, and there is no objection to it. I have now gone through all the amendments The Com- mittee have introduced four new ones, which have never been in the Constitution before, and the first one is: “Slavery and involuntary servitude in this State are forbidden, except as a pun- ishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” You all know that the Constitution of the United States has the same language used in one of its late amendments. The _gentleman from Todd county has offered an amendment, in which he proposes to leave Now, I think, when he comes to look at it correctly, he will perceive that great land mark in one of the most remarkable contests in the history of the world ought not to be left out. _greatest epic known in the annals of the The world closed in 1865, and from 1861 to 1865 witnessed the abolitionof serfdom in Rus- sia, which was a great step for that monarchy; and when that remarkable .epoch closed in this country, it was closed for good, so far as slavery was concerned. How we are going to solve that dark prob- lem yet to arise, I can not tell; but small .as a man’s hand, as it is, it is certain to . come. I apprehend that the gentlemen here have some notions of expediency and reasonable foresight. When you put your Constitution before the State, and the world begins to inquire about it, there will be thousands of voters who, turning their eyes upon this body, will want to know what you did about slavery, and how you are _going to work the problem out. How will you face the question? By an expression here and there. all through the Constitu- tion? I do not know, but in my humble judgment you had better put it in as events and the providence of God have ordained it; let it stand as a monument in history. When you come to the polls, if you leave it out, there will be twenty-five thousand votes in this State who will not vote for this Constitution. upon that subject. The next new amendment is : I shall say he more “No armed person or bodies of men shall be brought into this State for the preserva- tion of the peace or the suppression of do- mestic violence, except upon the applica- tion of the General Assembly, or of the Governor when the Assembly may not be 1n session.” ' We have had evidence that there is a germ springing up in this country which may grow into something terrible unless obviated in advance. . Some State Constitu- tions recently made have clauses equivalent to this, and I imagine that it is nothing but right. We have the right to protect our liberties, and no less our boundaries, If the Governor cannot, and the Legislature can- not be assembled in either case, when in- surrection or rebellion shall arise, we can call upon the President for aid; but do not let these irresponsible armed organizations enter our territories, unless invited accord- ing to law. I do not mention any by name; it would be useless to call any men by name, for they will be Protean in shape and name hereafter often enough if we open the door wide enough for them. But I say, close it, and let it be known that these armed bodies shall not be called uponfto in- terfere in case of violence in our State, un- less the Governor, at the head of the Execu- J 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] RoDEs. [October 7. tive Department, shall demand it or the . ‘Legislature ask it. Section 26: “Lotteries and gift enter- prises are forbidden, and no privileges shall be granted for such purposes, and none shall be exercised, and no schemes for sim- ilar purposes shall be allowed. The Gen- eral Assembly shall enforce this ‘section by proper penalties. All lottery privileges or charters heretofore granted are revoked.” There is no exception to that, that I am aware of; but I would make this remark: The newspapers have called lotteries “ vam- pires,” one of those big Brazilian bats that fans you gently to sleep while it sucks the last drop of blood from you. Some other newspapers'call it a politital “ octopus,” the appellation of the great, large-eyed, huge monster of the deep, with its hundred ten- tacles reaching out and drawing you in its close embrace with the hug of death Lotteries are doing those very things, and any thing that does it belongs properly and ought to be inserted in the Bill of Rights, the right intention of which is to protect the people and save them from such an n11- speakable lot. The next section proposed, reads: “No perpetuities of estate shall be al- lowed except for charitable purposes, and the General Assembly shall pass all proper laws in regard to the same.” How such a clause as that ever came to be left out of our Constitution I do not know.‘ It is not in a great many other Constitutions. If there is any character- istic difference between the civil institu- tions of this country and England or Europe, if there be any distinction at all, the question in regard to perpetuities must be one. It is one strong, well-marked, well-defined. Perpetuities belong to the aristocratic system, to the nobility system of the feudal ages handed down to the present time. Without perpetuities, aris- tocracy collapses; take them out, and a gulf swallows the entire system up. In this country we have no institutions based on aristocracy or a feudal tenure; but it occurs to me that a section forbidding them ought to be in our Constitution, be- cause they can not well co-exist with a Republican institution. They are utterly hostile to American institutions. They did exist for a while in the State‘ of Virginia. I am not aware that they existed any- where else. The tide of public events, Republican ideas being so diffused, soon blotted it out; but the time may come when the Legislature of Kentucky may wish to institute some such scheme, or en- act again some such law. Let it be forever put on record that none shall exist. Now, I have gone through the Bill of Rights so far as amendments are proposed, but I see from the variety and number of amendments offered to this report that some Delegates are mistaken as to what a Bill of Rights is, and what it should con- tain, and I will recur for a moment or two somewhat to the history thereof, and char— acter of the language that ought to go in its composition. What do you call it the Bill of Rights for‘? What do you put in it; what are its characteristics; what be- longs to it? It is set aside in an apart- ment by itself and made sacred. Let us come now and look at the last section. “To guard against transgression of the high powers which we have delegated, WE DECLARE that every thing in this article is excepted out of the general powers of gdv- ernment, and shall forever remain invio- late; and that all laws contrary thereto, or contrary to this Constitution, shall be void.” That is to say, it is consecrated. This is no ordinary part of the Constitution, and if by any misfortune or inadvertence any other part of it comes into conflict with the Bill of Rights, I apprehend there is not a court. in the land that would not say that the Bill of Rights is paramount. It is sacred; they are set apart in a room or apartment by themselves, and the mandate is, let no profane hand or foot come near it. In early ages of the world, in the oldest written BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Tuesday,] RoDEs. [October 7 . Constitution known to us, the Jewish Con- torn, rusty and worn with years. If you stitution, they had no conception of what we would call the Bill of Rights. There were some scattered propositions, disjecta membm, through the body of the Mosaic law that showed they had some ideas of what right was ; but ‘as a technical collec- tion of laws, embodying their fundamental rights alone, and having other laws corres- ponding to them and obedient to them, they had no conception whatever; and, indeed, ' they could not have borne it at that time if they had. The laws of Solon and Lycurgus knew no such thing. The Romans were somewhat wiser, and after Rome was founded several hundred years it became necessary to protect the people against the encroachments of the rich and powerful. They did not know at first what to do, but in time they found out a remedy. They put up a tribune, and as long as the tribune existed he was clothed with a veto power adequate to meet all aggressions. He was their Bill or Rights, and if I may be al- lowed to say without violating taste, when a Governor vetoes some fifty or sixty bills passed during one session of the Legisla- ture, and is supported by that body, he is a shield and a tribune for the people. He maintains their rights, and for the time‘ being is pro-re-nata the Bill of Rights. That illustrates my idea. Now, from what does your Bill of Rights spring‘? It is now—or was on the 15th of June, 1890— exactly six hundred and seventy-five years _ old, the oldest written title to your free- dom! The oldest record to your rights in- violable as they are does not go beyond that. On the 15th day of June, 1215, the barons and abbots of England met in a little meadow above London, and there, with swords at their sides, determined to recover what had been attempted to be wrested from them. They got what they demanded. King John gave it, and the curious traveler may go now to one of the museums in London, or in the Tower,-and see that old Bill of Rights, tattered and Q _ thirty-eight times. ever go there, go and see that title deed to your freedom. But looking at that Magna Charta, there are but two sections in it particularly interesting to one at this‘ time —-one is the twenty-ninth section, and the other the twenty-sixth. There is not a Committee in this body which has read this provision in the twenty-ninth chapter, or had occasion to look at that particular clause, that has not felt that he heard the . bass drum of centuries sounding in his. ears. How does the thirteenth section of our Bill read: Kentucky says to all her citizens that the- doors of her Courts are always open, and any person who has received an injury in his lands, goods, estate, person or reputa- tion, let him enter and he shall have a remedy by due course of law without. de— nial, sale or delay.” That is the language, and that is the proposition, the only impor- tant part of Magna Charta; the residue re— ferring to details which have long since passed out of use and are of no interest to us. And so dear was that title and that charter of freedom to the English people, that in the course of two hundred and seven years, down to the time when Henry the Fifth ascended the throne in 1422, just two hundred and seven years, that charter had been ratified by the Kings of England How often it has been ratified altogether, I shall have to leave to the scholarly gentlemen I see around me in this Convention, for I do not know, but I think about fifty times. Well, from that time onward, from 1422 on down to about 1621, the English people passed through many vicissitudes and vari- ety of fortunes contending for that very Magna Charta. After the Wars of the Roses, in which the people of England, exhausted and enfeebled, had sunk beneath the kingly power, the great shadow of the Tudor family arose over England, and during that supremacy, there almost seemed a night dark as Egypt to come over her. “ The Commonwealth of ' 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] RODES. [October 7 . It may have been thought that Magna Charta was forgotten, their rights gone and trampled under foot, and their freedom extinguished. Naturalists tell us that if you cut off the head of a turtle you will see signs of life for forty-eight hours after- wards; and you may take the heart of an alligator out and see throbbings of life for aweek. Not so with Magna Charta. It never died. With that little remnant hanging on, it was and became the germ of freedom, and which, in time to come, was going to and destined to multiply and re- produce itself, until we find it here now in the twenty-eight sections of the Bill of Rights in our Constitution—a lasting mon- ument enduring and to endure forever; and as long as they live your freedom lives. You may pull this Constitution down, but the throbbings of ha. in this Bill Of Rights will not cease in forty-eight hours or a week. For every one of them may be the parent of the whole, like Cuvier, when he attempted to reproduce some old dead monster which lived years and ages ‘ago; a bone enabled him to do it. Out of that and his brain sprang the monster; and out of Magna Charta, emerging from the time of the Tudors, have sprung all our rights. Learning got abroad; the people began to think; rights began to be asserted. The people found out that they were not slaves, and then the contest came on in the days of James the First. The people did not at once resort to the sword; they bore their grievances patiently, and to show just one instance of the grivances under which they labored, in 1621 Parliament protested strongly against the innovation of some of their rights by King James. James sent for the Clerk of the House of Commons and directed him to bring him the Journal. The Clerk brought him his Journal, and with his own hand he took the book and tore out that leaf. Now just imagine the -*Governor of this State so far forgetting himself as to send for the Clerk of this :body and tear out a leaf from your Jour- nal. What of it? Why jEtnaand Stromboli would hardly be a fair indication of the in- dignation you would feel and express. It was that sort of a contest going on for Magna Charta and rights secured by them ; but the people were patient. James died. Charles ascended the throne in 1625. In that Parliament which convened after Charles ascended the throne (after which there were none for eleven years) he needed money. Parliament then had the power in their hands, and they framed, under the auspices of Lord Coke, the Lord Coke we have with us at present, and Sir John El- liott, what was called the Petition of Right; and singular as that may seem, that little remnant of i’lfagna Charta, one sec- tion and a part of another‘, became enlarged to form others additional. They claimed and asserted that there- after no exaction of. a- loan of money by virtue of the King’s prerogative should be made without the authority of Parliament; and any man arrested and put in prison for refusal, if brought out on writ of ,habeas corpus, should not be remanded to jail; no soldier should be billeted or quartered upon the people without their consent, and, in time'of peace, no man should be tried by martial law—every one of which you have in your Constitution at the present time. Those men fought for it, and those men won it. Charles signed it; it was called a Petition of Right; but he signed it with a view to disregarding it immediately which he did; dissolved Parliament, and a short time afterwards Sir John Elliott, the master mind who carried it through, was thrown into prison. He staid there three years and died—the first martyr to Magna Charta, and your rights and mine. If any man deserves a monument in the hearts and minds of the English or American people, let Sir John Elliott remain there forever.’ And then followed the long interval of no Parliament for eleven years. I need not waste your time by showing how Charles BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 17 - Tuesday,] r_—* Rozors. [October 7 . ,—i unfurled his banner on the 25th of August, 1642, at Nottingham; how the war was fought; how Hampden died, and how Pym died, with harness on; and how Charles was brought to the block; how Cromwell usurped the throne; how Charles II. reascended the throne in 1660; and then, without stopping, coming down later, in 1679, you have another great achievement in the way of a Bill of Rights. Habeas corpus was then perfected and made mature substantially as we find it now. The only difference was, it was sometimes attempted to be evaded, and Parliament had to guard against that as we have to- day; and after that time, passing over intermediate events, in 1685 James II ascended the throne; on the fifth of No— vember, 1688, William of Orange landed at Tor-bay, and on the 11th of February following there took place the most august event in English history. In the great Hall of Westminster on that day (the 18th, as some authors have it), the large folding- doors were thrown open and William and Mary, hand in hand, marched in; the es- tates of England on either side, rows of Nobles and Lords, gentry and yeomen, with Halifax in the Chair, similar to that occupied by you, sir. He arose and read then what was called the Declaration of Rights. That Declaration of Rights, most of which is embodied in your Bill of Rights now, was solemnly read, solemnly assented to, and in three months after that time was transformed into what they called the Bill of Rights, passed by Parliament and en- acted into law, and is now a portion of the inheritance of the American people. What is that Bill of Rights? Let me give you a few extracts. I have taken the pains to enumerate what it contains. BILL or aren'rs or 1689. First. . laws or their execution. Second. There shall be no ecclesiastical I courts made by King’s Commission and others of like nature. Third. There shall be no levy of money \ There shall be no dispensing with V by King’s prerogative without grant of Parliament. Fourth. The right of petition shall be held sacred. Fifth. No standing army shall be kept without consent of Parliament. Sixth. The right to bear arms in some cases secured. Seventh. Elections made free. Eighth. Freedom of debate in Parlia- ment not questioned. Ninth. Excessive bail should not be re- quired, nor fines exacted, nor cruel and un- usual punishments inflicted. Tenth. Jurors ought to be empaneled and returned according to law; in other words, the jury system was to be main- tained. Eleventh. All grants and promises of fines and forfeitures before conviction were illegal. Twelfth. Parliaments ought to be held frequently. Now, you see here what the position of that celebrated Bill of Rights was. All important to you, all important to us now; it is our inheritance. It is derived to us, and comes to us in no irregular manner. We are in the regular line of succession, and we hold it as a part of our inheritance. ‘But that Bill of Rights was as remarkable for what it omitted as for what it stated. Like the Petition of Right, it did not state all which they claimed or wanted. The Petition of Right was confined to four propositions. These four were not all. Neither are these all. They had in their minds many more; but rather than go to war, they patiently took what they could get. That Declara- tion of Rights, as Hallam says, “"carried the principle of resistance as far as they could possibly go then.” Now, what did they emit? They said nothing about religious toleration; nothing about the freedom of the press; nothing about natural rights of men; nothing about all power being in the people; nothing about freedom from illegal search and seizure; nothing about no man being twice put in. jeopardy of life and limb, though that may have been the law at the time, ‘but so imq portant a statement as that might wellr 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. . powers that be also. ,Tuesday,] Ronns. [October 7 . have been put in the Bill of Rights, as we have it at the present day. Independence of the J udiciary—nothing said about that, though I may say that in seven or eight years thereafter, in the year 1700, the inde- pendence of the Judiciary was declared and ordained, because it was then ordered that the judges should hold their commission guam dia as bone gesserit, and not at the pleasure of the King. Now, we have gotten down to 1692. From that time on nothing remarkable, for nearly a century, occurred bearing on this subject. Doubtless around the council fires and the hearthstones of the people of England there were many long sighs and many strong desires express- ed by the people on all sides that those rights that had been omit- ted from the Bill of Rights, should be‘ supplied. Scotland had gone through a long and bloody war, and there are many ‘ Scotchmen here, perhaps lineal descendants of the men who in that struggle contended for religious liberty, for in that contest in v Scotland down to the death of Claverhouse, was furious, passionate and bloody. The Declaration of Independence in 1776 awoke the sleeping earth. People began to think. They began to question themselves, and the They knew what their rights were, and resolved to maintain them. The Constitution of Virginia was made in that year. In 1787 our National Convention met and, were in session some > In 1788 the'Convention of the States met to pass upon the Federal Constitution. I am not particularly concerned with any of them but the Convention of Virginia. In that Convention the Constitution was re- sisted ably, courageously, vehemently, by several great men, and Patrick Henry espe- ally, who never shown forth with more lustre or evinced more talent‘or patriotism than when he opposed that Constitution. Mr. Jefferson, then in France, was writing time. . back. ask-ing, “ Why don’t you make a Bill of Rights?” And yet they did not do it. They : had some four or five propositions in the Constitution, in the fifth section I believe it was, in which they stated some things essen- tial to a Bill of Rights; but they failed to do what Mr. Jefferson directed, showing how much farther that man saw in the future than the rest of his countrymen. Patrick Henry denounced the Constitution wanting in guarantees of human rights, and if any gentle- man here has read his speeches as I have done, he will be impressed with the fact that no man in England or America ever evinced more courage or far-sighted- ness than he did in those speeches. And to show that my opinion is correet, Mr. Madison, John Marshall, and other leading members of that Convention, could hardly get that Constitution through in the face of Henry’s opposition; and it was under their promise andresulting from it, as I suppose, that the first Congress after the Govern- ment was inaugurated, at the very first session, passed eleven amendments to the Constitution, some eight or nine of them embodying the very essence of the opposi- tion maintained by Henry in the Virginia Convention. Congress carried them out, and they are in that way not technically called a Bill of Rights, but equivalent to it. Take it all in all, the Bill of Rights, ex- pressing some fifteen or sixteen proposi- tions, was made secure. From that time on we soon reach the history of Kentucky. Our first Convention met in 1792, and in that Convention some changes occurred in the Bill of Rights then enacted, which brings me to a proposition I wish to dis- cuss relative to this Bill of Rights we have offered. I said awhile ago that I omitted the eighth and tenth sections in the first part of this discussion. I now call your attention to the eighth section. That involves the question of _ libel. observe, if you will turn to the Constitution of Virginia in 1776, that neither in its constituent parts nor in the Bill of Rights - does it say one word about the admission You will ' BILL. or Rren'rs. '19 Tuesday,] RonEs. [October 7 . of the truth of the matter in evidence. It I did not admit‘it Now, you may ask how it happened that that Bill of Rights omitted to say any thing about the introduction of the truth in (evi- dence in libel cases. Our Kentucky Con- stitution, made under the auspices of George Nicholas at Danville, has the clause in- serted in it, that in all suits for libel, the truth of the matter should be admitted in evidence, and the law and the facts sub- mitted to a jury as in other causes. How did it happen the Virginia Constitution of 1776 left it out? My answer is, that they hadn’t got up to it. They couldn’t accom- plish it. The English people are a slow people. Rather than go to war they re- ‘solved to be patient. They nursed their ' rights. They still claimed them, and hav- ing had a long contest about it, it was not deemed prudent by them to draw the sword in defense of that matter, or by way of claiming that right. The intervals were long, and the spoliation did not occur‘ often enough to cause much complaint. In the very year that our first ‘Constitution, was adopted, in 1792, Mr.‘ Fox introduced 5 his celebrated Bill in the House of Com-5 mons with regard to that matter. What did that Bill contain, and what was his ob- ject? Now, you know very well that in the contest about libels, whether public senti- ment should prevail or whether the Judges and lawyers should rule; the Judges and lawyers generally maintained be- fore that time that the law was supremely for the Court, and the facts for the jury; in the estimation in the judges, it was not the jury’s province to find any fact except the fact of publication, and whether the indictment had been filled out, to show that what the indictment charged, was true. That was all. The ' lawyers and judges maintained that was as far as the province of the jury went. In that state of case, the press was not secure. 7 If there be any portion of our liberty that we would hold on to rather than any other it would be that palladium of our rights the freedom of the press. The press is in no danger in this country from a censor- ship. License and censorship are the enemies of the press. When Mr. Fox, in his’Bill, attempted to reach that he did it, indirectly and almost clandestinely. Pub- lic sentiment was on his side, but the judges were against him, and he thought if he could get the matter before the jury, to let them pass upon the question of guilty or not guilty, the judges could not force them to their verdict, nor control them in their deliverance. That is how the pro- vision that the jury shall be the judges of the law and fact under the direction of the court as in other cases came about. If there is one principle better settled in this country and England than any other, it is that the law is for the court, and the facts for the jury. Why did he not say so? He did all he could. He did his best to reach that mark, but public sentiment was not up to it. He had to yield, make concessions; but he did'secure his object in- directly, and that is the inheritance he left us. But that was not right. The way to state it is the way we have stated it here in the eighth section, because it is right. It is nothing else but right, and if it was not right, I would not call it so. If it is wrong, purge it; but as long as we have judges independent in one sense and de- pendent in another, elected by the people, but their salaries secured, you can have a safe exposition of the principles of law and the freedom of the people, and the press is amply secured. Let it always be main- tained that the truth shall be given in evidence, and if it appears that the truth was spoken with good intent, let the man or men go free. Is not that right? Will it not pass muster anywhere? If it is right, stamp it with the seal of your appro- val; if wrong, blot it out. How can it be said that it is unfavorable to the press? I do not know that any one says that, but 20’ BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] RonEs. [October 7 , some one suggested it is less favorable than the old law. How? It does not tell the Legislature what they shall do. If the charge be made is true, to that extent it is prima facie evidence that! the man was right; if it be made with good intent he goes free. Suppose he makes a charge which is true, but with bad intent. It goes in mitigation. and the Legislature may make what laws they ‘please; but if it be untrue, with regard to that; and with bad intent, let them suffer. We need protection as well as the press. They need it and shall have it. It is their bul- wark and ours. But if these principles are true, if the law is as I have stated it, in the hands of the court, and the juries are bound to obey it, give it to them. What does Cooley say upon that subject? “Where, however, the Constitution provides that they shall be judges of the law ‘as in other cases,’ or may determine the law and the fact ‘under the directian of the court,’ we must perhaps conclude that the intention has been simply to put libel cases on the same footing with any other criminal prose- cutions, and that the jury will be expected to receive the law from the court.” That is what we contend for and nothing else. How can you make a law different in libel from murder? Is libel more important than murder‘? Is a man’s reputation more important than his life‘? Are not - judges the judges of the law in murder, and do not they expound the law and the jury , Why do you lay , receive it from them? down the law now as they did 200 years ago, when they were forced of necessity to do it‘? jury ought to be the triers of the law and the fact. They did it be- cause they were driven of necessity to it. Mr. Fox cut the knot. He opened it with a key—the key of his dexterity, wisdom and patriotism—by framing that law as he did. That saved them for awhile. But when our Constitution was formed, they interlined the words, “the truth shall be They contended then thatg the‘ —_ given in evidence.” If Mr. Fox had intro- duced and obtained the insertion of those ' little words in his law, what a scene of tri- umph they would have had! What paens of victory they would have sung! We have it here, and I defy any gentleman to improve upon it. The words are few, but they are powerful. Mirabeau said words are things. Horne Tooke said that two propositions and a conjunction nearly ruined him. These are simple words, “the truth shall be admitted in evidence.” And if it appear that they were true and ut- tered with good intent, the man or the defendant, whoever he may be, goes free; and I call upon you to give your verdict and say whether that is not right. That is the question that is involved in section eight. I will not argue it further. I shall have to leave it to the able vindication of some other gentleman, and I hope I shall have many others in this body. I hope I shall have the valuable aid of our friend from Marion on this subject; and let the law be stated on the subject as in other cases quoted.- One other section only remains to be no- ticed, and that is section 10.v It is as fol- lows: “In all criminal prosecutions the accused hath a right— i 1“ First. To be heard by himself and coun- se . “ Second. To demand- the nature and cause of the accusation against him. “Third. To meet the witnessess face to face. “ Fourth. To have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.” Does anybody object to that? I have heard no objection. _ “Fifth. In prosecution, by indictment or information, to havea speedy public trial in the county wherein the alleged offense was committed 'fby an impartial jury there- of, on which trial he shall not be compelled to- testify against himself, nor shall he be deprived of his life, liberty or property, except by the judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.” Up to that point there is but one objee~ BILL OF RIGHTS. _ 21 Tuesday,] R01) ES. [October 7, tion, and that objection is one that meets with a sympathetic answer from me. The Committee struck out the word “ vicinage ” and inserted the word “county.” We all know that the words “vicinage ” and “ coun- ty” mean'the same thing. I like, as I say, old words, and I dislike to part with them, and I stated before ‘the Committee that if anybody could get that word “vicinage” properly wedged in there, I would sustain it; and if any gentleman in the Convention can succceed in getting it in properly, I will vote for it; but it evi- dently means county. And as I am at- tached to old principles, old times and old ancestries, and every thing else that is old (I hate to part with things of that kind), I say retain it, if you can consistently with the residuelof the sentence, and I would be glad to do so. But now notice the proviso, which is, that in all cases of trial by jury the General As- sembly may authorize the court to cause a jury to be summoned and empaneled to try ‘the case from any adjacent county or coun- ties, or from other counties conveniently near the place of trial, whenever the court may be satisfied that a fair and impartial jury cannot be procured in the county ,where the trial is had, and make an order to that effect: Provided further, The Gen- eral Assembly may provide by law. for a change of venue in favor of the defendant in such prosecutions. Some gentlemen here want the provision to extend to the Commonwealth for a change of venue. I leave that to the Con- vention. I have nothing to say, except that I am opposed to it myself. But the question now springs up, and it is one that Ihave to meet, that no proviso is proper in the Bill of Rights. Ought it to go into the Bill of Rights? That is the question. If it be improper to in- terlard it in the Bill of Rights; if the Bill ,of Rights is sacred, then be it far from me to assail its sacred character. In the old Ark of the Covenant they carried serted ? many things. They had a pot of manna; they had Aaron’s rod that blossomed, and they had the oracles of God, the tables of the law; but I imagine those tables of the law, ' or oracles, were the most precious part of the Ark. If this Bill of Rights is so precious ‘ in our sight, the question remains, and I state it strongly, what ought we to intro- duce into its consecrated apartments? Nothing profane or foreign. Let it be a collation of proverbs, a code of maxims, of strong fundamental truths, admitting noth- ing foreign to its character that would lessen the power of it. If that be the case, the ques- tion comes up, ought that proviso go in ‘? The only reason we have for its going in, is be- cause of its immediate connection with the provision of the Bill of Rights that a man shall have a trial in his county. We still retain the right of a trial in his vicinage or county. But then the question arises, how is that vicinage to be maintained and as The old word is enlarged. , Our disc has grown, and in the lapse of years the light comes clear upon us. The laso, part of this section grows out of the first; part of it. It is in juxtaposition with what goes before. It belongs to it; it is cognate to it, and so close a relationship does it bear to the preceding portion, that we would be doing wrong to separate it from that part and transfer it to the division of sub- jects usually termed “General Provisions," or to the “Legislative Department.” Let it remain as it is. The Chair mentioned yesterday that he did not like the word “provided.” I do not like it myself in a Bill of Rights. You can strike it out if you desire. The word “but” will look just as well. It will read then: “But in cases of trial by jury, the General Assembly may authorize the court to cause a jury to be summoned and empaneled to try the case, from any adjacent county or counties,” etc. I recall the only time when I was a mem- ber of theLegislature, and that was when I was quite a young man—in 1853-4. The question in regard to a Criminal Code ofPrac- v22 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] RonEs. [October 7 . tice was before the Legislature. Madison C. Johnson, of Lexington, was the Chairman. You all kn ow him by reputation and character He introduced the Code of Practice and carried it through, and in section 194 of that Code, 195 of Bullitt’s Code, and 194 of Car- roll’s Code, that very provision is inserted. I understand—I do not know whether I am right or not—that the question grow- ing out of the constitutionality of that pro- vision has never been settled by the Court of Appeals. It has been acted upon by the courts down in my part of the State. Fre- quently men have been sent to the peni- tentiary under the law. If it be the law, a constitutional test of it has not yet been made. If it be doubtful, it ought to go into the Constitution, where it can not be doubted. We know sometimes there can not be a trial in a county on account of prejudice; there is no impartial jury there, and a man may not go unwhipped of jus- tice .by reason of a defect of this sort. How easy it is for you to say that vicinage shall be county. Look at the geographical connection of certain counties. Breckin- ridge, Hardin and Grayson counties unite at the same point, and I am told that a man at one time attempted to evade the liquor laws there by having his house on wheels. Which is the man’s vicinage there, his neighborhood? I put it to you, Delegates of the Convention, lawyers and sensible men, ought not this provision go in here, imme- diatel y after that statement, as a part 01 the Bill of Rights, explanatory of it, enlarging the meaning of the word “ vicinage ” when it relates directly to the subject and is cog- nate to it‘? If it be so. keep it there. Do not transfer it; do not relegate it to an- other part of the Constitution, where a man will have to look twice to find it. I do not think it derogates from the sacred character of the Bill of Rights to keep it where it is. If it does not, let it stand; and I hope to have the valuable aid of some legal gentlemen on this floor, who will come ~to my assistance, or rather the Commit- \ tee’s assistance, in maintaining that con- struction and holding the language firmly where it is. Mr. Chairman, I am nearly exhausted. I could say more. I could take up the de- tails of this Bill of Rights, and could an- swer the objections put by various gentlemen to specific portions of it. I could show that we have retained the old Bill of Rights in its main and essential character and characteristics. There is no particular reason why it should not be held the same sacred object still. We have not changed its name or meaning, or vitiated its tone. We have constructed a few sentences. We have turned a few phrases. We have made them perhaps more acceptable to the times. But so far as our rights and our title to our indefeasible inheritance are concerned, they remain the same now that they have been ‘for the last two hundred years, stronger because we have added beams and girdei‘s to the building. This Bill of Rights has grown from the germ of fifteenth of June, 1215, now to a magnificent tree. Now it isa ban yan tree. It covers much space. There is no finality in politics. We are always improving. Doubtless in years to come we will have more to put' there, because when an enemy raises his head or makes his presence known, it is the duty of the people to array themselves against it wherever it is seen. But at present it seems to me we have all in the Bill we ought to have. Some gentlemen seem to misunderstand the functions of a Bill of Rights. Every thing legislative does not belong to it. There are many things ap- propriate under the Legislative head, and under the General Provisions head, and under the Municipality head that do not pertain to this at all. Let them be appor- tioned to the particular part in the Consti- tution where they belong. Let the Bill of Rights retain the same sacred, inviolate position it has long assumed; not too numerous in sections, quantity or character. But numerous enough, admitting no guest BILL or RIGHTS. 23' 'Tuesday,] PETTIT. [October 7 . in the sacred chamber, unless armed with the proper credentials and proper qualifica- tions; and when they do come in that way, let its high name, its high character and commanding voice be heard so long at this world shall stand. (Applause) Mr. PETTIT. As one of the Commit- tee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, whose report has been so well stated, section by section, by our learned Chairman, the gentleman from Warren, I can tes- tify that the Committee have labored in season and out of season in the discharge of its duties and with con- scientious fidelity. But one object was manifest in its deliberations-to meet the demands of this progressive State, fully guaranteeing the rights of every inter- est, and more surely defending those of the individual citizen. , No code of laws was designed to be enunciated, simply the crystallization of fundamental truths, as applied to governmental affairs, serving, it may be, as beacon lights in guiding the action of other Committees that they might present and perfect an harmonious system for this Convention’s judgment and ap- proval. The Committee invites the most searching scrutiny of its work, and if, by amendment or otherwise, it can be perfected in any of its essential principles to meet the wants of the people in a more eminent de- gree, none, I assure you, will extend their congratulations more heartily for the bet- terment of the interest of the people than this Committee. In his resolution to this Committee a few days ago, the distin- guished gentleman from Madison (Mr. Burnam), said that the elimination of the dead system of slavery was the main ob- ject for the calling of this Convention, The Committee did not so regard it. Slavery in Kentucky has been dead so long that all memory of it almostJhas been forgotten. Liv- ing questions demand the attention of this Convention, and it will, doubtless, in the dis- charge of its duty, “hew to the line, letting the chips fall where they may." The rights of the people have been invaded; their lib- erties have been assailed. The courts of the State have become a stench in their nos- trils. Honest creditors have been cheated by long delays; criminals in every section of the State have escaped unwhipped of jus- tice. The freedom and equality of elections guaranteed, have become, under our present system, a farce. Corruption and money have taken possession of our ballot-boxes. In the fifth section of the bill we have pre- sented, all elections shall be free and equal. Although it is a provision standing in the old Constitution, we simply desire to em- phasize it to this Convention and to the Committee on Elections that they may pre- sent to this body such provisions as will carry out this sacred clause in the Consti- tion. Railroads and other corporations have forgotten their duty to the people, and need the restraining hand of the law upon them, reminding them that they belong to the country rather than to the corporation; that they are public highways, and must be employed for the convenience of the peo- ple,- supervised and regulated by Legisla- tive power. Purity and economy in every branch of the government is demanded in every hamlet of our State, and if this Con- vention fails to blaze the way for legisla- tion that follows in this direction, its work will prove a disappointment, its labors will have been in vain. The report this Com- mittee submits is abreast the civilization of the age. By it every trace of human slavery is wiped out. Section 24 provides, “Slavery and involuntary servitude in this State are forbidden except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” -Nowhere does this Committee look “backward.” Were it in our power, the 'beneficient system of Bel- lamy would be vouchsafed—so great is our desire to benefit this grand old Common- wealth. The demands of the people upon us are pressing. Let us be honest to our- selves, honest with them, and then no man will have the right to complain. Let each ' 24 " BILL or RIGHTS. Tuesday,] KNOTT—MOHENRY [October 7 . one of us erect at the beginning of this im- portant work a banner, emblazoned in let- ters of living light upon every fold, the sim- ple words of Thomas Jefferson : “Equal rights to all, exclusive privileges to none,” and when this Convention shall adjourn, we will have reflected honor upon ourselves, immensely benefited the State, and coming generations will rise up and call us blessed. Mr. KNOTT. I move that the Commit- tee now rise, with a view of asking that the various amendments submitted may be print- ed and laid upon our tables by to-morrow morning. The CHAIRMAN. It is moved and seconded that the various amendments which have been offered, and which have not been printed, be printed and laid upon the tables by to—morrow morning. Mr. KNOTT. My motion is that the Committee rise for the purpose of asking that. The CHAIRMAN. The question is, then, shall the Committee now rise? The question being put to the House, was declared carried. President CLAY thereupon took the Chair. Mr. McHENRY. Mr. President, the Committee of the Whole have had the re- port of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights under consideration, and made some progress therein, and direct me to ask the House to have printed the amend- ments which have been offered to the re- port of that Committee, and laid upon the tables of the members on to-morrow morn-. ing, that they may be taken up for consid— eration. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Commit- tee, which is that all amendments be print- ed and laid upon the desks of all members by to-morrow morning. Mr. FUNK. I desire to withdraw the amendment that I offered this morning, as the main features of it are covered by other amendments that were offered by other gentlemen. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the gentleman may withdraw his amend- ment. The question being put on the adoption of the report of the Committee, was adopted. Mr. MCHENRY. The Committee ask leave to sit again. As no other gentleman has indicated that he wants to speak again, I move that the House do now adjourn. The question being put to the House, was carried, and the Convention thereupon ad- journed. gZnm/cniiun guard. —- KENTU CKY— CCDNS'I‘I'I'U'I‘ICDNAL CCN'V'EN'I'ICDN- V01. 1. FRANKFORT, OCTOBER 8, 1890. N0. 24 Wednesday,] IMILLER—‘PHELPS. [October 8. i l The Convention was called to order by 1 SEC. 1. A Commonwealth’s Attorney for opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Henderson. ’ eachjudicial district and a Circuit Court * Clerk for each county shall be elected, The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings whose term of office shall be years; was read and approved. I also a County Court Clerk, an Attorney, | l the President, and the proceedings were i The PRESIDENT. Petitions arefirst 1 Surveyor, Coroner and Jailer for each in order. county, whose term of office shall be the Mr. MILLER. I have a Communica- l same as that of the Presiding Judge of the tion from the Clerk of the City Council of County Court. ‘ Stanford in regard t0 the indebtedness Of i SEC. No persun Shall be to -that town; Sent to me in response to a res‘ i the offices mentioned in this article who is olution of this bod-Y- _ _ _ I not, at the time, twenty-one years old, a The PRESIDENT What dlsposltlon { citizen of the United States, and who has does'the Delegate wish made of the com- ‘ not tended two years next preceding the "munlcauon? election in the State, and one year in the Mr. MILLER. It seems to me that ‘county or district for which he is a candi- ‘when communications of this kind come date. No person shall be eligible to the ~ ‘in, they should be tabulated. 1, ofiice of Commonwealth’s or County At- I ask that it be referred to the Special ‘ torney unless he shall have been a licensed Committee appointed a few days'ago, of practicing attorney for two years. No which the Delegate from Anderson was person shall be eligible to the ofiice of Chairman. Clerk unless he shall have procured from This was done. a Judge of the Court of Appeals, or a The PRESIDENT. Petitions are in Judge of the Circuit Court, a certificate 'order. If there are no petitions, reports that he has been examined by the Clerk of ' from Standing Committees. his. Court under his supervision, and that Mr. ZACK PHELPS. The Committee he is qualified for the oflice for which he is on Executive and Ministerial Officers for a candidate. Counties and Districts offer a report, which .1 SEC_ 3_ The Commonweanh’s Attorney they Tecomménd Shall take the P1306 of and Circuit Court Clerk shall be elected at present article 6 in the Constitution. They the game time as the Circuit’ Judge; the ask that one hundred and twenty-five Commonwealth’s Attorney by the qualified copies be printed, and it be made a special voters of the district; the Circuit Court order before the Committee of the Whole Clerk by the qualified voters of the county. -0n the 16th- Report read, as follows: The County Attorney, Clerk, Surveyor, The Committee on Executive and Min- Coroner and Jailer shall be elected at the isterial Oflicers for Counties and Districts same time and in the same manner as the report the following in lieu of the present Presiding Judge of the County Court. article 6 of the Constitution: SEO. 4. A Sherifl‘ shall be elected in each 2 EXECUTIVE AND MINISTERIAL OFFICERS. Wednesday,] REPORT OF COMMITTEE. ‘ [October 8 . county by the qualified voters thereof, whose term of oflice shall be four years, and until his successor be qualified; but no Sherifi' shall be re-eligible or act as deputy for the succeeding term; nor shall any Deputy Sherifi‘ be eligible to the oflice of Sherifi' for any term succeeding the one during which he may have served as such deputy: Provided, however, That the first election of Sheriffs under this Constitution shall be at the regular election in 1892, they to hold ofiice for only two years. SEO. 5. A Constable shall be elected in each Justices’ district by the qualified voters thereof, at the same time and for the same term as the Sheriff, and shall possess the same qualifications. The jurisdiction of Constables shall be co-extensive with the county in which they may reside. ‘ SEC. 6. Oflicers for towns and cities shall be elected for such terms and in such man- ner and with such qualifications as may be prescribed by law: Provided, however, They shall be elected on the same day as that fixed for general State and county elections. SEO. 7. Vacancies in ofiices under this article shall be filled until the next regular election, in such manner as the General Assembly may provide. SEC. 8. When a new county shall be erected, officers for the same, to serve until the next stated election, shall be elected or appointed in such way and at such times as the General Assembly may prescribe. SEO. 9. Clerks, Sherifi‘s, Surveyors, Coro- ners, Constables, J ailers, and such other officers as the General Assembly may, from time, to time, require, shall, before they enter upon the duties of their re spective offices. and as often thereafter as may be deemed proper, give such bond and security as shall be prescribed by law. SEO. 10. There shall be elected in each county, at the same time and for the same term that the Judge of the County Court is elected, a County Assessor, whose quali- fications shall be the same as that of the Sheriff‘; the Assessor to have power to appoint such assistants as may be necessary and proper: Provided, That the General Assembly may prescribe by law that the assessment of property be made by other officers. . SEO. 11. The General‘ Assembly may at any time consolidate the oflices of Jailer and Sherifi' in any county or coun-- ties as they shall deem most expedient; but in the event that such consolidation ‘be made, the office of Sherifl shall be retained, and he shall be required to perform the duties of Jailer. SEO. 12. The compensation of county officers shall be regulated by law; and all county oflicers who are or may be salaried shall pay all fees which they may be au- thorized to receive into the treasury of the- county or State as may be directed by law. In counties containing torty thousand in- habitants or more, all county ofl‘icers shall; be paid by salary; and the salary of any such ofiicer and his clerks, heretofore paid by fees, shall not exceed seventy-five per cent. of the aggregate amount of fees earned during his term and collected by or for him. SEC. 13. The General‘ Assembly may provide for the election or appointment, for a term not exceeding four years, of such other county or district ministerial and executive officers as shall from time to time be necessary and proper. ‘ ZACK PHELPS, Chairman, W. H. MARTIN, J: M. Woon, H. H. SMITH, V J. F. MONTGOMERY, W. R. RAMSEY, D. A. GLENN, A. D. J AMES, J AMES S. BROWN. During the reading of the report the President said: “The Chair would like to— announce that all amendments now offered are, under the rule, to be printed along with the report.” ' EXECUTIVE AND MINISTERIAL OFFICERS. 3 Wednesday,] PHELPs—SPALmNG-éBUaNAM. [October 8 .. Mr. BU RNAN. I do not wish to antago- nize any propositions which have been pre- sented, but it seems to me, in order that the business of the Convention may be- sym- metrical and harmonious, that the report which has been made should be first scru- tinized by the General Committee on Ex- ecutive Affairs, and instead have the report now printed and a special order made for its consideration. I will move that the re- port be referred to the General Committee on Executive Affairs. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. As I under- stand it, the practice has always been in Conventions of this character—it was in the previous Convention, and several other Conventions which I had occasion to ex- amine—to have the report printed and laid on the table of each member to ,give him an opportunity to examine it and ofler amendments, and then let it be passed on by the Convention, and then it can be re- ferred to the General Committee to dove- tail it in with other provisions. I think the regular order would be to have it printed and make it the speeial order for the 16th, so that everybody can read_ it and be in- formed about it, and I therefore move, as an amendment, that it be printed and made the special order for the 16th, to-morrow a week. The PRESIDENT. The motion to make a special order does not have prece- dence over amotion to commit. The‘Chair is of the opinion that the motion to com- mit should be submitted first. Mr. SPALDING. I rise'to make an inquiry. My understanding is, that all those resolutions are printed when re- ferred. If not, I want to make a motion to have it printed before it goes to the Committee. The PRESIDENT.v The rule is, when a report has been made to the Convention, before it has been acted upon it shall have been printed. No special order can be acted upon until the matter has been printed and laid on the desks of the mem- * bers. That is one of the standing rules of the Convention. Mr. SPALDING. I offer an amend- ment to the gentle-man’s motion, that it should be printed and referred. Mr. BURNAM. It strikes me we had better let it go as it now is, to the General Committee on Executive Affairs, and give opportunity to have the amendment of- fered, and then it can be printed and exam- ined by the members after it is laid on their tables. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I want to sug- gest one difl‘iculty in the way of the mo- tion made by the Delegate from Madison, and that is this: If we refer all these re- ports to this General Cammittee, in a few days there will be nothing whatever before the Convention—nothing for the Conven- tion to act on. . The PRESIDENT. The Chair will inform the Delegate that debate on ques- tions to refer is out of order ; it is only by unanimous consent that it is allowed. The question being put on the amend- ment of the Delegate from Union to the motion of the Delegate from Madison, it was'deelared to have been adopted. The question being put on the motion of the Delegate from Madison, as amended by the Delegate from Union, it was de clared to have been carried. ' The PRESIDENT. The Chair will now announce .two Committees provided for by resolution heretofore passed. The Cl-rk announced as Committee on Style, Messrs. Hanks, Knott, Lassing, Bur- nam and McChord. The PRESIDENT. Report the Com- mittee on Female Afi'airs provided for by the resolution of the Delegate from Mc- Lean. -' The Committee was as follows: Messrs. Jonson, Hanks, Bullitt, H. H. Smith and Ramsey. ‘ Mr. BANKS. I rise to ask that the style of the Committee be changed. As one, of the members of that Committee,_I 4 COMMITTEES. Wcdnesday,] Mc'H ENRY—HANKS—SMITH. [October 8 . would scarcely know what subject to inves- tigate. The women of Kentucky have rights—not upon this floor—but they have rights under the present Constitution, ‘many of them, and I move now that that Committee be styled the Committee on W’oman’s Rights. I think that change ‘would be proper and right. I believe that all questions touching the right should be referred to that Committee, and that the Committee be required to report if any changes are necessary to protect them in their rights. I hope the Convention will change the name of it. Mr. McHENRY. I do not understand that there was any such Committee pro- vided for by order of this House. My recollection is—and I ask the Clerk for the‘ record on the subject—that this resolu- tion was laid over on a point of order, and it was to be considered t)-d iy, ail at was not adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is so informed. The CLERK. The resolution was of- tered day before yesterday, and laid over one day under the rules. Mr. MCHENRY. Was it adopted? The CLERK. No, sir; it is in the Orde's of the Day. The PRESIDENT. The Chair was misinformed, and withdraws the appoint ment of the Committee. Mr. HANKS. If I am in order, I will ask that the style of the Committee be ‘changed, and have it now called up for [consideration by this Convention. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, ‘the resolution will be considered before the Convention. It is now open to amend- ment, commitment or debate. Report the 1 resolution. Resolution read, as follows: WHEREAS, Many communications are 'being received by the President and Dele- -. gated: to this Convention from the women -of this State ; therefore, Resolved, That a Committee, consisting -of five members, be appointed by the Pres- ident, to whom shall be referred all such ‘P ommunications for appropriate considera- 1“on and action thereon. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I move to amend the gentleman’s motion by inserting suffrage instead of rights. That seems to be the main idea. DELEGATES. No, no. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate insist upon the amendment? Mr. SMITH. I withdraw it. Mr. HANKS. 'I move to strike out “ female afl‘airs” and insert “woman’s rights.” The PRESIDENT. The Secretary for information to the Cmvention will again report the resolution. The resolution was again read. The PRESIDENT. The words indi- cated by the Delegate ‘from Anderson to be stricken out do not appearin the resolution as female affairs. Mr. HANKS. I moved that the style of the Committee be a Committee on Woman’s Rights. The question being put on the adoption of the resolution, it was declared to have been carried. The PRESIDENT. New report the Committee. This was done as follows: Messrs. Jon- son, Hanks, Bullilt, H. H. Smith and Ramsey. The PRESIDENT. If there are no re- ports from Standing Committees, re- ports from Special Committees are in order. Mr.' ELMORE. (‘The Committee on Printing asked me to report back a couple of resolutions, and ask that the same be adopted by the Convention. The Com- 7 mittee on Printing and Accounts, to whom same was referred, ‘report the following resolutions, with the expression of opinion that it should be adopted. Resolution read, as follows: > Resolved, 1, That the stenographer an printer are directed to permit no additions to or changes in the report of the daily - PRINTING. 5 , Wednesday,] proceedings and debates, unless it be to correct error or to insert words or_matter actually omitted. 2. That the Secretary be, and he is hereby, directed to furnish the printer at once with a copy of every order or reso- lution with reference to printing adopted by this body. The CLERK. Do you recommend the amendment? Mr. ELMORE. Yes, sir. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Lewis is as follows: But, upon the request of any Delegate, the reporter shall submit to him the orig- inal transcript of‘ any remarks made by Said Delegate for correction, before same shall be furnished the printer for publication, to be returned immediately to the stenographer. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment. Mr. McHENRY. ‘I would like to have some explanation; does that mean that a gentleman can not revise or ‘correct his speech? It seems to me this matter ought to be left between the Stenographer and the gentleman. I do not think they ought to object if a gentleman wants to insert something that he never said. It seems to be an extraordinary rule they are impos- ing. I see no particular objection to chang- ing his language if he thinks he has made a mistake. I think they are making the rule too rigid. Mr. ELMORE. Any Delegate has a perfect right to change, but we would like- to have that done immediately to avoid additional cost. We would like to have it done before or immediately after the ad- journment ot the House. It does not cut oil‘ anybody from correction. Mr. KNOTT. I think the Convention will find that rule entirely impracticable. If a gentleman desires to revise his speech, he is required by that to do so immediately. He may be upon a Committee; be may be sick. There may. be a variety of circum- stances that would prevent his doing so at once. If he wants to withhold it for re- MCHENRY—ELMORE—KNOTT—PETTIT. [October 8 . vision, and it can not come in its regular order of the day’s proceedings, it can be- published, as in Congressional reports, in the appendix. It is not necessary that it; should come in its order, but the withhold- ing of remarks for revision would always- compel that. I hope the rule will not be adopted. Mr. PETTIT. I do not think the gen-;- tlemen understand the amendment, as. proposed by the Committee on Printing. It is simply this: that every mornirg- we have copies of the proceedings printed and laid on our tables for the purpose of correcting them. It is well known that, after the type has been set up and has been printed, any corrections that may come in make an additional expense upon the printing of these reports. For instance, there have been changes made in the re- ports that have been placed or our table=,. by some Delegates, that actually cost more than the original printing of the “ form "' itself. It is simply to do this: that aftr r a gentleman makes his speech, if he de- sires to correct it, he can see the Stenogri- pher at once, so as not to make any delays at all, and that in the Stenographei’s copy, before it reaches the hands of the Printer, that then and there he has the privilege of making such corrections as he may desire. It is not to force a Delegate to print his speech before he has corrected it. He may have the privilege under this of holding his speech ever, if he desires it, and let it appear in the appendix, and come, as the gentleman from Marion suggested, in that appendix. It is simply to facilitate, and cut down expenses so far as can possibly be done by the Committee on Printing in making these resolutions, after the type has been set up. I think it will work nicely, without any detriment to any one at all, and in perfect accord with the D:le- . gates’ wishes on that point. Mr. YOUNG. I would like to hear the amendment read again. The Clerk again read the report. 6 PRINTING. Wednesday] -Mr. PUGH. I would like to inquire if those words, to be returned immediately, have not been inserted in the resolution ofliered by me. The CLERK. It seems to have been added by the Committee. 'Mr. YOUNG. I hope this rule will not prevail. It practically leaves every man in the House at the mercy of the Stenog- rapher On that matter I do believe that the honor and gcotl faith of all the mem- bers of the Convention will be trusted. There may be times when a gentleman de- sires to change some word. We have not had during this lull, which precedes the storm, any thing requiring that we shall make any change; but we areg ing to dis- cuss a question that will bring forth most earnest and probably, I am almost afraid to say, vehement discussion, and a gentleman may use some word or expression that he does not desire to go down for all time. to come in the reco ds, and I believe that this is a matter that can be safely trusted to the honor and good faith of the members of the Convention. No man is going to insert any thing that is wrong. and I be- lieve no man will take out any thing, unless some word utte*ed without consideration in the heat of debate, that upon reflection, he desires to change; and every member ought to have the right to change it. It may be bad enough to make those utter- ancesin this body, but no man will want them to go down on the record for all time to be read by his children. I hope this matter will be laid over. If there is abuse of this privilege, it will be time enough to make this ironclad rule. I do not be- lieve the time has come. It puts us all at the mercy of the stenographer. I do not think the reporter is infallible. And they say I can not charge a single word-in this record. I must be bound by it absolutely, simply because the stenographer made it. If, upon deliberation, I may'choose to ex- punge a word, I should be allowed to do it. It looks to me like an outrage that _ YOUNG—BECKHAM—PETTIT. ‘M any such rule should beienforced. A man, after a night’s consideration of any ques- tion, might desire to make a change which would not eflect the general line of discus- sion, but might efl'ect somebody in this Convention. I think I see the idea that prompted the Committee. They were afraid that somebody would put in the rec- ordaspeech he had not made. I have heard that intimated; but I do not believe there is anybody here who wants to put any thing in he has not said. A Delegate in the height ot debate might say some- thing which, if placed upon the record, which cause him mortitication. In the old debates, from what I have seen, these changes were permitted; and [do not be- lieve it is right to take away from the members ot this Convention such a privi- lege. It seems to me unwise to pass any such rule. Mr. BECK HAM. This, as I understand it, isa report of the Committee of the Convention to the Convention. I do not think it ought to be hastily rejected. If I understand it, I am inclined to agree with the Delegate of the Fourth District of Louisville in what he has said. I do not think the report of the Committee ought to be acted 01 so hastily. These gentle- men have given it full consideration, and therefore I move the report of the Com- mit‘ee be printed and laid on the desks. Mr. PETTII‘. If the Delegate will withdraw that for a moment, I would like to make a few remarks. I want to say, in behalf of the Committee, that we are en- deavoring to get the business before that _Committee before the House in a satisfac- tory manner. We are doing every thing we can do to bring it hastily before the Convention. It is well known that there is an order of this body compelling the Pub- lic Printer to place upon our tables every morning the proceedings of the day pre- vious. If the ‘Printer is to place upon our tables the proceedings daily, how is he to do it unless it is corrected by Delegate [October 8 . RESOLUTION S.’ 7 (compels Wednesday] PET'rrr—BEcKHAM—McCHoRn. [October 8 . for that purpose}? Give to the Reporter some discretion as a matter of course. 'Give to the Delegate who may have spoken any woi d somelatitude in regard to changes of expression. It simply does this: it compels that Delegate to make his correc- tions in the afternoon preceding the printing of these reports. It him to make them with the Stenographer, and not upon the _ printed matter presented to us here the day after, because we desire to curtail that enormous expense that will come in cor- recting the report as made and {placed here upon our tables. I want simply to say ‘that, in one instance, it has cost more to correct these forms than it did originally to place it in type. The gentlemen will see evidently our point, that it is not to cur- tail any ‘rights of a Delegate, but it is ~simpl y a business matters that should be at- tended topromptly and without delay. If delays come in the correction of this mat- ter, as a matter of course, the delay must come in the presentation of‘ daily pro- needings. The PRESIDENT. What does the Del- egate wish to do with the resolution? Mr. PETTIT. I move that it be post- moned and printed. , The PRESIDENT. Perhaps the best motion would be that the resolution be ;printed, and allow it to go into the Orders --of the Day. Mr. PETTIT. I move that it be printed and made a special order for to- morrow at 10 o’clock. . The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate :accept that 7 Mr. BECKHAM. I do. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to ask .the Committee what the prospects seem to be to have the reports put on the table 'each day? Mr. ELMO RE. The printer will be ready by the last of the week-up with his work. The question being put, the motion was declared to have been carried. A DELEGATE. 'I have already a copy of the resolution and amendment. Mr. PETTIT. It has been amended again by the Committee. The PRESIDENT. The Committee in- forms the Chair that there has been an additional amendment; that it is not iden- tical with the printed report on the desks of the members. The Delegate moves that the report shall be printed, and made the special order for to-morrow at 10 o’clock. The same Committee reported the fol- lowing resolution. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the Secretary of this Convention is directed to put in one bundle all resolutions, petitions, &c.. filed on each day, and the slips of paper on which that day’s business is noted and read as the Journal of this Convention; and indorse the s true as the day’s business the same were enacted, vfiled, &c., and file the bundle so formed away as that day’s business, and safely keep the same until further orders of this Convention. The question being put on the adoption of the resolution, it was declared to have been adopted. Mr. McCHORD. I have a resolution which I desire referred to the Committee on Circuit and County Courts. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows : Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that the courts with jurisdic- tion similar to that of the Circuit Courts, shall be so organized under the new Con- stitution that the civil and criminal juris- ' diction be conlerred upon different courts, except in the trial of misdemeanors in the quarterly courts, as hereinafter provided ; to that end, it is further resolvei, that the State of Kentucky be divided into a suffi- cient number of Circuit Court Districts to transact the business, and that in each of said distric‘s there shall be established a- Circuit Court, which shall have jurisdic- tion ‘in civil cases only, and that the State be divided into a suflicient number of Criminal Court Districts to transact the 8 , RESOLUTIONS. Wednesday,] MoCnonn—Kno'rr. [October 8 , business, and that in each of said districts there shall be established a Criminal Court with jurisdiction to try felony cases only, That all indictments for misdemeanors shall be found in such Criminal Courts, and all indictments for misdemeanors shall be transferred to the Quarterly Courts for trial. - A Quarter‘y Court shall be established in each county in this State, with limited jurisdiction in civil cases, and with juris- diction in misdemeanor cases which may be transferred from the Criminal 'Court, and all cases which may be prosecuted by warrant or information . ' There shall be four terms of the Quar- e rly Court in each year. The Judge of the Quarterly Court should bea lawyer of not less than four years’ practice. That Justices of the Peace Courts should be abolished, ard in place of such courts each county in this State should be divided into sub-quarterly court districts, each of which Shr uld contain not less than fifteen hundred inhabitants, in which should be established ‘ Sub-quarterly Courts. with limited jurisdiction, in each of which shall be elected a Clerk of the Sub-quarterly Court. That the Judge of the Quarterly Court should be the Judge of such Sub-quarterly Courts, and there should be four terms a year of each of said Courts in each dis- trict. A County Court should be established in each county in this State, with jurisdic- tion the same as the County Courts under present laws, of which the Judge of the Quarte'ly Court shall be Judge. The. County Judge and three Commis- sioners, to be appointed by the County Judge or elected, shall constitute the Court of Levy and Claims of the county, and shall have charge of the financial affairs of each county. ‘A Commonwealth’s Attorney shall be elected in each Criminal Court District, and shall prosecute all felonies in the Criminal Courts, and shall prepare all in- dictments *ound by the Grand Juries. A County Attorney shall be elected in ca h county, and he shall prosecute all cases before the Quarterly Court, in in- dictments as found by the Criminal Courts, or in warrants returned. He shall also assist the Commonwealth’s Attorney in prosecutions in his county before the Crim- ' inal Courts. Referred to Committee on Circuit and. County Courts. The PRESIDENT. The time has now arrived to take up the further 0 insideration of the special order of yesterday, which is- the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. KNOTT. I move that the Con-- vention now go into Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of the- report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The motion, being seconded and‘ put to the House, was carried. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will name the Delegate from the Fourth Dis- trict of the City of Louisville as the Chair- man of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. YOUNG took the chair. Mr. KNOTT. I ask that the amend- ment which I had the honor to offer on. yesterday he reported by the Secretary. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will’ please report the amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amend- ment. Mr. KNOTT. Mr. Chairman, it has been said that rhetoric can have no place- in a Constitution; but while I have no dis- position at present to dissent from that proposition, it occurs to me that if there can be any emanation from the-human in- tel‘ect which should be characterized, as far as it is possible, by perfect precision of thought and absolute accuracy of expres- sion, it should be the article now under consideration. For, sir, if there is any necessity at all for a Declaration of Rights in a written Constitution, it is that those who may be invested with governmental authority shall be distinctly apprised of the limitations which are imposed upon their poweas, and that the humblest citizen, by recurring to the fundamental law of the- Commonwealth, may be clearly informed- of the safeguards which have been thrown round his liberties. I have, therefore, ventured with grea , BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘ 9 Wednesday,] Kno'r'r. [October 8, diffidence and reluctance to prepare. as a substitute for the report of the Committee on the Preamble and Bill of Rights the amendment just read, in which I have endeavored to group in their logical order the natural and inalienable rights of the citizen in one section, and those which grow out of his artificial relations to society in another, and to de- fine each of them in such terms as will not only show that we thoroughly comprehend the business with which we have been in- trusted, but have given to it the patient and intelligent consideration its impor- tance demands, and which those who sent us here have a right to expect at our hands. ’ In doing so .I think it impossible that I should incur a suspicion of the slightest want of respect for the learning or the ability of any of the distinguished gentle- men composing the Committee which sub- mitted this report; for it is not claimed or pretended by any of them that they have ‘ done any thing more than to recommend the adoption of the various provisions in our present Bill of Rights, with some few slight alterations and additions, precisely in the language in which they appear in our own, and, perhaps, other Constitutions. While I sympathize mrst thoroughly with my excellent and esteemed friend, the distinguished Delegate from Warren, in his devotion to the great principles em-v bodied in that irstrument as it now exists, I share none of his partiality for particular words or peculiar phrases, on account of their antiquity or repeated iteration. I know of no use for words except the ex- pression of ideas, and have no preference for any except those which convey the thought in‘ended with the greatest clear- ness. I know of re reason indeed why I should not choose a modern phraseology which is better suited to the idea I wish to express than I have to forego the appli- ances of comfort and elegance which per- tain to the modern dwellin g simply because l my grandfather lived in a cabin. I make- bold, therefore, to submit several criticisms. upon the language which the Committee has seen proper to adopt, with all due defer- ence to their learning and taste. I think I may offer one, in fact, to the very first sen-s tence under consideration, however imma-- terial it may appear. That sentence reads as follows: “ That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government. may be recognized and established, we de~ clare; ” but I would submit, that while the term “free government” is one of frequent occurrence in common. parlance, as well as in political and. juridical liberature, it i=, nevertheles, an inapt expression, if not a solecism in lan- guage. The very word government im~ plies restraint. -To apply it to the agency organized by a free people to regulate their- public affairs, would be manifestly improp-- er, for the simple reason that the principal, if not the sole purpose of the Constitu'ion- which we are here to frame, is to restrain its Wlll and restrict its authority; while to apply it to the act of governing would be equally out of place, unless the will of the governing power should be absolutely without limitation or restriction. It is true, sir, that this may appear to. be an immaterial, if not a frivolous objection; but in my judgment- it is not. If an idea is worth. expression at all, it is worth express‘ ing as accurately as possible. ~Especially is this so in a‘grave and important paper such as we are now considering. And as the real object of such a document is to designate clearly and distinctly the rights which are to be excepted out of the gen- eral powers of government, I see no res.‘- son why it should not be expres'ed in plain and unequivocal terms. I therefore prefer, and I think the critical judgment of mankind would prefer, the sentence I propose as a substitute: That the essen- tial principles of civil liberty shall be for- Qver observed by all who may be in‘ 10 BILL OFv RIGHTS. Wedn esday,] ,i trusted with authority in the government of this Commonwealth, we declare. Pre- _ sented in that form, the real purpose of what follows would be readily and clearly apprehended by even the commonest ca- p‘acity. But the statement in the next sentence, “that all men are, by nature, free and equal,” is to my mind more objectionable than the one which precedes it. There is not an expression known among English speakin g people which has been more fre- quently, or more justly criticised han that ‘hoary platitude. It is not correct in theory, nor true in fact. All men are not by nature free. Freedom consists in the exer- cise of one’s own volition, but only in such manner as will not injure or impair the enjoyment of their rights by others. The idiot. therefore, who is born without the capacity either to form or to exercise such a volition, is as naturally subject to the re- str tint of those who have, as the latter are by nature free. Nor are all men by nature equal.‘ They are neither physically, mentally, nor morally equal, and nobody can pretend with any show of reason that they are. It is true, however, that all men are, as I have expressed it in the amendment. just read, endowed by their Creator with equal rights to life, liberty, property and the .pursuit of happiness, though differing widely in their capacity for the exercise and enjoyment of those rights. Why, then, perpetuate such a fallacy in a document "like this, although it may be a mere ab- straction ‘? If it is necessary to state it at all, why not state it truly? Why not state the simple truth as it is in such a manner that it can neither be doubted nor criticised ‘? ' Nor, sir, is the statement made in the third section, “that all power is inherent in the people,” a particle more accurate. Certainly it can not be pretended that the people are Omnipotent—that they are equal to their Creator. That all political KNOTT. [October 8 . power ultimately resides in them can not be questioned, but all intelligent minds are bound to admit that there are some things which even the peop‘e, in all their sovereignty, can not do. There are many things, even of a political nature--aye, and of the utmost gravity and importance at that—which are beyond the power of the people of this Commonwealth at this mo- ment, and which will continue to be so as long as it shall remain a member of the Federal Union. What they might have a right to do if that relation should cease to exist is needless now to discuss; but while it does exist, I deny that they have the right to alter or reform or abolish their State government in such manner as they see proper, as we find broadly asserted in this section. They have no right to alter it so as to make it monarchical in form; they have no right to amend their State Constitution so as to authorize the Com- monwealth to keep troops or vessels of war in time of peace, or to make a compact or agreement with other States or with a foreign power, without the consent of Con- gress, nor to pass bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, or laws impairing the obligation of contracts, or to re-establish slavery, or to impose involuntary servitude upon any person, except as a punishment for crime; nor to do many other things either with or without such consent. Why should we make a solemn statement here. in the gravest and most impartant article we are called upon to frame, which every one knows is not literally true, and, to say the least of it, but little better than a mere vain-glorious boast? But, again; it is declared in the fifth section that “ all elections shall be free and equal.” What does this language mean? Free! Free to whom, sir? To all sexes and conditions of people—men, women, children, freemen and felons alike? Or shall they free only to a particular class, possessing some specific qualifications‘? Equal! Equal among whom and in BILL or RIGHTS. 11 Wednesday,] Kno'r'r. [October 8 , what manner? You may understand this guaranty, sir, but I am free to confess that, taking the language of this section as it stands, I should be totally unable to an- swer any ‘of these questions satisfactorily to myself, much less to my constituents. I supp se, however, that if it means any thing, it is that no power known to this Constitution, civil or military, shall inter- fere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage by any person entitled to vote at any election which shall be author- ized bylaw. If it does, why not say so in plain words? If it does not, say what it-does mean, so that there can be no guess- ing or doubt about it. I find it provided in section six that “the ancient mode ,of trial by jury shall be sacred,” What was the ancient mode of trial by jury upon which no iconoclastic hand shall ever be laid? It was, sir, that juries should be selected from the immedi- ate viclnage of the transaction, and com- posed of those who were best acquainted with‘ the facts in controversy from their own personal'knowledge, while in the modern jury trial no man is a competent juryman, unless by the consent of the parties, who. has any knowledge of the material facts involved in the issue, or who has formed or expressed an opinion as to the merits of the case. Which of these principles,.so diametri- cally opposite, is to be observed ac- cording to the language employed in this section ? But it further provides that -‘ the right thereof shall remain inviolate, sub- ject to such modifications as may be au- thorized in this Constitution.” That is, it shail be inviolate, except as this Constitu- -tion shall authorize the Legislature to violate it. Now, $11‘, I ask in humblest deference to the tastes and prejudices, as well as to the wisdom of those who know more about it than I do, why encumber this article with this provision at all? Why not relegate all thatthere may be in it to the Commit- tee,- whose duty it is to report upon such Constitutional regulations as may be neces- sary to the organization of our jury sys- tem, so that equaland exact justice may be administered to all men under it regard- less of the antiquated rubbish of past ages ? But again, sir: We have in the eleventh section the declaration that: “ N 0 person, for an indictable offense, shall be pro- ceeded against criminally by information, except in such cases as do not amount to felony,” 8:0. But what is an \indictable offense? Under our present system, I be- lieve, all violations of the criminal or penal laws, from high treasonto the most trivial breach of the peace, are indictable, and I can recall at this moment no provision in our present Constitution that might not be so construed as to authorize the Legisla- ture to dispense with process of indictment in all cases. But they shall not “be pro- ceeded against criminally.” Criminally! I am aware that it has become not at all uncommon to employ this term in the sense in which it is here used; but in all such cases, I 4 submit that it is a clear violation of one of the most obvious laws of any language which has for its object the accurate ex- pression of ideas. Criminally simply means in a criminal manner, nothing more nor less; and I fully concede that it would be an outrage upon the natural rights of any person to proceed against him in any such way. “Except in such cases as do not amount to felony.” But what is meant here by the word felony‘? At common law the term had no reference whatever either to the magnitude or the turpitude of the offense Under the system of laws which our English ancestors brought with them to this continent as their common heritage from the mother country, there was a vast variety of offenses denounced as felonies; many of t which, under our present system, amount to nothing more than the most trifling misdemeanors, while others of them 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] KNOTT. are not considered olfenses at all; but in some respects at least, among the most praiseworthy acts of courteous hospitality, if not of vchristian charity. Petty pil'ering was a felony. Tearing down a toll-gate or a sluice-way authorized by act of Parliament, was a felony. Contributing any thing to the maintenance of a Roman Catholic Priest was aielony; and I believe the importation of beads, crucifixes and such things, as had been blessed by the Pope, was a felony also, while the infamous crimes of bribery and perjury were only mi demeanors. In a word, the term felony simply signified an offense which occasioned, as one of the consequences of its commission, a total for- feiture of lands or goods, or both ; to pre- vent which, by the way, not only our pres- ent Bill of Rights, but the one we are now discussing, contains a positive provision. What, then, does it mean here‘? True, we haveflprovision in our statutes which defines a felony to be any ofiense the punishment of which shall be death or imprisonment in the penitentiary. But suppose the Legisla_ ture shoul repeal or alter this statutory definition, what would be its meaning then ‘2 Ti ue, the court, would probably hold that it should continue to mean what it did when the Constitution was adopt'd; but why leave it to judicial construction at all? Why hold on to this utterly mean- ingless and useless word in our Constitu- tion ? Why not say at once in plain Eng- lish, as I 'have in- the amendment I have offered: “No person shall be put upon his trialin any court for any crime, the pun‘ ishment of which shall be- death or im- prisonment in the penitentiary, unless _ upon indictment or presentment of a competent grand jury, etc., but in all other case the proceeding may be upon in- formation, if the Legislature shall so direct?” Does not this language cover the entire ground the original section is in- tended to occupy‘? Is not the language fully as plain? There can be no question that it is more accurate, and it is certainly as elegant. And again, sir, the report provides in section thirteen that “all courts shall be open, and every person, for any injury done‘ to him in his lands, goods, person, or repu-- tation, shall have remedy by due process of law, and right and justice administered without sale, denial or delay.” Submit the expression “without sale, denial, or delay” to the average citizen of the Com-v monwealth of Kentucky, the farmer, me- chanic, or the merchant; will he under- stand it? Does he know any thing of the circumstances that gave rise to this colloca- tion of words, or wher ce it is taken? If he has any interest in being informed of the nature of the important right which this section is- designed to secure to him, why not say in plain language that courts shall be open, in which all persons shall have certain and speedy‘ remedy, and justice shall be publicly ad- ministered in all cases, whether for the prevention or punishment of public wrongs, the protection or enforcement of private rights, or the redress of civil injuries?‘ That covers the whole ground, and there is not a school-boy in the land who could not- comprehend precisely what you mean. But again : It is declared in section 19 of~ the report that “ no person shall be at- tainted of treason or felony by the General Assembly, and no attainder shall work corruption of blood, nor, except during the‘ li‘e of the oflender, forfeiture of estate to the Commonwealth.” Bills of attainder are fortunately strange to the laws of ‘Ken- tucky, a: d. to all other States in the Amer- ican Union. They are expressly inhibited by the Constitution of the United States; but while I see no objection to the repeti- tion of the inhibition here, I would ask why adhere to the word “attainder” ' which really has no practical signifi- cation under our present system of laws. Why not use the word “conviction?” Persons may still be convicted of treason [October 8, ' BILL OF . RIGHTS. . ‘ 13 = Wednesday,] ' man or set of men are entitled! KNOTT. [October 8 . or other crime, and it is just as easy, and certainly a great deal more accurate, to :say that no conviction of treason or other crime shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate. ‘ But the most serious objection I have to this report, Mr. Chairman, is to be found in the second section, which declares that “ no man or set of men are entitled to sep- arate exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in ‘consideration of public services.” I take ofi my hat, sir, in respectful reverence to ‘this venerable relic of a bygone century. I sympathize with the patrio‘.ic fervor of our ancestors under the circumstances which surrounded them when it was ‘penned, as it is claimed, by the gifted hand of the celebrated George Mason; but "it has always seemed to me that their ani- mosity to the government of King George was so intense that it extended even to the best-established rules of his language. No This is "the-identical formula used in the Virginia Bill of Rights in 1776. We have had three Constitutions framed and adopted by the people of Kentucky, and in each of them it “bobs up serenely,” and every time with the inevitable “are.” But the smoke of battle has long since rolled away; :a hundred and fourteen years have elapsed and we have had time for revolutionary .ardor to cool. We can therefore look at this language free from passion or prejudice, and right here I draw the line at the word “are.” It we must adhere to this section, let us at least venture to substitute for it the word .it is. ” But, sir, it is not so much to the mere grammatical inaccuracy, as to the obscurity of this language that I object. “No man -or set of‘ men are entitled to separate ex- clusive public emoluments or privileges from the community.”. What does this mean? Does it mean that no man is en- rtitled to any public emolument or privilege separate from the community, or does it mean that no man is entitled to receive from the community a separate and ex- clusive public emolument or privilege? The emolument seems to be defined as a public emolument, but does the qualifica- tion apply to the word privilege also, or are separate and exclusive private privi- leges included in the inhibition as well? And what shall constitute a public service as intended here? Who knows‘? I confess, sir, that I have always labored under great difliculty in reaching an abso- lutely accurate conclusion as ‘to the mean— ing of this section; and, as we shall pres- ently see,'I am not alone in that misfortune. Thev fact is. there have been more outrages perpetrated upon the rights of the people, more vicious, unfair, unjust and oppressive legislative enactments under the sanction or assumed sanction of this single section in our Bill of Rights, than thatot' all other provisions in our Constitution combined, as well as more uncertainty and conflict of judicial opinion arising from its misappre- hension or misconstruction. Let me ask’ gentlemen to look at the ponderous volumes of private acts passed by our Legislature within the last few years, and enumerate the horde of railroad and other corpora- tions which have been exempted from tax- ation, and allowed avariety of other special privileges, while battening like vampires upon the substance of the people; all upon the specious pretext of performing public services. ' They will find the entire trade of Green and Barren River, one of the most mag- nificent natural channels of commerce on the continent, monopolized bya single cor- poration under an exclusive privilege granted to it for thirty years, on condition that it should keep the locks and dams in repair. And that grant was fully author- ized by the most rational construction of this section. The property belonged to the State, it was the State’s province, if not its duty, in its governmental capacity, to keep it in repair; but it saw proper to em- 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] KNOTT. [October 8 . ploy a corporation to perform that duty, and the performance of it was the public service which constituted the consideration, however, inadequate it may have been for the special privilege granted. It was a plain contract under this section; there was the exclusive privilege, and there was the public service, the authorized con- sideration; yet the grant itself, as all will admit, was a most atrocious outrage upon the people affected by: it. Who, sir, can estimate the extent to which it retarded the growth and prosperity of one of the fairest and most richly endowed sections of the Commonwealth? Who shall ca‘culate the millions that might have been added to the aggregate wealth of the State but for the creation of that crushing monopoly? Had it never been permitted to exist, the State Government could not have shirked the burden of keeping the public works on the river in repair, as it did when it bartered off the commercial prosperity of that entire region for a pal- try consideration. But what kind of a privilege is meant here, public or private, and what consti- tutesapublic service as contemplated by this section? These are questions which seem to have perplexed the judicial mind almost as much as they have my own. A few years ago the Legislature passed an act in which it attempted to authorize The Winchester Building and Loan Associa- tion to charge a greater rate of interest on its loans than the people at large were per- mitted to do under the general law. Its right to do so, however, was brought be— fore the Court of Appeals, and that high tribunal promptly and properly ‘denounced the act as a violation of this provision of the Bill of Rights, because the privilege granted was a private one, ‘and because there was no public service required of the association to support it. Later on, however, the Legislature, in commiseration of the condition of a private citizen, at- tempted to grant to him the privilege of disposing of certain property by lottery. He was, nevertheless, indicted for a viola- tion of the statute against setting up and maintaining lotteries; and when the ques- tion was brought before the same distin. guished tribunal, it was held, by a divide" Court, that he had a perfect right to do so; that the privilege was a mere private one, and that this section did not preclude the Legislature from granting a spe-ial private privilege, but only those of a public char- acter. Regardless of the demoralizing effects of all lotteries, regardless of the fact that the error of to-day might become the precedent for to-morrow, which, in its turn, would become the prolific parent of unnumbered evils, they said in effect, “this is a mere private privilege. It does not affect the rights of anybody else. It does not hurt anybody. Whose business is it except the owners how, or in what manner he disposes of his property ?” Yet there was no public service, either pretended or thought of, as a consideration for it. It was a mere naked immunity to a single individual, distinct from all others in the community, a gratuitous privilege to dis- pose of his property in a manner contrary to the public law, detrimental to the public morals. and in violation of public policy; nevertheless, it was a private privilege, and, therefore, no infringement of this sec- tion of the Bill of Rights. On another occasion, the Legislature granted to the Louisville Gas Company the exclusive privilege of manufacturing and disposing of gas in that city for thirty years. I need not pause here to discuss the magnitude of that wrong, norjthe enormity of the burden it imposed upon the inhabitants of the metropolis, who were thus compelled to buy their gas from a monopoly through all those years. Suf- fice it to say, the question was finally tested before. the Court of Appeals, and it was held—again by a divided court—that the grant was unconstitutional, upon the BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Wednesday,] KNOTT. [October 8_ ground that there was no consideration of public service to support it, half the court contending, as did the court below, that furnishing gas to the city of Louisville was in the 'nature of a local convenience, and in no sense such a public service as was contemplated in this section ; while two of the judges held that it was a sufiicient consideration to sustain the exclusive privi- lege. A public service! To whom? To the great body of the people of the Com- monwealth? To the farmer in the far-off field, who toils through summer’s head and winter’s cold to earn an honest livelihood? To the blacksmith or the carpenter in the distant village, who pounds the iron or shoves the plane for an humble sustenance for himself and family? If it was a public service, they might be justly taxed, along with the great body of the people, to pay for it. Yet who will contend that the in- habitants of the mountains, or of the Blue- grass, or of the Green River country, or anywhere else outside of that municipality, could be justly or constitutionally taxed in order to supply the city of Louisville with gas‘? The case was, however,.taken to the Supreme Court of the United States, where the decision of our State Courts was re- versed, upon the ground that the service rendered was of a public nature, and, cor - sequently, a sufficient consideration to sup- port the grant. And so burden was left upon the people of that city. But the Legislature passed another act, in which they undertook to authorize the Louisville Board of Trade—a voluntary association of gentlemen in that city—to hold a certain amount of real estate free from taxation. The public services they were to perform were in no sense com pu'- sory, but to acquire and disseminate busi- ness information, determine rules and cus- toms, and settle as far as practicable mis understandings among those engaged in trade, or something to that efi'er-t, for the promotion of the commercial interests of that city, and perhaps other localities. The property was nevertheless assessed, and ‘the sherifl’ proceeded to enforce the pay- ment of the tax. An injunction was sued out, but the Court held that the exemption ' claimed was in violation of the section we are now discussing, and on appeal the judgment was aflirmed by the Court of Appeals. The Court divided again, how- ever, three of the Judges holding that the services rendered were not of the nature required to sustain the pretended grant, and one that they were. Now, sir, when the doctors disagree, what is to become of the patient‘? Are we to keep in our Constitution a provision so vague and uncertain that four judges can not be found for your appellate bench who will agree upon its construe-ion. I d* sire to say here. in his presence, that if the distinguished Delegate from Frank- lin (T. H.Hines) had never done any thing else in his whole life to commend him to the admiration and gratitude of the people of his native State, his manly defense of' pupular rights against aggression under this dangerous provision, while he adorned the bench of the Court of Appeals as its Chief Justice, entitles him to an enviable distinction among the most eminent jurists who have maintained the pr'me principle which underlies all good governments.- equal and exact justice to all men, of what- ever condition or degree—exclusive privi- leges to none. (Applause) Yet, sir, ‘it is vision, with all proposed that this pro- its vagueness, with all its uncertainty. with all its evil con- sequences, shall be perpetuated in the fundamental law of the Commonwealth; and that, too, Mr. Chairman, when there is in this Convention among the peopleof Kentucky, and throughout the e'itiie 0 mn- try, a just and almost universal con-"len- nation of lottery privileges. Why. sir. fit is the very’ den of the lottery fiend; the lair from which the monstrous octopus so eloquently described by the distingu shed Delegate from Warren on yesterday, 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] KNOTT. [October 8 . emerges 'to twins its far-reaching ten- tacles about the‘ energies of the people while gorging itself with their substance. On what pretext was the Frankfort lottery permitted to exist? Fors'ooth, upon the specious copsideration that a p)rti-')n of its ill-gotten gains should be devoted to the ‘maintenance of the schools of Frankfort? But is the Commonwealth under any greater obligation to support a school in Frankfirt, than in Louisville, or Union- town, or Lebanon, or at any other point in "the State? I presume that no gentleman will contend that it is. If it is right in one ins ance, it must be in every other. Nor is this all. Every other lottery privilege, which has been heretofore granted by our Legislature has been under the assumed authorTty of this section, and so has every other. exclusive, unjust and oppressive monopoly that now exists, or has ever ex- isted, in our State. Allow it to remain, and it will always be so. Yet, sir, as I‘ have said, we not only find it iterated and re- iterated in three Constitutions already, but it is proposed to repeat it in the one we are here making, to remain the perpetual source of all these and similar evils. It I might have the privilege of strik- ing it out of the printed ‘report of my remarks, I would, with the indulgence of ‘the Convention, relate an anecdote to illus- trate my thought at this point. (Cries of “Leave l” “ Leave 1”) It is said that a dis- tinguished doctor of divinity, who was attending a Synod, Conference, or some :such general convocation of his church, was greatly charmed by an eloquent ser- fmon delivered in one of the houses of worship on Sunday morning by a young 'minister, from the text, “And Simon’s [wife’s mother lay sick of a fever.” He ‘was so delighted with his young brother’s performance that he determined to hear him again that afternoon. He accordingly went to the church where the young man had been assigned to preach, but was somewhat disappointed to hear him an- nounce his text, “And Simon’s wife’s motherlay sick of a fever.” At night he concluded to attend service at a little, ob- scure out-of-the-way church, and to his surprise, there was the same young divine, who arise with the same melancholy an- nouncement that ‘Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever.” Being called upon to offer the closing prayer, the old doctor said: “Oh, Lord, we have three times today re- ceived the mournful intelligence that Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever, and if it be Thy will that Thy servantshall not recover, we pray Thee to take her to Thy bosom before the next return of Thy holy Sabbath.” ( Laughter.) We have had this enormity repeated three times in our Constitution to the great danger and detri- ment of our people, and now I hope and trust that we will bury it out of our sight forever. Now, sir, as I have already said, I have endeavored, in the amendment I have sub- mitted, to classify the various rights to which every citizen is justly entitlei, groupincyas. far as possible,those which may be said to belong to him by nature in one section, and those justly arising out of his artificial relations to society in another. In lieu of the expression employed by the Committee in the first section reported, “ that all men are by nature free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights,” I propose the following: (reads) “That all men are endowed by their Crea- tor with equal rights to life, liberty, prop- erty and thepursuit of happiness; that in the social compact they engage to hold those rights subject t J ju=t and impartial laws, securing equal protection and equal privileges, and im- posing like duties and responsibilities upon all under like circumstances and con- ditions; that for the purpose of prescribing and enforcing such laws, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the'governed, who in this Commonwealth possess the in- BILL on RIGHTS. 17 Wednesday,] KNOTT. _\ [_October 8 . herent right to make any alteration there- in, not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, they may deem proper.” ‘ If every idea that can be embraced in any just scheme of social organization is not clearly expressed in that paragraph, I am unable to conceive how it could be done in human language. You may believe, if you will, that “all men are by nature free and equal,” or you may deny it, but cer- tainly no one can dispute that all men are endowed by their Creator with equal rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness,_however much they may differ in their capacity to exercise and enjoy those rights. Nor can it be ques- tioned that in the social compact they engage to hold and enjoy those rights, subject to just and impartial laws. There may be some criticism, perhaps, of the term “social compact ;” but I do not mean to be understood, nor do I suppose that any intelligent mind at this day will under- stand, that the people of this or any other community ever met in a body and form- ally entered into an engagement with each other that they would form a society and organize a government. I simply mean that every one who lives in an organized’ society, and who has the volition to go out of it, must, 1mpliedly at least, agree to live according to its laws, and more especially if those laws are just and impartial; for I suppose that no sane man would be content to live under unjust or partial laws, if he could avoid it. And if a just government can be organized‘ for any other purpose than the enactment and enforcement of such laws, or can be predicated upon any other principle than that of equal rights, equal privileges and equal responsibilities, among all persons under similar circum- stances and conditions, I am unable to con- ceive-it. Nor do I suppose, ‘sir, that _I need ofi‘er a defense of the expression that governments derive their just powers from consent of the governed.‘ It is the exact lan- guage used in the Declaration of Independ- ence, and consecrated in the hearts of all who have read and revere that celebrated document; but we must not forget that as long as this Commonwealth remains a member of the Federal Union, its people have no right to make any alteration in the organization or powers of their State government inconsistent wlth the Consti- tution of the United States. As the logical ‘sequence of these princi- ples the amendment I have offered proceeds to provide, first, that no person shall ever be deprived of, or disturbed infthe enjoy- ment of any of the rights enumerated above without due process of law, and sec- ond, that no privilege, immunity, exonera- tion or exemption shall ever be granted to any man or set of men which shall not be as freely and fully exercised by all others under similar circumstances and on like conditions. :That, sir, is absolute equality, and there- fore absolute justice. That distinctions will sometimes have to be made no one can deny. It may be right and proper, for instance, that those who have discharged their duties,as good citizens,until they have attained the age of forty-five or fifty years, should be exonerated from military or other duties; but if one shall be excused on that account, let all, under such circum- stances, be excu ed. Or it may be deemed expedient by some future Legislatureto ex- empt church property belonging to some particular denomination from taxation. If that should be so, let all other denomina- tions be likewise exempted. If the property of the Roman Catholic is to. be taxed, let the property of the Protestant be also. If the Presbyterian or the Baptist is to be taxed, let the same burden be laid on the Methodist. Let all under like circum- stances and conditons share alike, whether it be in privileges or re‘- sponsibilities. Certainly no objection can be urged against a provision 18 ' BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] so eminently just and proper in every- re- spect. The very statement of it reminds me of a somewhat ludicrous but illustra- tive incident which once occurred on quite a solemn occasion. A jovial, but unfortu- nate fellow, who sometim-s indulgel his thirst to a greater extent than was entirely consistent with his moral or physical wel- fare, was going home late at night with a little more than he could conveniently carry, holding on to the fence of the grave- yard that lay on his way, until he came to a wide gate which opened and swung him around into the cemetery, where he fell be- hind one of those old-fashioned tomb- stones, and soon sank into a deep sleep. The next morning a funeral procession en- tered the gate, headed by the clergyman reading from the ritual, and just as he was rec ting in measured and solemn tones the pa=sagez ‘-Even as in Adam all died, so in Christ shall all be maie alive,” our tipsy friend woke up and exclaimed: “Well, nothin;r ca'u’t be any fairer than that, shore 1” (Great laughter.) And now I ask, in all serious ess and candor, can any thing be more just or proper than absolute equality between citizens of the same re- public under similar circumstances ‘2 My amendment proposes, in the third place, “that no public emolument shall ever be allowed to any person except in consideration of public services, the per— formance of which shall be required by law, or which the Chief Executive Magis- trate, or some other oflicer of the Common- wealth, shall be legally authorized to con- tract.” Is it possible that any reasonable objection can be made to such a proposition as that ? Should any man be paid out of the Public Treasury for doing nothing? Should the people’s money be given to any man asa mere gratuity? If so, upon What prin- ciple of justice or equality can it be justified? Under a government like ours, all are sup- posed at ‘least to be equal before the law. The man who achieves an _ imperishablere- nown upon the battle-fi whether by his Kno'r'r; [October 8, courage or his capacity as a leader, oc- cupies no higher plane in the eye of that impartial arbiter than the humblest laborer in the land. He is entitled to no emolu- ments from the public that he has not earned. It might seem like a hardship, perhaps, as was so feelingly suggested by the learned and able Delegate from War- ren on yesterday, if the Legislature should not be allowed to vote a sword, with jew- eled hilt and golden Scabbard, to some dis- tin guished military chieftain; but how much harder will it be upon the tax-paying masses of the Commonwealth to have the doors of the Treasury thrown wide open that any Legislature, whether actuated by proper or improper influences, may empty it in gratuities upon favored individuals who havn rendered no service to the public required by law. I see that some gentleman has offered an amendment to this section as reported by the Committee, to strike out the words “ except in consideration of public service ;” but this, in myjudgment, would leave the section in an infinitely Worse shape than it now stands. It would, in effect, destroy the government at once. It would deprive every officer in the Commonwealth, execu- tive, ministerial, judicial or legislative, of his salary or fees. They all perform public services which are required by law, and should be entitled to just emoluments from the Public Treasury therefor. But it may be asked why should the allowance of public emoluments be restrict- ed to public services, the performance of which shall be required by law, or for which some oflicer of the government shall be legally authorized to contract? The an- swer is obvious. Beyond the mere fact that it would take away the power of the Legislature to make unjust and mischiev- ous distinctions among our citizens-—bur- dening one class with taxes to be given away in gratuities to another—it is necessa- ry to prevent any person from making him- l self the creditor of the Commonwealth at“ BILL or RIGHTS. ' i 19 Wednesday,] Kno'r'r. [October 8 , his pleasure, by first performing some pre- tended service for the public without re- quest or direction, and then prevailing upon the Legislature to appropriate the money, or vote him some exclusive privilege to pay him for it. How long has it been since a public spirit- ed citizen came before your Legisla- lature with the plausible but spurious claim that he had, with great labor and expense, cleared out a certain stream so as to make it suitable for rafting logs to market, and ask- ing in consideration of that public service that he should be allowed to charge every person who might use it for that purpose, so much per log, or some such toll, for every log that might be floated out of it? How long has it been since your General As- sembly acceded to just such a request, which, but for the tireless vigilance of your brave and honored Governor, would have added another to the long list of atrocious monop- olies which have fastened upon the people of the Commonwealth under the authority of this mischievous section in our Bill of Rights? ' But again; it is frequently the case that the performance of very valuable pub- lic services can only be procured by con- tract, which the Governor, or some other officer, i< authorized by law to make, and which should be paid for out of the Public Treasury when performed. A familiar il- lustration of this may br foundin the extra- dition of fugitives from our justice. I No man can be compelled to go to another State and bring back another who has fled from our jurisdiction. The service is purely voluntary so far as the agent who executes such process is concerned. He performs it under a contract, which the Executive is authorized to make, and is justly entitled to the compensation agreed upon, and it was to provide for just such cases that my amendment was worded as it is. With this provision, and the clause preceding it, we will be forever free from the evils which would be in- ‘than a term of years.” evitable if we should adopt the sec- ond section reported by the Committee. But my amendment provides in the fourth place, that no charter or franchise shall ever be granted which the Legislature may not at any time alter, amend or revoke at pleasure; saving, however, to the owners thereof and their legal representatives all such property rights as shall accrue or be ac- quired thereunder. Let us have no such thing in this Commonwealth hereafter as an irrevocable contract made by judicial con- struction, and not in fact, that shall hang upon the energies of our people forever, like the Old Man of the Sea hung upon the shoulders of Sinbad the Sailor. There are very few lawyers in this body, or out of it, who do not know how this country has groaned under the rule established in the Dartmouth College case, or the maledictions which have been heaped upon the court for announcing therein a false principle, until then unheard of in our system of jurispru- dence, or that from which it was derived. Let us have no more of it here. Let every franchise be revocable at the will of the Leg- islature, whenever it shall see proper, but place those to whom it may have been granted precisely in the position they were before the grant was made. Rob them of nothing. Save to them and their legal rep- resentatives all property rights they may have acquired thereunder. This can injure no man, while it is but just to the people that any franchise should be recalled whenever its exercise shall become hurtful to the pub- lic interest. Again, sir, as requisite to that complete civil equality that should exist among the people under our Government, the amend- ment I have proposed provides “that no title of nobility, hereditary rank, dignity or distinction shall ever be established or conferred by law; nor shall the tenure of any oflice, created under or by authority of the Constitution, be for a longer period As we are to have no privileged classes, let us have no 20 - BILL or RIGHTS. VVcdncsdayJ KNOTT. [October 8 . moss-grown office-holders, sheltered under a life tenure, but a speedy responsibility on the part of all who may be intrusted with oflicial power ‘to those whom they may be appointed to serve. But it is unnecessary, Mr. Chairman, that I should reiterate, one after another, the various provisions embodied in this amend- ment. Suffice it to say, that I have on- deavored to preserve in its most effective form every principle embraced in our present Bill of Rights. If I have omitted one, it has been done inadvertently. It is true that in one instance—and the same may be true in d‘thcrs —-~ I notice that a sentence employed in the original draft does not appear in the printed copy, having no doubt been accidentally omitted in has- tily preparing the copy to be read at the desk of the Secretary-I allude to the pro- vision in reference to prosecutions for libel, in which I intended to insert the ‘words “and if established by the proof, shall be a sufficient defence.” But, this and such other omissions as I may notice, or to which my attention may be called, I will ask to supply at the proper time. I have suggested one other amendment I to the report of the Committee, however, to which I would briefly allude, and that is with regard to the privilege of the writ of ltd/was corpus. To the provision that the privilege of the writ of habcus corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, in case of invasion or rebellion. the public safety may require it, I have added the words “and then only in pursuance of such authority as the Legislature shall prescribe by law.” Under the English Constitution the great writ of freedom can be suspended only by the authority of Parliament. The Queen herself dare not interfere with it without the permission of the representatives of the real sovereignty of the realm—the people- In this country, however, strange to say, quite a different opinion has been held by some, though not by any depart- ment of the government of this State, _ and I trust But in times of great popular alarm or excite- ment, when passion is rife, the rights of the individual are liable to be obscured by the smoke of battle, and the groans of the prisoner unheard amid the clash of arms. We all remember with regret the most it never ‘will be. melancholy episode in the history of our - country, when it was the boast of a high functionary of our government that he could touch the little bell in his ofiice. and any man, whether the object of his malice or his caprice, would be consigned to a distant prison, where his appeal for justice would be unheard, and his demand for the golden key that should open the doors of his prison house unheeded. There ought to be some greater protection thrown around the liberty of the citizen than we find either in our Bill of Rights, or in the Constitution of the United States. The latter we cannot change, but let us provide in the Constitu- tion we are now framing that this great bulwark of personal freedom shall never be overthrown, even in times of public dan- ger, except in pursuance of plain pro- visions of law, prescribed by the represent- atives of the people. But, Mr. Chairman, I have done; and while I am profoundly thankful to the gen- tlemen of the Convention for the polite attention they have accorded me, I am im- pelled to confess that I have but illy re- quited their courtesy by detaining them full twice as long as I intended when I arose. I have with extreme diffideiice and reluctance offered a substitute for the Committee’s report. Examine it, and you will find that I have thrown aside none of the crown jewels of liberty gathered from the golden caskets so venerated by our an- cestors—Magma Charta, the Petition of Right, the Bill of Rights, and the Libcl.Act. I have only sought to'give them a new and more appropriate setting in the coronet we are fashioning for the queenly brow of our Commonwealth. Ev- ery gem is there, and my fervent prayer is \e BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Wednesday,] KNOTT—MILLER—JOHNSTON. [October 8 . that their associated radiance, like the lam- bent glory of the stars, may guide the foot- steps of her children along the paths of peace and security, prosperity and happi- ness, until the heavens shall be rolled to- gether as a scroll and the earth shall wax old as doth a garment. (Applause) Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee rise. The CHAIRMAN. It is moved and seconded that the Committee rise and re- port progress to the House, and ask for furthertime to consider the report. Mr. W. H. MILLER. With leave to sit again? The vote being taken upon said motion, it was decided in the affirmative. Thereupon the Committee of the Whole rose, and its Chairman, Mr. Young, said: “Mr. President, the Committee of the Whole has had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, together with the amend- ments thereto. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the report of the Committee. And the question being taken thereon, said report was adopted. Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the Secretary will report the resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Johnston, which is as fol- lows: -Resolvecl, That the use of this hall is hereby tendered the distinguished represent- atives of “Woman’s Equal Rights Asso- ciation of Kentucky,” now in this city, for the purpose of presenting the principles of the Association for the consideration of‘ members of this Convention, and other good people of the Commonwealth, all of whom are invited to meet them here at 7 o’clock’ to-morrow evening. And the question being taken upon the adoption of said resolution, the same was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will lay before the Convention the following com- munication from the Clerk of the Court of Appeals. I The Reading Clerk thereupon read the communication from the Clerk of the Court of Appeals, as follows: CLERK’s OFFICE COURT OF APPEALS, FRANKFORT, KY., Oct. 8, 1890. To the Hon. C’. M Clay, J12, President Con- stitutional Convention .- In response to a resolution adopted by your honorable body, requesting me to fur- nish to that body. the number of appeals pending in the Court of Appeals and Su- perior Court; also the date of filing of each appeal and when submitted, I beg to submit the following : ' The cases submitted and in the hands of the Judges of the Court of Appeals are as follows: Abbott v. City of Louisville. Filed July, 1889; submitted November, 1889. Avery’s Trustee v, Avery, L. L. & E. Filed August, 1889; submitted March, 1890. Usher’s Executor v. Flood, L. L. & E. Filed December, 1888; submitted'October, 1889. ‘First National Bank, Springfield, v. Lan- caster, Bullitt. Filed December, 1888; sub- mited May, 1890. Commonwealth v. Smith,- L. L. & E. Filed August, 1889; submitted March 1890. Commonwealih v. U. S. Express Co. Filed August, 1889; submitted March, 1890. National Bank of Commerce v. Licking Valley L. & M. Co., Floyd. Filed Decem- ber, 1889; submitted March, 1890. Trimble v. McCormick, Montgomery. Filed December, 1888; submitted March, 1889. Chamberlain’s Adm’r v. Chamberlain, Mason. Filed August. 1889; submitted February, 1890. Chambers & Marshall v. Baldwin, Mason. Filed ‘August, 1888; submitted January, 1890. . 22 COURT OF APPEALS. Wednesday,] Taylor v. Minor, Marion. Filed Janu- ' ary, 1888; submitted May, 1889. Sandford v. City of Covington, Kenton. Filed December, 1888; submitted Novem- ber, 1889. Green’s Ex’r v. Green, Montgomery. Filed August, 1889; submitted October,‘ 1889. Walker v. Leslie, Pike. Filed Decem- ber, 1887; submitted October, 1889. Springfield v. Bethe], Daveiss. Filed August, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Goodin’s Ex’r v. Kentucky Lumber Co., Whitley. Filed August, 1889; submitted January, 1890. Breeding v. Flanary, Elliott. Filed Au- gust, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Meguiar v. Helm, L. L. & E. Filed July, 1888; submitted October,1889. Hawkins v. Palmer, Bath. Filed Au- gust, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Morton v. Parker, Mason. Filed No- vember, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Wood v. Pitman Coal Company, Laurel. Filed August, 1889; submitted January, 1890. K. C. R. R. Co. v. McGinty, Clark. Filed February, 1886; submitted May, 1889. (This case was decided by Superior Court in 1888:) Deposit Bank v. Daveiss County Court, Daveiss. Filed December, 1888; submit- ted September, 1889. Gillem v. Same. Filed January, 1889; ‘submitted September, 1889. FirstNational Bank of Stanford v. Mat- tingly, Lincoln. Filed December, 1888; submitted November, 1889. Cavanaugh v. Riley, Lou. Chy. Filed July, 1889; submitted March, 1890, Dehart v. Lewis. Filed November,1889; submitted February, 1890. Render v. McHenry Coal Co., Ohio. Filed January, 1889; submitted December, 1889. . Mathews v. Mathews, Ohio. Filed Au- gust, 1889; submitted October, 1889. REsroNsE 0F CLERK. [October 8 , Gately v. Weldon, L. L. & E. Filed August, 1889; submitted Febuary, 1890. Bridgeford v. Fogg, Shaw, Thayer & Co., Jefferson. Filed August, 1888; submitted March, 1890. i ‘ Bent & Co, v. Barnett, L. L. & E. Filed February, 1888; submitted October, 1889. Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Co. v. Kreiger, L. L. & E. Filed November, 1888; submitted October, 1889. Simpson and Hardin Counties v. L. & N. R. R. Co. Filed 1878; submitted 1880. (Submission set aside ~and re-argument or- dered, and resubmitted in 1885; brief filed in 1889.) Goff v. Anderson, Clark. Filed Decem- ber, 1888; submitted April, 1890. Creigler, &c., vs. Conner, Kenton. Filed November, 1889; submitted March, 1890. Carter, &0., v. Carter, Bath. Filed De- cember, 1888; submitzed May, 1890. L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Commonwealth, Green. 'Filed August, 1889; submitted March, 1890. l N. N. 85 M. V. Co. v. Dentzel’s Adm’r. Filed August, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Cornelison v. Toney. Filed August, 1889 submitted May, 1890. National Bank of Lancaster v. Johnson, Garrard. Filed . October, 1889; submitted May, 1890. Henderson National Bank v. Alves, Hen- derson. Filed July, 1889 ; submitted April, 1890. Gay v. Witherspoon, Clark. Filed May, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Hampton v. Meek, Greenup. Filed De- . cember, 1886; submitted March, 1888, (Briefs filed in March, 1890, and went to court September, 1890.) Rives v. Wood, Marion. Filed August, 1888; submitted June, 1890. Burks v. Burks, Barren. Filed July, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Gibson v. Gibson, Allen. 1889; submitted April, 1890. Ratclifi' v. Mason, Christian. Filed June, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Filed August, COURT or APPELAS. ' 23 Wednesday,] RESPONSE or CLERK. [October 8 . Louisville Courier—J ournal Co. v.Weaver, Sefi‘. C. P. C. Filed August, 1888; sub- mitted April, 1890. Roberts v. City of Louisville, Lou. Ch’y. Filed July, 1889; submitted June, 1890. Commonwealth v. Gowdy, Taylor. Filed June, 1884; submitted November, 1889. Cosley v. Commonwealth, Graves. (De- cided by Superior Court 1885.) Woods v. Devers, Fayette. Filed Au- gust, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Bryant v. Wood, &c., Whitley. Filed November, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Abert v. Lape, Campbell. Filed De- cember, 1888; submitted January, 1890. Whipple v. Earick, L. L.& E, Filed August, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Anderson v. Fitzpatrick, &c., Montgom- ery. Filed September, 1889; submitted February, 1890. McKee v. Stein, Guardian, L. L. & E. Filed June, 1888; submitted October, 1889. Treadway v. Pharis, Clark. Filed Au- gust, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Kaye, &c., v. City of Louisville, Lou. Ch’y. Filed August, 1889; submitted May, 1890. Kent’s Administrator v. Deposit Bank, Daveiss. Filed August, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Hill v. Hamilton, Sheriff‘, Lou. Ch’y, Filed December, 1882; submitted May. 1883. Rothchild’s Adm’r v. Kohn Bros. & Co. Filed August, 1889; submitted January, 1890. McIntyre v. Bransford, Daveiss. Filed August, 1888; submitted October, 1888. Townsend v. Chenault, Montgomery. Filed January, 1889; submitted January, 1890. Seiler v. Hallam, Davezac v. Seiler, Ken- ton. Filed August, 1887; submitted May, 1889. American Wire Nail Co. v. Bayless. Filed December, 1888; submitted Decem- ber, 1889. Louisville Underwriters v. Pence, L. L, & E. Filed August, 1888; submitted May. 1889. Beach v. Cummins, Lou. Ch’y. Filed August, 1887; submitted December, 1888. Osborne v. Monks, &c., Lou. Ch’y. Filed August, 1883; submitted March, 1887. Clark, Sheriff, v. Louisville Water Co., L. L. & E. Filed December, 1887; sub- mitted January, 1890. Commonwealth v. Sapp. Filed January, 1890; submitted September, 1890, C. & O. Ry. Co. v. McMichael, Clark, Filed November, 1887; submitted Decem- ber, 1889. Kirwan v. Henry, Lou. Ch’y. August, 1888; submitted March, 1889. Webster’s Trustee v. Webster, Hardin. Filed August, 1888; submitted April, 1889. Jones Bros. v. McEwan, Clark.‘ Filed August, 1888; submitted April, 1890. Jones v. Gorham, Nicholas. Filed Au- gust, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Zimlich, &c., v. Zimlich, Jefferson. Filed July, 1889; submitted May, 1890. McDaniel v. Evans, Breathitt. Filed October, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Ford v. Mayo, Boyd. Filed December, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Bailey v. Farmer’s Orphan School, Chris- tian. Filed December, 1889; submitted February, 1890. McClanahan v. McClanahan, Bracken. Filed December, 1889; submitted Febru- ary, 1890. Meadows v. Goff, Estill. Filed Decem- ber, 1888; submitted November, 1889. Schimdt v. Miller, L. L. 85 E. Filed De- cember, 1888; submitted February 1890. Bodine’s Adm’r v. McArthur, Union Filed December, 1889; submitted Febru- ary, 1890. Beckett, &c., v. Sawyers, 850., Knox. Filed November, 1889; submitted Febru- ary, 1890. Reynolds v. Thom’s Trustee, Franklin. Filed August, 1885; submitted November, 1886. Brief filed January, 1890. Penick 'v. Thom’s Trustee, Franklin. Filed 24 COURT or APPEALS. VV ednesday,] RESPONSE OF CLERK. [October 8 . Filed August, 1885; submitted November, [ ' mitted November, 1885. 1886. Brief filed January, 1890. , Warde v. Beale, Harrison. Filed Au- gust, 1888; submitted February 1889. Bodman v. Fisher, Bracken. Filed Au- gust, 1882; submitted February, 1890. Edens v. Ratliff, Carter. Filed J anu- ary, 1889; submitted June, 1890. L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Ingram, Caldwell. Filed June, 1889; submitted April, 1890. L. & N. B. R. Co. v. Quissenberry, Cald- well. Filed June, 1889; submitted April, 1890. ' Puckett v. Blakeman, Barren. August 1889; submitted April, 1890. Parker v. Richardson, Whitley. Filed August, 1889; submitted January, 1890. Glass v. Gaines, Owen. Filed December, 1888; submitted June, 1890. _ Lucas v. K. C. B. R. Co., Kenton. Filed December, 1888; submitted April, 1890. L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Taylor, Todd. Filed August, 1888; submitted June, 1890. Lcavison v. Baird, McCrackell. Filed December, 1889; submitted June, 1890. Baird v. Leavison, McCracken. Filed January, 1890; submitted June, 1890. Longdale Iron Co. v. Swift’s Iron and Steel Co. Filed August, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Wells v. Reubenacker, Mason. October, 1889; submitted June, 1890. Thompson v. Moore, Fleming. Filed April, 1889; submitted April, 1890. Bell v. Henshaw’s Ex’s, Union. May, 1889; submitted April, 1890. L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Orr, Campbell. Filed August, 1887; submitted February, 1890. Wills v. Tanner, Clark. Filed August, 1889 ; submitted February, 1890. Triplett v. Seelbach, Lou. Chy. Filed December, 1888; submitted March, 1890. Pickett v. Adams, Franklin. Filed May, 1889 ; submitted January, 1890. Bright v. Dunn, Garrard. Filed Decem- ber, 1888; submitted March, 1889. Filed Filed Filed Berry v. Commonwealth, Franklin. Sub- mitted October, 1886, City of Louisville v. Gas Company. Sub- Total, 111. 2d. Cases submitted and not yet distribu- ted to the members of the Court of Appeals, are as follows (these cases are in the Clerk’s oifice) : Carter v. Bank of Columbia, Adair. Filed June, 1890; submitted October, 1890. v City of Bowling Green v. Barclay, Pot- ter & Co., Warren. Filed December, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Bamberger, Bloom & Co., &c., v. Moayon, Christian. Filed August, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Boulier Bros. v Macauley, L. L. & E. Filed July, 1889; submitted September, 1890. Bosquett v. Hall. Hardin. Filed De- cember, 1888; submitted September, 1890. Commonwealth v. Fleming Lodge, Flem- ing. Filed December, 1889; submitted Oc- tober, 1890. . Carter Bros. & Co. v. Martin, Warren. ' Filed July, 1890; submitted October, 1890. Christian, Trustee, &c., v. Byars. Todd. Filed August, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Clement v. Hughes, Crittellden. Filed January, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Fortner v. Duncan, Owen. Filed De- cember, 1889; submitted September, 1890. ‘Filbern’s Adm’r v. C., O. St S. W. R. R. Co., Jefferson. Filed December, 1887; sub- mitted May, 1889. (Briefs filed Septem- ber, 1890.) Gill, 6:2; part0, Meade. Filed January, 1890; submitted October,_1890, Gossom v. Gossom, Warren. Filed Au- gust, 1890; submitted October, 1890. Houston v. Beutlinger, Lou. Ch’y. Filed August, 1889; submitted February, 1890. Irvine v. Irvine, Hickman._ Filed Jane uary, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Illinois Central R. R. Co. v. Dick, Car~ lisle. Filed November, 1889; submitted October, 1890. _ Kenton County v. Lowe, Kenton. Filed COURT OF APPEALS. 25 Wednesday,] RESPONSE oi CLERK. [October 8 . December, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Miller v. Hayden, &c., Daveiss. Filed August, 1890; submitted October, 1890. Lucas v. Hunt, Warren. Filed August, 1890; submitted October, 1890. Martin’s Trustee v. L. 8: N. R. R. Co., Caldwell. Filed August, 1890; submitted October, 1890. Martin v. Richardson, Pulaski. Filed February, 1890; submitted October, 1890. McDaniel’s Guardian v. McDaniel, Da- veiss. ' Filed August, 1890; submitted Oc- tober, 1890. McCormick v. Crowe, Ohio. 1890; submitted October, 1890. McFarland v. Baugh, Russell. Filed December, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Northup v. Ward, Johnson. Filed-De- cember, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Ruley v. Ruley, Simpson. Filed May, 1890; submitted October, 1890. Rubel v. Bushnell, L. L. 8: E._ Filed August, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Shaw v. Campbell T. P. Co. Filed De- cember, 1889; submitted October, 1890. Turner’s Adm’r v. Turner, Montgom- ery. Filed December, 1889; submitted Oc- tober, 1890. Vanover v. Murphy’s Adm’r, Daviess. Filed August, 1890; submitted October, 1890. Williamson v. Yeager, Shelby. Filed December, 1889 ; submitted September, 1890. Zable v. Masonic Savings Bank, Lou. Ch’y. Filed July, 1889; submitted March, 1890. Filed May, Trimble v. Citizens’ National Bank, Me? Cracken. Filed August, 1889; submitted October, 1889. I Citizens’ National Bank v. Trimble. Filed August, 1889; submitted October, 1889. ‘ Total ‘number submitted cases not dis— tributed, 34. I There are on the Appearance Docket of the Court of Appeals (not submitted) 176 cases, and on the Argument Docket of said Court (not submitted) 78 cases. The following are the submitted cases in the Superiour Court, to wit: Louisville Water Co. v. Reed & 00., Lou. Law and Eq. Filed July, 1890; sub- mitted September, 1890. Shrout v. Shrout, Nicholas. Filed De- cember,1889; submitted September, 1890. Munnell v. Barnes, Montgomery. Filed November, 1889; submitted September, 1890. Ratliff v. Bellfont Iron Works, Carter. Filed August, 1889; submitted September, 1890. Shepherd v. Ewell, Powell. Filed Sep- tember, 1889; submitted June, 1889. (Transferred from Court of Appeals Sep- tember, 1890.) Feighery v. Feighery’s Adm’r., Har- rison. Filed August, l889; submmitted October, 1890. Cornett v. Huff, Harlan. Filed June, 1890; submitted September, 1890. Bach, &c., v. Weston, Campbell. Filed December, 1889; submitted September, 1890. ' L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Zachritz, Campbell. Filed February, 1888; submitted Decem- ber, 1888. Prewitt v. Trimble, Montgomery. Filed December, 1889; submitted September, 1890. Roe’s Adm’r v. Canifax’s Gd’n, Carter. Filed June, 1890; submitted September, 1890. East Tennessee Coal Company v. Dob— son, Whitley. Filed December, 1889; sub- mitted September, 1890. Davis v. Lamb, Jefferson. Filed August, 1889; submitted March, 1890. Watts v. Collins, Lou. Ch’y. Filed Au- gust, 1890; submitted September, 1890. Wagner v.Weideman, Campbell. Filed December, 1889; submitted June, 1890. City of Maysville v. Stanton, Mason. Filed October, 1888; submitted February, 1890. Citizens’ National Bank v. Boswell’s Adm’r, Fayette. Filed December, 1889; submitted October, 1890.. 26 COURT OF APPEALS. . perior Court, 21. Wednesday,] REsPoNsE OF CLERK. [October 8 . Cumberland. Filed submitted September, Cartre v. Carter, December, 1889; 1890. Pierson v. Cambell, L. L. & E. Filed August, 1890; submitted September, 1890. Fenley’s Adm’r v. Kendall, Kenton. Filed September, 1889; submitted Septem- ber, 1890. Mathis v. Mathis, Spencer. February, 1890. Total number of submitted cases in Su- Submitted 1 There are on the Appearance Docket of the Superior Court (not submitted) 177 cases, and on the Argument Docket of said Court (not submitted) 56 cases. RECAPITULATION. No. of submited cases distributed (in Court of Appeals) . . . . . . . 111 No. of submitted cases undistributed (in Court of Appeals) _ .l 34 No. of cases on Appearance Docket (in Court of Appeals) . 176 No. cases on Argument Docket (in Court of Appeals) . . . . . . . 78 Total number of cases in Court of Appeals . . . . . . . . 399 No. of cases submitted (in Superior Court).. . 21 No. of cases on Appearance Docket Superior Court) . . . . . . . . 177 No. of cases on argument Docket of Superior Court. . . - - . . . . 56 Total number of cases before Supe- rior Court . . . . . . 254 Total number of cases before Court of Appeals ' 399 Total number of cases before both Courts 653 Respectful] y submitted, W. W. LONGMOOR, (.7. (7. A. During the reading of the said commu- nication— Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. President, I move to dispense with the reading of that paper and have it printed, and referred to the Committee on Court of Appeals. And the question being taken upon said motion, it was decided in the aflirmative. Mr. BOLES. Mr. President, I have a resolution. I don’t care about its being read, but I want it referred to the Commit- tee on Revenue and Taxation. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be read by its title and referred to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. ' Mr. FUNK. Mr. President, I desire to offer a resolution, and, as it is an amend- ment to the rules, I will not call it up to- day. I desire to have it read. The Reading Clerk read the resolution ' offered ‘by Mr. Funk, which is as follows : WHEREAS, The Chairmen of a number of the Standing Committees of this Con- vention are experiencing much ditficuly in getting quorums at their Committee meet- ings; and whereas, there is a growing dis- position in the Convention to devote but a short time each day to the business in hand; Be it therefore Re or'veu', That a Standing Committee, composed of five Delegates, be appointed by the Chair, to be known and styled as “The Committee on Industry,” whose duty it shall be to devise ways and means for se- curing the time and attention of the Dele- gates to the work of framing a new Consti- tution for the people of Kentucky; and Resolved further, That said Committee be requested and directed to report at the earliest possible moment. The PRESIDENT. The resolution un- der the rules will lie one day on the table. Mr. STRAUS. Mr. President, I move that the Hous adjourn. ' And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the aflirmative; and the ‘ Convention adjourned until to-morrow morning at 10 o’clock. onvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1.] FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 9, 1890. N0. 25 ‘Thursday,] PETTIT—MILLER—ELMORE. [October 9 , At 10 o’clock President Clay called the Convention to order, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Hen— derson. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the special order for this hour. The SECRETARY. It is the report of the Committee on Printing and Accounts, that was ordered printed. The report read, as follows: Resolved, 1. That the Stenographer and Printer are directed to permit no additions to or changes in the report of the daily pro- ceedings and debates, unless it be to correct error or to insert words or matter actually omitted. ‘2. That the Secretary be, and he is here- by, directed to furnish the Printer at once with a copy of every order or resolution with reference to printing adopted by this body. . . 3. But upon the request of any Delegate the Reporter shall submit to him the orig- inal transcript of any remarks made by said Delegate for correction before same shall be furnished the Printer for publica- ‘tion, to be returned innnediately to the Stenographer. Mr. PETTIT. I ask unanimous consent that the third paragraph, beginning with the word “ but,” be inserted after the word “omitted,” in the first paragraph, making only one section. Mr. W. H. MILLER. an amendment. Mr. ELMORE. man want changed ‘2 Mr. PETTIT. To make the third para- graph a continuatlon of the first. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Lincoln. I desire to offer What did the gentle- The. amendment to first section read, as follows: Strike out the word “immediatelv” in the eighth line, and insert in lieu thereof by him, and add to said section these words, “as soon as said corrections shall be made, and if the report of the proceed- 1ngs of the day on which such remarks shall ‘have been made have been printed, omitting such remarks, the same mav be printed as an appendix.” U The amendment was, upon‘ a vote, adopted. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment just read. The question being put upon the said amendment, it was declared to have been adopted. The PRESIDENT. The question is now on the adoption of the resolution. The question being put on the adoption of the resolution, it was declared adopted. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I have a report from the Clerk of the County Court of Boyd, in response to a letter written to him in regard to the indebtedness of that coun- ty. I desire to have that presented and re- ferred to Special Committee. ' Mr. T. H.HINES. WVith the same matter, I have a report about the county of Franklin, City of Frankfort. I desire it referred to the same Committee. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the communication will be referred to the appropriate Committee. Reports from Standing Committees are in order. Mr. "BRONSTON. I have a report from the Committee on Crimes, Punishments reference to- 2 CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS. Th llrsday,] Rnronr or COMMITTEE. [October 9 . and Criminal Procedure, and ask that it be read. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the report, and any amendments to the report will then be in order. Report read, as follows : SEC. 1. The Governor shall have the power to grant reprieves, remissions, pardons and commutations of sentence after conviction, for all offenses, except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions and with such restrictions and limitations as he may think proper. Upon convictionfor treason, the Governor shall have power to suspend the execution of the sentence until the case shall be reported to the General Assembly at its next meeting, when the General Assembly shall either pardon, direct the execution of the sentence, or grant a further reprieve. The Governor shall communicate to the General Assembly, at the beginning of every session, every case of reprieve, remission, pardon or commuta- tion of sentence, stating the name of the person convicted, the crime for which he was convicted, the sentence, its date, the date of the pardon, reprieve, remission or commutation, and the reasons for granting the same; but the Governor shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sheriff or Commonwealth’s Attorney ill penal or criminal cases. SEO. 2. All prisoners shall be bailable by sufficient securities, unless for capital offenses, when the proof is evident or pre— sumption great; and the privilege of the writ of ilabms corpus shall not be suspended unless when, ill cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it. SEC. 3. That excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishments inflicted. SEC. 4. That no person shall, for any in- dictable offense, be proceeded against crilni- nall y by information, except ill cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service in time of war or public danger, or by leave of the court for oppression or misdemeanor in~ oflice. SEO. 5. In prosecutions for the publica-- tion of papers investigating the official conduct of officers or persons in a public capacity, or where the matter published is. proper for public. information, the truth thereof may be given in evidence; and ill all indictments for libels the jury shall have a right to determine the law and the- facts, under the direction of the court, as in other cases. SEC. 6. That ill all criminal prosecutions- the accused hath a right to be heard by himself and counsel ; to demand the nature- and cause of the accusation against him ; to meet the witnesses face to face; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; that he can not be compelled to give evidence against himself, nor can he be deprived of his life, liberty or pro-p- erty unless by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land; and ill presecutions- by indictment or information, a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the- vicinage; but the General Assembly may provide, by general law, for a change of‘ venue ill such prosecutions for both the- defendant and the Commonwealth. Mr. BRONSTON. As I understand the- rule governing Committees of this body, all that can be done with that report now is to- have it printed and referred to the General Legislative Committee, and I make that motion. I desire, as a personal matter to the Committee, to state that some matters: have been reported by the Committee which are before this Convention reported by the- Committee on the Bill of Rights. The rule under which this Committee was established requires it to report upon all matters pertain-- illg to crimes, punishment, and criminal procedure. There was no such Committee in the Convention which formed thepresent Constitution; hence the confusion of having a report from two Committees on the same- subject may be accounted for. The Com- mittee felt it was its duty, inasmuch as it CRIMES AND PUNISHMEN TS. 3 Thursday,] BURNAM—BRONSTON—BECKNER. [October 9 . had that matter under consideration, and postponed it for the personal convenience of some members, to report it to the House and leave it in the hands of the Convention to determine whether, in its wisdom, it should become the report of the Committee of which I have the honor to be Chairman, or accept the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights. Mr. BECKNER. amendment. The PRESIDENT. The amendment will be reported. Mr. BURNAM. If I gather correctly the report, there are portions which should be referred to the Committee on Executive Affairs. I think all those portions which have reference to granting pardons by the Governor properly belong to that Com- mittee. There are others, instead of going to the Committee on the Legislative De- partment, should go to the Committee on Bill of Rights. I think there is radical difference between the different branches as reported by the two Committees, and I think on its re-reading by the Clerk there could be seen where the different parts of that report should go. I make the motion. Mr. BRONSTON. I diffenfrom the dis- tinguished Delegate from Madison. I do not understand that every report from a Committee can be referred, at the will of a Delegate, to another Committee, because this House has adopted a rule in which there have been classified certain com- mittees which belong to the General Com- mittee of the Executive Department, and certain Committees which belong to the General Committee of the Judicial Depart- ment, and certain Committees which belong to the General Committee on the Legisla- tive Department. The Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure belongs, under that classification, as expressly stated in that rule, to the General Committee on Legislative Department, and that rule prescribes that none of these several Committees shall report, matter for I desire to offer an final action by this body until it has been submitted to and considered by the General Committee of that department; and in strict obedience to that rule I ask that this- report of the Committee on Crimes, Punish- ments and Criminal Procedure, which be- longs to, and is a part of, the General Com- mittee 011 Legislative Department, and so‘ designated by this body, shall have that re- port so considered. But I do not desire- that that report shall be severed and re- ferred to separate Committees upon this- floor; but bowing with great respect to the- rule of the Convention, we desire it- shall be considered and revised by the Gen- eral Committee of which we are a part. The PRESIDENT. It is moved and seconded that the report be printed and re- ferred to the General Legislative Depart- ment. The question being put upon the motion, it was declared to have been carried. Mr. BECKN ER. My amendment was not reported. / i The PRESIDENT. By the rule the amendment will be printed along with the report. Mr. Beckner’s resolution read, as follows: Strike out of the first section the words “upon conviction” and “after conviction.” Mr. BURNAM. ’ In the report which was made by the Committee on Rules on the 11th of September, 1890, I find the following: 4. A Committee on‘ the Executive Ofli~ cers for the State at Large, whose duty it' shall be to report such change or amend- ments as may be necessary in that part of the Constitution relative to executive and ministerial officers for the State at large. This Committee shall consist of seven members. The members of the several Committees created to consider matters pertaining to the Executive Department of our Government, shall constitute a Committee to be known as the General Committee on the Executive Department; and all questions referred to the said Gen- eral Committees shall, after consideration by them, be submitted to said General Committee for its action before being re- ported to this Convention. 4 CRIMES AN D PUN ISHMEN TS. Th ursday,] BRONSTON———BURNAM—DEHAVEN. [October 9 . That Committee was originally reported to consist of seven members. It is impos- sible for me to conceive how it is that a report coming from the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure, which undertakes to fix the powers and duties of the Governor of the Com- monwealth-— Mr. BRONSTON. a question? Mr. BUR-NAM. Certainly. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to say, for information of the gentleman, that that matter was especially referred to the Com- mittee after the report from the Committee Will you yield for on the Executive Department, and special- ly referred on motion of the Delegate from Lincoln. _ Mr. DEHAVEN. It is still before the Committee on Executive and Ministerial ‘Ofiicers for the State at Large, and they have considered and prepared such pro- visions that we think should be inserted in the Constitution. I concur with the gen- tleman from Madison ; I do not well see how the Ministerial and Executive Oflicers for the State at Large can be gotten before the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. All I desire, how- ever, is to get it before the Convention. I report a resolution that has been referred to us on that subject, and ask that we be discharged from its further consideration, but the Convention in their wisdom re- fused to discharge the Committee; and my Committee regarded that almost as tanta- mount that we should prepare an amend- ment to that provision, embracing in‘ sub- stance what the resolution indicated; and we have that under consideration, and have it ready to report as soon as it is submitted to the General Committee on that subject. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make the point of order that the report of that Committee ie not in order. Subsection 8, rule 11, says : The members of the several Committees created to consider matters pertaining to the Legislative Department of our Govern- ment, the Committee on the Legislative Department, the Committee on Revenue and Taxation, the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure, shall constitute a Committee, to be known as the General Committee on the Legislative De- partment; and all questions referred to the said several Committees shall, after consid- eration by them, be submitted to said Gen- eral Committee for its action, before being reported to this Convention. I make the point of order that that re- port of the Committee is out of order, and not in order until it shall have been con- sidered by the General Committee, and it is not new subject to amendment. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will hold that what the gentleman says, in a certain sense, is correct; but that is a rule which the Chair can not enforce. It is di- rectory. The Chair does not’ think it is his province to enforce that rule on the Com- mittees, because he is unable to do it; and as the matter is before the Convention, the Chair will. overrule the point of order. Mr. BRONSTON. The Committee were not disposed to arrogate to the Committee a right which did not properly belong to it. I am sure we can not be mistaken as ‘to this state of facts—that the Delegate from Oldham reported a resolution relative to pardoning .power, and asked to be dis- charged from further consideration of the question. The Convention declined to dis; charge the Committee. Then a resolution was introduced’ to instruct the Committee to prepare a provision on that subject, giv- ing the views of the Committee on the sub- ject of pardoning power; and when that was being discussed by the Convention, the Delegate from Lincoln moved that the whole matter be referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure. It was so ordered, and by the Sec- retary placed in the hands of that Com- mittee. I am sure I can not be mistaken. as to that statement of fact. As it had been so referred to ‘the Committee by the order of the House, the Committee felt it was their duty to report, and in discharge of that duty'ahave reported, not for the ac- CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS. '5 Thursday,] BURNAM— BRONSTON—HENDRICK. [October 9 . tion of the House, but reported it for the purpose of having the matter printed and considered by the General Committee, of which we are but one part. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the motion made by the Delegate from Lexington, that this re- port be printed and considered by the Gen- eral Committee. Mr. BURNAM. I wish to say, even if the facts be as stated by the Delegate from Lexington, it occurs to me that so much of the report as has been made here as under- takes to interfere with, or regulate the pow- ers of the Governor of the Commonwealth, ought still to go to the Joint Committee on the Executive Department of the Govern- ment, and if it be now in order, I desire to have a division made as to whether certain portions of it should not take that direc- tion. I am not entirely opposed as to the rules. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate will have to indicate in his motion what part he desires to refer. Mr. BURN AM. If I can get the Clerk to read the first clauses of the report, I will indicate. I. think they are the first three or four subsections. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the resolution again. The Reading Clerk read the first sec- tion. Mr. BURNAM. That portion should go to the Joint Committee on Executive Department. Mr. BRONSTON. If I can get unani- mous consent, I would like to make a single statement. DELEGATE. Leave! Leave! Mr. BRONSTON. The question as to whether that was properly before the Com- mittee on Crimes, Punishments and Crim- inal Procedure, which may have been made by the Delegate earlier, is now too late. If the facts stated are conflicting, I will ask the Secretary to read from the record that this Convention itself, by express order, re- ferred that matter to the Committee, and in obedience to the order the Committee has reported. If it was properly before the Committee, it would be an act of great injustice to take it away from the Commit- tee, and submit it to the General Committee, of which this Committee is no part. It is due to the Committee, if it has performed its duty as assigned to it by this body, that it should be a part of the Committee which will revise the ‘work under the rules of the House; and for that reason I trust this Convention will not refer it to the Com- mittee on Executive‘ Affairs, because the Convention relieved them of its considera- tion by its former action. Mr. HENDRICK. I think it unfortu- nate that there should be any contest be- tween the Committees as to reference, and I think there are some things in that report that ought properly to be considered by the Executive Committee; but this House, un- der an amendment offered by the Delegate from Fayette, declared that the General Legislative Department, presided over-by'a special Chairman, should consist of the following Committees: The Legislative De- partment of our Government—Committee on Revenue and Taxation, the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and, Criminal Pro- cedrne, shall constitute that Committee. That is the legislative group, as made by order of the body. The General Executive Committee embraces an entirely diiferent group; and if there is any difference be- tween those two Committees, ordinary legislative co'urtesies would designate such a conference with those Commit- tees. I have no motive in defending the position of the Delegate from Lexing- ton, except that the business of the Con- vention may be conducted in order; and if the General Executive Committee have any purpose to conserve with reference to any matter reported by the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro— cedure, it can certainly be arranged by con- ference between those two General 6 CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS. Thursday,] BncKnAM—BLAcKBUnN—BURNAM. [October 9. Committees; but under the order made by this Convention, making the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure a part of the Legislative Depart- ment,it certainly would be discourtesy to the Commlttee now reporting that this matter should be referred to any but its own gen- eral group, that it should be taken away and referred to another Committee. So far as the matter reported by the Executive Department is concerned, that can be ar— ranged, and any suggestion which has been made or formulated by the Executive Com- mittee can be arranged by conference be- tween the two, and ,no clash had. I trust the House will conform to the rule, and will refer this matter to the Committee on the General Legislative Department; and certainly, I mean no disrespect to the Gen- eral Executive Committee. Mr. BECKHAM. When I heard the an- nouncement of this Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure, and learned that I was a member of it, I must say I thought, looking at all the Commit- tees of this body, that it was a sort of a fiftll wheel of a wagon. I find there are a num- ber of matters referred to this ‘ Committee, and I think as this particular matter was referred to the Committee in a special way, by order of the Convention, at the sugges- tion, too, of the Chairman of the Executive Committee on State Afl’airs, it would not be proper to take it out of the hands of this Committee. I have no pride ill the matter, because, as I say, when the Committee was first appointed I looked upon it as a sort of a fifth wheel of a wagon; but it is here and has made this report on the order of the Convention, and I feel that the Convention ought to consider the report at the proper time as a report of its Committee. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is un- der the impression that the rule requires that reports from Committees constituting these General Committees should be sub- mitted to the Joint Committee before they are reported to the Convention. That point of order was made by the Delegate from Lincoln. The Chair overruled the point of order because the matter was be- fore the Convention, and was a matter which the Convention should decide. Mr. BLACKBURN. If my recollec- tion is correct, it was upon the report of the Committee on Executive Officers for the State at Large. They reported the first provision and the Committee asked to be discharged from the further consideration of that matter. My recollection is, it was on the motion of the Delegate from Lex- ington that the request of the Committee was refused, and that special matter recom- mitted to the Committee on Executive Affairs for the State at Large. I think this was given as a reason at that time. That Committee, in obedience to the order of the House, took that matter under ad- visement again. It has been considered by that Committee on two or three separate occasions. As the Chairman said, that Committee is ready to report as soon as the Engrossing Clerk can reduce it to form. I think the Convention will be but consistent ' to itself to recommit that portion of the report to the Committee on the Executive Department. , Mr. BURN AM. Nothing could have been further from my mind than to indi- cate the slightest discourtesy to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure; but I think, and still think, in view of what has fallen from the Delegate from Woodford, that this matter will be made the subject of report from his Committee in a short time. There is an eminent propriety ill dividing that and re- ferring it to the Joint Committee on Exec- utive Affairs, so much as read by the Clerk.‘ Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to have the Secretary report the resolution with the reference. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the Secretary will report the reso- lution with the reference. RESOLUTIONS. Thursday,] vdered. .Standing Con'n'nittccs, motions and resolu- BoLEs—Hoee—McCHoRD. [October 9 . Resolution ‘.270 was read with the refer- ence to the Committee on 'Crin'ies, Punish- ments and Criminal Procedure. The question on the motion of the Dele- gate from Madison, amending the motion of the Delegate from Lexington, to refer the first portion to the Committee on Ex- ecutive Affairs, being put to a vote, was declared to have been lost. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion of the Delegate from Lexing- ton. . Mr. CARROLL. I oifer an amendment ~to the report. The amendment was read by the Reading ‘Clerk, as follows : Amend section 1 by striking out all that ‘portion of it ei'nbracing the words “but the Governor shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sheriff or Common- l wealth’s Attorney in penal or criminal cases." The PRESIDENT. The amendment will be printed with the report. Mr. MOORE. I am directed by the Committee on Circuit Courts to return resolution 329, in regard to minority repre- -8811t2ttl011,2111d request that it be given to the Committee on the Judicial Department .and Court of Appeals. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the change of reference as indica- ted by the Delegate from Boyd ‘? The Chair hears none, and such change is or- If there are no further reports from tions are in order. Mr. BOLES. I have a resolution which I ask to have referred to the Committee on Woman’s Rights. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on VVoman’s Rights prepare for insertion in the Constitution we are now making a pro- vision, to he a part of said Constitution, that .‘all property owned by a woman on her in- termarriage, whether real, personal or mixed, and all property she may thereafter acquire, whether by descent, distribution, purchase, gift, or otherwise, shall be her 1, I‘ i l i l l l l l i l separate property; and that all property acquired by the joint efforts or labors of husband and wife shall be their joint prop- erty; and to such joint property, there shall be no right of survivorship, and that the rights of curtesy and dower shall be the same. Referred to the Committee on VVoman’s Rights. , Mr. HOGG. I have a resolution to offer. Resolution read, as follows : Resolved, That section 16 of article 8 of the present Constitution be amended to read as follows: All elections by the people shall be held between the hours of 6 o’clock in the morning and 6 o’clock in the evening, on the first Wednesday in September, except elections otherwise pro- vided for by this Constitution. Referred to Committee on Elections. Mr. IWIcCHORD. I have a resolution which I wish to refer to the Committee on Court of Appeals, without being read. The PRESIDENT. Vvithout objection, such reference is made. The Secretary will read the resolution by its title, which was done. Resolution was as follows: Resolred, 1. That itis the sense of this Con- vention that an Appellate Court be created, the style of which shall be the Supreme Court of Kentucky, which shall have ap- pellate jurisdiction only, and which shall be co-cxtensive with the State of Kentucky. 2. The Supreme Court shall consist of a Chief Justice, to be elected from the State at large, and six Associate Justices, to be elected from each Supreme Court district, as hereinafter provided. The Supreme Court may sit in depart- ments and in bank. and shall always be open for the transaction of business. The Jhief Justice shall assign three of the As- sociate Justices to each department, and such assignment may be changed by him from time to time, as he may deem proper. 4. The Associate Justices shall be compe- tent to sit in either department and may interchange with each other by agreement among themselves, or as ordered by the Chief Justice. Each of the departments shall have power to hear and determine causes, and all questions arising thereon, subject to the provisions hereinafter pro- vided, in relation to the court in bank. 8 RESOLUTIONS. Thursday,] McCHoRn—MUIR. [October 9 .. 5. The presence of three Justices shallbe necessary to transact any business in either department, and the concurrence of three Justices shall be necessary to pronounce a judgment. 6. The Chief Justice shall apportion the business between the departments; and may, in his discretion, order any cause pending before the Court to be heard and tried by the full Court. The order may be made before or after judgment, pronounced by a department; but where a cause has been allotted to one department and a judg- ment pronounced therein, the order must be made within thirty days after such judg- ment, and concurred in by two Associate Justices; and if so made, it shall have the effect to vacate and set aside the judgment, when such cause shall be heard and dis- posed of by the whole Court. 7. On the trial of a cause by a depart- ment, if any of the Justices of the depart- ment which tried the same shall so direct within thirty days after the trial, the judg- ment shall be vacated and the cause tried by the whole Court. 8. In the determination of causes, all de- cisions of the Court, in bank 0 rdepart- ments, shall be in writing, and the grounds of the decision shall be stated. 9. The Chief Justice may sit in either de- partment, and shall preside when so sitting, but the Justices assigned to each depart ment shall select one of their number as Presiding Justice. 10. In case of the absence of the Chief Justice from any cause, the Associate Jus- tices shall select one of their number to perform the duties and exercise the powers of the Chief Justice during his absence or inability to act. 11. The term of the oflices of the Chief and Associate Justices shall be twelve years from the first Monday of the month suc- ceeding their election. 12. That the first General Assembly next after the adoption of this Constitution shall divide the State of Kentucky into six dis- tricts, as nearly equal in population as may, without dividi n g any county, and designate from which, and the time when, the election of a Judge shall take place, to fill the va- cancies as is hereinafterprovided, and there- after the election of a Justice shall be held in such district every twelve years, unless to fill a vacancy. 13. The Judges of the Court of Appeals and the Superior Court shall constitute the first Justices of the Supreme Court under this Constitution. 14. The first General Assembly of Ken- tucky, after the-adoption of this Constitu- tion, shall, by an act, so classify said Judges that two of them shall go out of oflice some- time during the year succeeding the passage of such act ; and two the third year; and two the fifth year, and one the seventh year after the passage of such act. 15.111 making such classification, the- General Assembly shall do so with refer- ence to the time the said Judges have to‘ serve, under their respective elections to the- ofiices they now hold, so that the Judges- having the longest time to serve will, as near possible, have the longest time to‘ serve as Justice of the Supreme Court- That the Judge having the longest term to serve under such classification shall be the Chief Justice during his term of oflice; at. the expiration of his term, his successor shall be elected by the State at large. 16. If a vacancy occur in the ofiice of a. Justice, the Governor of Kentucky shall appoint a person to hold the office until the- election and qualification of a Justice to fill the vacancy, which election shall take place at the next succeeding general election, which does not occur within sixty days after such vacancy occurs, and the Justice so elected shall hold the office for the re- mainder of the unexpired term. 17. No person shall be eligible to the: office of Justice of the Supreme Court who is over sixty years of age or under thirty-- five years of age at the time of his elec- tion, and who has not been a practicing lawyer eight years, or whose services upon the bench of any Court of record, when added to the time he may have practiced law, shall not be equal to eight years, and who has not been a citizen and a resident of the State or district in which he has been elected five years next preceding suchclec- tion. , Mr. MUIR. I offer a resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows : Resolved, That all property used for the worship of Almighty God, for schools, academies, colleges, or other institutions of education, and for charitable purposes, except such property as may produce rent, shall be exempted from taxation—~state, county, district and municipalities. Referred to Committee on Revenue andv Taxation. The PRESIDENT. If there is nothing- before the Convention the Chair will call BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 9 Thursday,] DEHAVEN. [October 9 . the special order for 11 o’clock, and the matter is in the Committee of the Whole, and the Chair will call the Delegate from the Fourth District of Louisville to the Chair. Mr. YOUNG here took the Chair. The CHAIRMAN. The matter we were discussing yesterday was the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights.- Mr. DEHAVEN. Mr. Chairman, I de— sire to offer a few suggestions on the sub- ject we now have under consideration. When I took my seat on this floor as an humble member of this body, I had no idea how rapidly one could lose, from disuse, if he ever had it, the facility of expressing with any thing like force or fluency his ideas on any subject, however familiar he might be with that subject. But my manner of life and ofiicial duties for many years past have required me to do much more listening than talking; and the consequence has been that I have grown to be a much better listener than I am a talker. But I have some con- victions upon the question we are new con- sidering, and although I may not be able to present them to this Convention with that degree of force, or fluency, or per- spicuity, or logical precision that I would desire, I think I can make myself under- stood by the Committee; and if I do so, I will have reached the height of my expec- tation. Mr. YOUNG. Will the Delegate per- mit me? The pages must not deliver mat- ter while the Delegate is speaking. Mr. DEHAVEN. I have the most pro— found respect for the talent, learning and wisdom of the gentlemen who compose the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. I have no doubt, sir, that they have given the most careful examination to the impor- tant subjects confided to their care. I have no doubt that the report they have made to this Convention embraces what they hon- estly believe ought to constitute the Pre- amble and Bill of Rights to the instrument we are about to frame; and it is a matter of sincere regret to me that I am unable to- concur in all that they have reported to- this Convention; nor can I fully concur in . all that was so forcibly and elegantly pre- sented by the distinguished Delegate from To the Preamble, as reported by the Committee, I have no serious objection. It occurred to me, upon my first reading of that Preamble, how— ever, that it would have been more accurate perhaps to say that “we, the Representaw tives of the people of ‘the Commonwealth of Kentucky in Convention assembled, thankful to Almighty God,” and so forth. But when I remember that the language- used by the Committee is the same lan- guage that is used in the Constitution of the- United States, and when I remember that we are to submit our work here to the peo-- ple for their ratification or rejection, if we: are fortunate enough to have our work ratified by the people at the polls, it may, in that sense, be the act of the people, and the language of the Committee correct- I attach but little importance, however, to, this mere-verbal correction. To the second amendment of the Preamble offered by the the county of Harion. Committee I have no objection whatever, ' and that is that portion of the Preamble in which they undertake to express our grati- tude to Almighty God for the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty. I sup- pose that that amendment will not be chal- lenged by any Delegate upon this floor. I suppose that all, or quite all, will cheerfully vote for that, for all must certainly feel the deep gratitude that we all owe to a. beneficent Providenee for the multiplied; blessings he has bestowed upon us, our‘ fathers, and our common country. .I am one of those who believe that from the time the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth and our cavalier ancestors in Virginia and the: Carolinas to this, the destiny of this great. country has been shaped and moulded by the hand of Omnipotence, for His own wise, but sometimes inscrutable, purposes, and for the amelioration and elevation of 10 ‘ BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] DEHAVEN. [October 9 . the human race; and when we come to form a Constitution for a Christian people like ours, I think, sir, it is eminently proper that we incorporate ill. the preamble to ‘that instrument an acknowledgment of our obligation, and an expression of our gratitude to that Divine Being from whom has flown all these blessings. I shall therefore, with the greatest pleasure, vote for the Preamble as reported by the Com- mittee. But when we come to consider ‘the Bill of Rights, I regret to say that I can not concur so fully either with the re- port of the Committee or with the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Marion. I shall not weary the patience of this Con- vention by attempting to enter into a dis- cussion of all the various sections of that report; I shall not attempt to enter into a labored argument or a close analysis of all these various provisions; time nor my strength would serve me, and it would be .an imposition upon the patience of this body. But, sir, we must have some general rule by which we propose to deal with all these proposed amendments to the Con- stitution. I know how diflficult it is, if not impossible, to lay down any general rule, one that is of universal application, in determining these questions. I have formulated, however, for my own guid- ance, to adopt something like this : wher- ever the provisions of the present Consti- tution have worked with any degree of satisfaction to our people; wherever expe- rience has not demonstrated that some change is demanded; wherever it is shown to my satisfaction that we have not out- grown the provisions of the present Con- stitution, for one, I want them to stand un- changed, _That some amendments, how- ever, will i have to be made to the Constitution of the State, is apparent. The effects of the war have destroyed one of our domestic institutions. The effect of ‘that has been to bring the provisions of our .State Constitution into direct conflict with the Constitution of the United States. We all know that the Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, any thing ill the State Constitutions or laws to the contrary notwithstanding; and, there- fore, it is apparent that the first duty of this Convention will be to bring the pro- visions of our State Constitution in accord with the Constitution of the United States; and, ill my humble judgment, that is the easiest task that will devolve upon this Convention. All that we need say or do is, to leave out of the instrument we are to ‘frame every thing that is said about slavery. I infinitely prefer that to incorporating in the Bill of Rights, or anywhere else in the Constitution, the provision that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist ill this State, except for crime of which the person shall have been du y con- victed. Why do it‘? What necessity is there for it? That institution, sir, that en- gaged so much of the attention of the great men of ’49 who sat in this House, and who attempted to pile constitutional ram- ‘ parts mountain high around it, ill less than twelve or fifteen years was swept from the face of the earth by contend- in g armies. The Constitution of the United States has been so amend- ed that it can never be re-estab lished in any portion of this great country. Then, why, in the name of ordinary com- mon sense is it necessary to insert ill the Constitution that we are trying to frame a prohibition against the re-establishment of that institution‘? I believe now, and always have believed, that slavery was the creature of positive law, and I believe now that it never can and never will be re-established ill this country. There was a reason assigned by my learned and respected friend, the Chairman of the Committee, that unless we did insert some such provision as that, when this instrument comes to be submitted to the people of the State for their ratifica- tion twenty-five thousand votes would be cast against it. While I want to do every thing I possibly can to please the people I BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 Th ursday,] DEHAVEN. [October 9 _ represent and the people of the State, for one, I cannot go to the length of inserting into the Constitution which we are to frame a totally useless provision for the purpose of catching votes. I say, then, that the proper and the easiest way for us to dispose of that question is to leave it en- tirely out of theinstrument that we are here attempting to frame. That institution has been dead for twenty-five years. Is it nec- essary for this Convention to throw another shovelful of earth upon its mouldering remains‘? I think not. I can only ' express the hope, however, that our present statesmen, and the statesmen to come after us may be enabled so to deal with the great questions growing out of the abolition of slavery then, that the spirit and genius or our government, and the lib- erties of its citizens, may be maintained, and that equal and exact justice shall be done to all. I am, therefore, opposed to in— corporating any provision upon that sub- ject, either in our Bill of Rights or any- where else. But I have said we ought to retain, as far as practicable, not only the arrangement of the present Bill of Rights, but also its very language, and I think that the reason for that is obvious to the mind of the most unthinking. These various provisions that were subjected to such a critical examination by the distinguished gentleman from the county of Marion on yesterday, have all been made the subjects g of judicial investigation by the highest courts of our country. They haue been settled, and whether they have been settled right or wrong, it does not become me to stop to inquire. But they have been settled, and are now the law of the land, and ought not now to be disturbed. We know the imperfection of all human pro- ductions. We all know the imperfections and infirmities of our language, and we know far better our own inability to sit down and draft a length attempting to define any great general proposition or truth that human in- sentenee of any 5 l | l genuity, prompted by ambition, avarice, or interest, can be made to mean a very different thing from that which was in- tended by the writer. I doubt very much whether my distinguished friend from the county of Marion--with all his precision and elegance of expression—can redraft asingle section of the Bill of Rights with such ab- solute accuracy as hereafter to escape all judicial strife. If I had time to do it, and the patience of the Convention would tole- rate it, there are two or three sections pro- posed by him, upon the construction of which this trouble would arise. I will risk my reputation as a prophet, if they were submitted to the Court‘ of Appeals to-day, he would have at least two or three con— structions upon each section. This demon- strates, to my mind at least, the absolute necessity for this Convention holding on not only to the old principles in the Bill of Rights, but to also the very language in which they are expressed—even though that lan— guage may be ungrammatical; even though these sentences are not rounded off as beau- tifully as some of us perhaps could do it. Although there may be some inaccuracies in these various sections that a hypercriti- cal scholar could point out, yet, as they are there, and as they are understood by our people, and understood by the courts, and understood by the profession everywhere, and have answered the purpose, for which they were designed, I think it would be unwise, to say the least, in us to attempt to change their phraseology. But these princi- ples that we are now discussing are not the in- vention of to-day. They are no new dis- covery that we have just now brought to light and are going to promulgate to the admiration of the world. They are the . outgrowth of ages. They have been wrung from the hand of power by the heroes of the past; they have formed, and are to- day forming, the outposts that guard the lives, liberty, and property of this great people. They are the crystallization of the [ wisdom of ages; they come down to us crim- 12 BILL or‘ RIGHTS. Thursday,] DEHAVEN. [October 9 .. soned with the best blood that ever flowed through mortal veins. Aye, they are polit- ical jewels, if you will, that not only adorn but protect every free sovereign American citizen. I will go one step farther than that. They have been framed in apt words by the wisest and best men our country has ever produced, and, for one, I want them to remain unchanged in their present garb and their present framing. I listened very with great pleasure to the very able and learned argument that was made by the Chairman of the Committee whose report we are now considering. There was much, yea, a great majority, of what he said that could have been, in my humble judgment, just as fitly said about our Bill of ‘Rights as it now stands in the Constitution. I listened with peculiar interest to that able and well de- livered speech. I admired greatly the gen‘ tleman’s reverence for old things. I admired the tenacity with which he clung to the old expression “of life and limb,” and I could not but regret that the same reverence that he had for those other old words would not have in- duced him and his committee to refrain from altering the words of the Bill of Rights as they now appear in our Constitution. That is the sort of reverence I feel for them. Who ever heard that our people were complaining of the Bill of Rights? In all the arguments that were ever adduced for calling a Convention, who ever heard that our Bill of Rights was imperfect? I venture the assertion that there is not a Delegate upon this floor, whose seat in this House was contested be— fore the people, who ever dreamed, in argu- ing these various proposed amendments be- fore his constituents, that he would go the length to say that he would come here and improve our present Bill of Rights; that they were operating disastrously or im- properly upon the lives, liberty or property of the citizens. I think that we ought to be exceedingly careful 110W we make innovations upon that instrument. I am opposed to blazing out any new paths. I am opposed to inaugurating any Constitu-- tional experiment. I want to follow in the- beaten pathway that our father’s trod- If there are any impediments in the way of the pursuit of life, liberty and happi' - ness, in the present Constitution, let us re- move them. If that old pathway has gotten a little too narrow in some places, let us enlarge it, but do not let us undertake to tear down this- whole Constitutional fabric and present to the people an entirely new instrument. It maybe, sir, the duties of ofiicial life that have devolved upon‘ me for many years, have been such to require of me such close study and such intimate acquaintance- with these provisions'of the Bill of Rights, and other provisions of the Constitution as they now stand, that I over-estimate their value. It sometimes occurs to me that my judgment, perhaps, has become warped by my partiality and reverence for its lam guage and my‘ anxiety for its preservation. It may be that that reverence I feel is not due to that instrument; but when I begin to hear gentlemen talk about amending the Bill of Rights, when I see grave prop— ositions introduced into this Convention to improve it, when I hear complaint made that its sentences are not as grammatical as they ought to be, that the rhetoric is not as good as it might be made, that the various pro- vision and sections are not as systematically and as orderly arranged as they could be, it looks to me like a man having a family picture, drawn by a master’s hand, an exact likeness of the original, a picture that had hung in his own home and the in home of his ancestors for a hundred years, the admi-~ ration of all whose eyes had rested upon it, the veneration of every member of his family, should, in some wild freak of frenzy or fancy, take it intolhis mind to employ some modern portrait painter to retouch that masterly production with brighter colors, to smooth‘ down its- rugged but expressive features. to tear away the ancient tunic with which it was so ap- BILL OF RIGHTS. . 13 i j udgment. ‘charitable consideration of the .211‘8 $01118 - ment. Thursday,] DEHAYEN—ALLEN. [October 9 . propriately rohcd, and clothe it in all the gaudiness of modern fashion. Why, sir, the act of such a man as that would not, in my humble judgment, be more unwise than it would be for this Convention now to at- tempt to remodel the Bill of Rights as it stands in our Constitution. To retouch it with brighter colors; to correct its gram- mar; to make more florid, if you will. it rhetoric; to make more systematic and logical, if you will, its arrangement. (Ap- plause.) No, sir; I am opposed to all such ornaments as that. This Bill of Rights has hung in our offices and in our homes, and the homes of our fathers for one hun- dred years; and, for one, I want them to > hang there still, with their old, familiar ex- pression, and with the very words in which .they were first clothed unchanged. It may he a boyish and childish reverence, but these are the honest conclusions of my heart, and the candid convictions of my But I thank the Convention sincerely for the attention they have paid me. I submit these few broken and inco- herent remarks, so feebly expressed, to the Conven- hope that there men at least in this Con- vention that have some sort of reverence tion,, add sincerely :and regard for the great work we have in- herited from our fathers, and if we destroy every thing else. let us leave these politi- cal jewels, that have been handed down to us for ages, unobscured, and these founda— tion stones of our political fabric unde- faced. ‘ Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Mr. Chairman, I feel this morning an unusual embarrass- Although I am yet a young man, permit me to say that, in an humble way and to a very limited extent, I have been a public speaker for a quarter of a century; but never before in my life did I feel the timidity which now oppresses me. Stand- ing in the presence of the Chiefs of the ‘old Commonwealth of Kentucky, who have come here at the bidding of the tribes to lay an offering upon the altar of State, and there standing together, with locked shields pledge afresh our lives, our fortunes and and elbows touching, to again our sacred honor to the maintenence of good order within the borders of this old Commonwealth. intensified by the fact that I must travel, in support of this Bill of Rights, a well trod- den road; that I must glean from a field from which the choicest flowers have already been plucked. But, thank God, with the embarrassment which I feel as I stand here to-day, there is a consolation down in the very bottom of my heart, that along that road have traveled the best and bravest men the world has ever seen; and I gather inspiration from the very epitaphs that I read upon the tombstones of those who have given the best energies of life, the best thoughts of their minds, yea, the very richest blood of their veins, to establish the great ideas, the great truths, and the great principles that are inr- bedded in this Bill of Rights. I shall not undertake to follow my distinguished friend from the county of Warren. He has told us in language that was touching, so touching that it brought tears to the eyes of nearly every man in this Convention, how the old barons fought, and bled, and died, that we, living two hundred and odd years afterwards, might enjoy that individual liberty, that civil liberty, that religious lib- rty that now blesses the American people wherever they are, in State or Territory, The first thing to which I wish to direct the attention of this Convention, is to the Preamble that the Committee reports. Some objection has been made to the fact that we have stricken therefrom the words, “ the representatives.” Why was it done ? Who makes this Constitution? Who im- places their sign manual upon it and makes it the law of the land? Is it you‘? Nay! For if you obey the law which brought you here you must send it back to the people, to the sovereigns of the old Committee on That embarrassment is 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] A LLEN. [October 9 . and they read it, they study it, they digest it, and, on a day certain. theylay their sign manual upon it and say: “ This shall be the law of Kentucky.” Therefore, the Committee thought it best to say, “We, the people of Kentucky,” ordain this Constitu- tion. That is the reason why the word “representatives” was stricken out of the Preamble. Ihave one suggestion further, however, one criticism to make even upon my own work, and I shall do it fairly and willingly. I stand here to-day recognizing the fact that 1. st lrhe highest mark of aIstatesman, if you please, to correct his own work if he finds error therein. I would not "for my right hand give a vote to establish one sec-. tion of this Bill of Rights, or of the Consti- tution, even though I had written it my- self after months of study, if the humblest Delegate upon this floor called my attention to one error, or to a word that contained a suspicion of an error. Iintend, while here, trsgive honest votes. I will not contend for the adoption of an idea, or of a proposition, unless in my heart I am satisfied that it is right—right as between man and man, right as between man and his government, and right as between man and his God. That criticism to which I refer is ill the word “continuation.” The word “continuance,” Isubmit, is a more elegant word for this place, so that the Bill of Rights will read, t‘We, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which we enjoy, ill order to secure to our- selves and to succeeding generations the continuance of these blessings, do ordain and establtsh this Constitution ;” and at the proper time I will submit an amend- ment, striking out the word “continua- ation,” and inserting the word “con- tinuance,” let it be. rhetoric or not. I shall submit it to the intelligence of this Convention. The next thing to which I will invite your attention is con- tained ill the two lines that precede section first—“that the great and essential prin- ciples of liberty and free government may be recognized and established.” Recog- nized here; recognized in this hall‘; recog- nized ill this Commonwealth; established here; established in this Commonwealth‘? What '? The great essential principles of liberty and free government. This brings me to the consideration of the criticism made by the distinguished Delegate from the county of Marion. The words “free government,” he said, were incompatible, if I understood him; that there is no such thing as free government. I submit that we have a free government. What is the word government ? What does it mean? I take issue with the Chieftain from Ma- rion, bold and presumptive as it may be. I take issue with him here on this word and the very purpose of government. I have been reading for thirty years that the pur- pose of government was not to restrain. The object of government is to protect, and the less government you have, the best gov-v ernment you have. Is thatright‘? The object of government is to protect, not to restrain. There is some incidental restraint, but that restriction is not the prime object of gov-- ernment. l. subl'nit it to you and to your intelligence if I am not correct. And “free government”-—what does it mean? Free from tyranny, free from op- presslon, free from despotism, free to all who are given by the law of the land the- right to participate ill the direction of govermental affairs. “Free government?” Why, it is /a household word ill every American heart, and it pained me when I heard it said upon this floor yesterday that “free government” was a myth; a lie; all men are by nature “ free and equal ;” an- other falsehood, another untruth, it was said. Why, if we desire to be hypercritical, I take it that there is no such a thing as- freedom at all. We are dependent in ev— ery relation of life. We are dependent upon God first and foremost for the air we’ breathe, for the sun that gives us light; does BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Thursday,] ALLEN. [October 9 , not that exclude freedom ? We are depen- dent at the very hour of birth. Depen- dent upon others when in our infancy and weakness we cannot protect ourselves. There is dependence everywhere ; but that is not the freedom we speak of here, in a political sense or governmental sense. Not at all.‘ We are not born free and equal in intelligence either. I adinit it. It does not mean that here. “Free and equal” under the government under which we live, as far as human beings can be free and equal. It is in that governmental sense, that political sense, that the words “free and equal” are used. Are you not, Mr. Chairman, “free and equal” with the rest of us here? Are you not ‘- free and equal” ‘with all the people of Kentucky? Follow this Bill of Rights, follow the Constitution from Alpha to Omega, and you will real- ize, I trust and I think, the meaning of the words “free and equal.” “And have certain inherent and inalien- able rights;” my friend from the county of Warren the other day referred to the letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote from his post of duty in France in 1787 to Patrick Henry. insisting that a Bill of Rights should be placed in the Federal Constitu- tion before its acceptance and adoption by. the State of Virginia. Why did he do it? That great man had the true conception of government, as I think, in his mind. The individual is the unit of our-system of State government. Weaken that unit, and in like manner, and to the same ex- tent, you weaken your State government. Strengthen, fortify, protect that individual, the unit, and to the same extent, and in like manner, you strengthen and fortify your State government. The State government is the unit of the Federal system; weaken that unit, and you weaken your Federal system in like man- ner and to a similar extent. imagine that these thoughts were in the mind of old Thomas J eiferson when he insisted that the individual should be brought to the front. Is that right?‘ With his prophetic mind he saw a time would come when government would be would be magnified, the individual minimized; that the government would be “all in all,” and the would sink to insignificance. Have we not reached that point now? I tell you, my friends, the idea is growing in this country that the Government is a “bigger thing ” than we ever thought it was; that the indi- vidual is of small consideration. I object. I cling to the old idea that the individual is the unit of the Government. Magnify him; bring him to the front, clothe him with “inalienable and inherent rights,” and do it in a manner that will attract the at- tention of all. That is the reason why this Committee has brought to the front individual the individual; and in the very outset of our Government we say, that the individual has certain inalienable and inherent rights that nobody, that no government, can take- from him. You have the very same thing in the old Bill of Rights, word for word. But they are scattered all through that splendid document. We thought it ad-- visable, in the present juncture of affairs, to bring that individual to the front and magnify him; yea, if you please, glorify him. And at the very start of the great Declaration of Rights We say, that the in- dividual has seven inherent, inalienable- rights, and that no State government, that no county government, that no city gov-- ernment, that no district government, can ever take from him. What objection have- you, my friends .and brothers, to stating that great fact in the very beginning of the- Bill of Rights? If we have left out one- single inalienable and inherent rightv that belongs to the individual,’ and of which he can not be deprived, tell me what it is, and I will vote to add an eighth paragraph to this section. What are the inalienable and inherent rights that. belong to the individual‘? The first and nearest one is what ‘? The right of enjoying and defending his life. Whether he be; 16 BILL OF RIGHTS.’ Thursday/3] ALLEN. [October 9 , saint or sinner, Protestant or Catholic, or what not, the first inalienable right he has, and ought to be protected in, is that of and defending his iife. The importance is the right Almighty God accord- of his conscience. enjoying next in -of worshiping ing to the dictates ' 'The third, the right of seeking and pursu- ing his safety and happiness. The fourth, the right of communicating his thought and his opinions. Fifth, the right to acquire and protect property. Sixth, the right to .meetand consult with his fellows as to‘ "what will promote the common welfare. Seventh—and while enjoying all these rights, these six that I have just mentioned, he has the right to bear arms in defense of himself, his family and his State, and no man can take it away. There are seven inalienable and inherent rights of the indi- vidual man. Like the Pleiades that shine with unspeakable splendor in the midnight .sky, attracting the attention of every eye ‘that is cast thitherward, so these seven in- -alienable and inherent rights, the Pleiades of individual liberty, shine as a group in the galaxy of civil liberty. What objection can there be of this ar- rangement, when not a thought nor ‘an idea—scarcely one word—is changed? There the picture stands, with the individ- ual in the front clothed with the seven in- _ alienable and inherent rights of man. It strikes me as a good picture—one decided- ly appropriate in these days of degeneracy, when the government is drifting on to . greater power than anybody ever dreamed of, and the individual is almost lost sight -of. I would like to see Kentucky come to the front with the true theory and the true ‘idea of government, that the individual is the unit. He ought to be magnified! He ‘ought to be glorified! He it is who makes ‘the government. The government never made him. Now, I come to that second section—and now, with the permission of the honorable gentleman from the county .of Warren, I will make a single statement which he, in the excitement of the mo- ment, omitted. That statement is this: Every member of the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights realized one fact -—that in that second section of the Com. mittee’s report was a loop-hole or a gap through which evils untold have poured in upon the good people of this Common- 'wealth. We referred to and talked over some of the cases of which the honorable gentleman from the county of Marion so well spoke of on yesterday. Wc realized the fact that charters and franchises and special privileges had been granted under the second section which have grown to be a burden almost unbearable upon the peo- ple of this Commonwealth. We knew that over that section the great fight of this Convention would be made. Yea, further I myself stated in Committee, and on the ‘ stump in my county, that the day had come when the great fight of the century would be inaugurated under that section which has given birth to improper, and, I think, unlawful franchises and special priv- ileges. We tried, honestly and faithfully, each talking with the other, to suggest some remedy for the evils we bear, and we all came to the conclusion that perhaps it would be best to report the old section just as it was, with all the charges resting upon it, and call the attention of the Convention to the imperfections of the section, and let every man take a crack at it. And we did. We did not report that section indorsing all that had been said or done under it. I am very free to confess my inability. I am not ashamed to confess that I am unable to draft a second section in lieu of that that will put an end to the evils that we have. One distinguished gentleman in this Convention has taken his crack at that sec- tion, and now let us see if he has hit the mark. The gentleman from the countv of Marion, in lieu thereof, says “ thatv no privilege, immunity, exoneration or exemp- tion shall ever be granted to any man or set of men which shall not be free and ‘as BILL OF RIGHTQ. '17 Thursday,] ALLEN. [October 9 , fully exercised by all others under similar circumstances and on like conditions.” Does that cure the evil? Now, let me illustrate. We have a river in Western Kentucky known as Tradewater. For many years past it has been suggested that we get up a company down there to slack-water that river, and come to the Legislature and ask for a charter, as did the Barren and Green River Company, and get some special privileges. Suppose we got that charter “ in consideration of public services?” As soon as that charter is granted, with its immunities, with its fran- chises, with its privileges, then and there you grant similar privileges, immunities and exemptions to all others who will do likewise with any other river. Does it not? If it doesnot correct me. It strikes me that way. What limitation is there upon the granting of immunities, exonerations and exemptions under the section offered by the Delegate from Marion? If you grant one you must grant all in the same way, and under the same circumstances, and on like conditions. If that does not multiply the evils we have, then tell me what is multiplication. In all candor, and in no spirit of harsh criticism, I submit it to the gentleman himself if that section cures the evils which we are groaning under. He has taken his crack, and I think he has missed the mark. “All power is inherent in the people.” My friend from the county of Marion says that is not true. I felt for the old heroes of the seventeenth century. My mind re; verted back to the dark scenes of the seventeenth century, when the blood of the brave flowed like water, when the sweat of the poor drenched the fields of old Eng- land when they were contending for that great principle. All power—power to pro- tect, power to tax, power to take life, to de- prive one of his property—is inherent in the people, who have and possess and enjoy that country, and ‘whose government it is. They saii,1 ii? in 1689 in the Bill of Rights; , when Lord Halifax, the Speaker of the House of Lords, sat in that Chair in the presence of William and Mary, and in the presence of the House of Commons, and said .it was true. and it was good. Coming down to 1776, amid the clash of arms and the gladdening shouts of freemen in America, the same proclamation was made —“All power is inherent in the people.” I plead the statute of limitations 011 the dele- gate from Marion. (Applause) It is good doctrine. It is good rhetoric. It is good logic. It is a good thing, and let us cling to it with all the tenacity that marked the martyrdom of Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley, and with all the heroic chivalry that marked the life of John Elliott, one of the most memorable defenders of the rights of the people whose name lives in English history. My friend from the county of Marion likewise said that certain words “ free gov- ernment ” and “free and equal elections,” as we use them, have no meaning. I would like him to tell me what “social compact” means. If he criticises the work of the fathers, and with one swoop of his fair hand brushes all the work away, and intro- duces a new word, “social compact”—not a new one either, for it is old—and then to break the force of it he says: “I don’t know that any one can tell what that phrase means.” Social compact is a fiction—afic- tion in law. place in this country that I -know of; where all the people met together in one great plain and entered into a bargain, and called it a “ social compact.” If the farm- ers and the blacksmiths and the mechan- ics of Marion county can understand that, I think they can understand that proud proclamation of the fathers when they said: “The Courts shall be open, and right and justice [shall be;I administered with- out sale, denial or delay.” Let us read section 4. “No charter or franchise,” says the gentleman from Ma- rion, “ shall ever be granted which the Leg- Nothing like it ever took I 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. Th ursday,] ALLEN. . [October 9 . islature may not at any time alter, amend,‘ or revoke.” That is good. It is in the Bill of Rights reported by the Committee. “Saving,” he says, however, “to the owners thereof, and to their legal representatives, all such property rights as shall accrue or be acquired thereunder.” Does the latter part of the section cut the throat of the first? It strikes me that it does; and yet I am puzzled to know what to say or do about it, because I knowthat in the cele- brated Dartmouth College case it was de-' cided by the Supreme Court of the United States—and, if I am not mistaken, the principle of that decision has been affirmed by the Courts of last resort in-almost every State—to the effect that when a charter of special privileges is given, it isa contract, and it stands forever. So it seems to me that ‘the fourth paragraph of the first sec- section of the substitute really means noth- ing. If I am wrong, I will acknowledge it when it is pointed out to me. Give me a charter and grant of special privileges, and then say, notwithstanding you give it tome, you will hold a string and pull it back when you please, but all the rights which I gained under the original grant shall be mine forever! There‘ are diflicul- ties, and very serious difliculties, in the way of the march of the gentleman from Marion, as well as across the pathway of the Committee. Let us turn to Section 6. “The ‘right of the people to keep and bear arms for their own defense.” I submit‘ as a question of right, of justice, and of rhetoric, whether it is not better to say, as we say here in the seventh paragraph of the first'section, “The right to bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, and of the State ;” or to make it fuller still, “In aid of the civil power, when thereto legally summoned, subject to the power of the General Assembly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying con- cealed arms.” The Bill of Rights of the Com- mittee gives it as an inalienable right to every individual to carry arms openly to defend not only himself, but his family and the State. I say it is right, and let it stand. The wording is better; it covers more ground than the substitute. _ Let us turn to section 1 of paragraph 7. That refers to search warrants, and the sub- stitute says that no man can swear out a search warrant unless he is a competent witness in a Court of Justice. That is what it says, if I understand it correctly. Now, let us suppose a case. A young man com- mits some indiscretion in the days of his youth. He is sent to the Penitentiary, serves his time, comes back to his old home for the purpose of making a man of him- self, of wiping out by right-living and hon— orable conduct the shame and disgrace he has brought upon his family. He goes there and‘ spends thirty or forty or fifty years and rears a family, and by his good conduct he is reinstated in the opinion of his fellows. A burglar enters his house and steals his property, carries it across the road and conceals it in a house. Not having been pardoned, he is not a competent‘ wit- ness in a Court of Justice; he cannot vote; there is his property and he knows, or has good Eareason to know, it is there, and yet under the law of the land, if this substitute is‘ adopted, that man stands helpless, even though the courts stand open to him.‘ I know the gentleman will not deny the citi- zen the remedies afforded by law in such a case. If the present law does not allow him that, I say amend it, and give that man a right to sue out a search warrant when a burglar and a thief has his stolen goods. You see, the gentleman from Ma- rion has taken another crack, and, I think, with all due respect, he has missed the mark. Again, that very section contradicts section 2, paragraph 2. The substitute says that courts shall be' open to all persons. He denied to this reform-ed man the privilege of suing out a search warrant to recover the goods stolen from him, but in the sec- ond section, second paragraph, he says courts shall be open to ALL persons, wherein BILL OF RIGHTS. 19 . Thursday,] - ALLEN. [October 9 . certain and speedy remedy shall be afforded. There is a contradiction, or, at least, I think so. I may be mistaken. Turn to paragraph 8, and the only criti- cism I have upon it is a matter of arrange- ment, and I simply submit it to the intelli- gence, discretion and taste of this Convention that two thoughts and two ideas, or two things that are not cognate, ought not to be put into the same section. Look at sec- tion 8, on page six. “The right of the people to peaceably assemble to consult to- gether for their common good or other law- ful purpose, or to petition the Government for redress of grievances, shall never be infringed or denied.” That is right. That is good. “Nor shall the freedom of speech or of the press ever be abridged or impaired, but every person _may freely and fully express his sentiments and opin- ons upon all subjects whatsoever, being responsible, nevertheless, for any viola- tion of the public peace, and for any un- lawful injury to the rights of any other person of which he may be guilty in the abuse of that liberty.” The only criticism I have upon this section is, that I think the two thoughts should not be blended in one section. Read paragraph nine and compare it with the Committee’s section four. I will read one and then the other, and you can see what I am driving at. “ No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship, or sys- tem of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, or obliged, against his own con- sent, to contribute to the erection or main- tenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion whatever; but all persons shall be protected in their right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own con- sciences; and the civil rights, privileges, or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or en- larged, on account of his belief or dis- belief of any religious tenet, dogma, or teaching whatsoever.” How is it superior or better than this: “No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or sup- port any place of worship, or maintain any ministry against his consent; no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of con- science, and no preferences shall ever be given bylaw to any religious societies, de- nominations or modes of worship; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousnes, or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State, or op- posed to the civil authority thereof.” Do you catch what is in the Committee’s bill which is not in the substitute‘? The latter part of the Gommittee’s section was aimed at what is now called Mormonism. Do you wish to forbid it in Kentucky‘? Do you wish to invite it by not prohibit- ing it? If, so, take the substitute. If, on the contrary, you desire to send to Utah an invitation to Mormons, vote down this denial; vote up the substitute, which gives them the privilege of coming here and es- tablishing themselves within the Common- wealth of Kentucky. I submit it to the intelligence of this Convention, that the Committee’s article is superior in every respect to that substitute. Read section 10 of the substitute. Let us see if my friend has hit the mark there. “Private property shall in no case be taken for public use, nor destroyed or in- jured for the public benefit without the consent of the owner thereof, unless just compensation in money shall previously be paid to him therefor.” What objection have you to that? words “or injured.” Let me see if I can make myself understood on that. The sub- stitute says: “ You can’t take my prop- erty for public use without paying me for it.” That is right. “You can’t destroy My objection is to the. 20 . BILL OF RIGHTS. try for Thursday,] my property without paying me for it.” That is right. “You can’t injure me, my property for the public benefit without paying me for it.” It looks like that is right. Let me show you why I think it is wrong. A railroad is chartered to run through the county of Franklin. The railroad company buys its right of way and pays for it. It runs within forty feet of my residence. It does not touch my prop- erty. It does ‘not destroy my property; but I say in a Court of Justice, in a sworn petition, that I am injured to the tune of $10,000, that I am disturbed in the enjoy- ment of my home and the rights of prop- erty, and I swear to it, and I ask for an injunction, and upon the face of the papers I get it. The railroad is stopped. N o more progress, although it has not touched my property; although it has not ruined or destroyed my property, yet I claim that I am injured to the extent of $10,000; and if I understand the way such things are done, Imust be paid then and there before any more progress is madejn building that rail- road. Am I not right‘? That is my way of looking at it. If I am wrong I will take it all back. Suppose you strike out the words “or in- jured,” and how will it then read‘? ,“No man’s property shall be taken for public ‘use, nor destroyed for the public benefit, without the consent of the owner thereof, unless just compensation in money shall previously be paid to him therefor.” Then if one claims he is injured he can go into the courts of the coun- compensation; but do - not lay the hand of estoppel, as it were, upon another man who wants to build the road. Let him go into court, and if he can show he has been injured to the tune of $10,000, let him prove it, and when proven, the jury will say so, and the court will give him a judgment. Is not that criticism a legiti- mate one, and has not the gentleman from Marion taken another crack and missed the mark? I think so. ALLEN. ' [October 9. Section 2, paragraph 1, of the substitute says: “No power, civil or military”—there is no other power in this land except the civil or military that I know of, “shall ever interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage by those entitled to vote at any election authorized by law.” It sounds very nice, doesn’t it, and I expect, upon first blush, I, perhaps, would have voted for it. Is there not a denial of a great right in it‘? Let me try to illustrate what I mean. We have in this country what is called the August election. At sunrise it is the privilege of every freeman to go to the polls and participate in the election of officers. ()n the highway he is met by a thief, a murderer an assassin. His property is taken ; his life is taken; and the murderer and the thief mounts his horse, takes the Bill of Rights in his hands, and says : “N 0 power, civil or military, shall interfere with me, for I am on my way to vote at an August election.” How does that strike you? We have now in Kentucky a law—per- haps it is in the Constitution, or in the statute law, I forget just now where, but you all will remember it—to the effect that no freeman shall be interfered with on the day of election, when he is going to exer- cise his high prerogative, unless he is guilty of murder or some other crime. Then the power that is inherent in the people says, “Stop!” You have done violence to the Bill "of Rights under which we lived. You have robbed and murdered a fellow-man; or, you have committed treason against the Commonwealth. Thou shalt not vote, but thou shalt be brought to the bar of justice. Do you want the substitute‘? Do you want it said that no power, civil or military, shall ever interfere with a man when he is on his way to the voting-place—mo excep— tion, no saving for the public weal, none whatever‘? I say, down with it! Another crack, and he has migsed the mark. Now we come to paragraph 2: “ No bill of attainder, ea: post facto law, retrospect- BILL 019‘ RIGHTS. 21 Thursday,] ALL EN. [Obtober 9 . ive law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall ever be passed.” That is very good. But I will first invite the gen- tlemen’s attention to the fact that, if I am not mistaken, the Supreme Court of the United States has said a State may pass retrospective laws. They can not pass 6:1: post facto laws. There are numerous de- cisions to that effect. If I am not mis- taken, the substitute robs the Kentucky Legislature forever of doing what the Sn- preme Court of the United States has said she may do. He will answer that, per- haps, by saying that retrospective laws are odious. I think so, too; and I do not know that the time will ever come when I would ask for, vote for, or call for a retro- spective law; but perhaps Something may turn up in the future when it will be wise and proper to pass a retrospective law; and this section in the substitute says, “thou shalt not do it.” But that is not my only criticism upon that section. You remember very well the laughing, rollicking criticism made by the gentleman from Marion upon the words, “No person shall be attainted of treason or felony by the General Assembly, and no attainder shall work corruption of blood; nor, except during the life of the offender, forfeiture of estate to the Commonwealth.” He made the old heroes of the seventeenth century turn over in their last resting places. The recollec- tion of the last Bill of Attainder of Sir John Fenwick by Parliament came up before me when I listened to his criticism upon the words of the fathers, not upon the words of this Com- mittee, “No Bill of Attainder shall be passed by the General Assembly.” What do you mean by that? I may have an er- roneous conception of it. I may not know what a Bill of Attainder is. estly, and if I err, some gentleman in the course of this discussion will correct me. Let me tell you what my idea of a Bill of Attainder is. A Legislature passes an act robbing me of my life for an alleged crime, I speak hon-_ I not hearing the witnesses, having nojury, not being allowed to face what witnesses they have, and deprived of the privilege to cross-examine them, robbing me of my life and sending me to my grave. That is a Bill of Attainder, as I understand it. But, says the Committee’s report, that shall not be done, and it adds on, “And no attainder shall work corruption of blood.” The gentleman asks “if you have no Bill Attainder, how can there be an attainder?” Maybe I am wrong, but what is an attain- der‘? I will turn to this dictionary which quotes from Bouvier: “An attainder in law means a corruption of blood, the ex- tinction of civil rights, in consequence of being condemned for a capital crime.” I put this question to the gentleman from Marion, recollecting the fact that he stands high as a jurist in Kentucky. John Brown is accused of crime. John Brown is in- dicted. John Brown is arraigned in court- He is brought face to face with his wit- nesses. He is heard by himself and counsel. The jury says, “thou art guilty.” The court says, “ thou shalt be hung.” Is he at- tainted‘? ~‘ Attaint” means, as I have been taught, a “disgrace,” “an extinction of .civil rights ”——isn’t there an attainder? Isn’t the man robbed of his civil rights‘? Is he not disgraced? and a blemish upon his character? But notwithstanding that, this Bill of Rights, as the Committee says: “ N o attainder shall work corruption of blood.” The convicted man can transmit his property just as well as he who died without being disgraced or attainted or convicted or sentenced to death. Am ‘I right about that? Perhaps I am not. I throw out these suggestions. That is my interpretation of the old Bill of Rights that has come down to us honored so highly from the great and the good and the brave men of old. ‘ Read section 2, paragraph 2, and com- pare it with section 13. Mr. Chairman, it is said that in a Bill of Rights or a Consti- tution there is no place for rhetoric; but I Is not there a stain. 22 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] tell you, you may search all creation through; you may unfurl the scroll of Time, and read therefrom all the notable orations that have come down to us during the last fifteen hundred years, and I submit it to yon, if there be one sentence in all the eloquent orations that have been delivered, any thing that is more eloquent or contains prettier rhetoric than these words. Hear ye, chiefs of Kentucky. Listen to the proclamation that has come down to us for 200 years. . “All Courts shall be open.” What is the meaning of it ‘.7 All Courts shall be public, open, no hiding place about them; open to all; open to the high and the low, to the rich and the poor, to every citizen. I wish I had the voice to sound these words from the Big Sandy to the Mississippi: “Every person, done him in lands, goods or reputation, shall have a remedy, and right and justice shall be administered with- out sale, without denial and without delay.” Great God, the eloquence in those words! “Crown jewels,” the gentleman said, “gath- ered from the caskets of liberty, where all found a home and resting-place.” I tell you, Mr. Chairman, time will grow old, and we who are here will be sleeping beneath the sod before a grander piece of work will be done than is embraced in the 13th sec- tion of the oldBill of Rights. Farmers can- not understand how “right and justice shall be administered without sale, without denial and without delay. ” 'Where is there a for an in ury, man, unlettered though he may be, who does not know what those words mean '? And in lieu thereof the gentleman substi- tutes this, “All Courts shall be ‘open to all persons, wherein certain and speedy remedy shall be afforded, and justice shall be publicly administered according to the law of the land in all cases whatsoever, whether for the prevention. or punishment of pub- lic wrongs, the protection or enforcement of private rights, or tle redress of civil in- juries.” If there is one thought in the sub- Stitute that is not in the Committee’s re- , [October 9. port, I am unable to see it, and there is no comparison whatever, though I say it with the highest respect for the ability of the gentleman from Marion, in rhetoric or in eloquence, to the old Bill of Rights. Let us go to paragraph 3, section 2: “In all prosecutions for crimes, the accused shall have the right to be heard by him- self.” That is right. “To be informed of the nature and "cause of the accusation against him.” That is right. “To have the witnesses against him examined in his presence in open court.” That is right. It does not mean any more than saying “Shall meet the witnesses face to face." “To have compulsory process for securing - the testimony of witnesses in his defense.” That is right. “And to have a fair trial by an impartial jury, according to the law of the land.” Where shall that jury come from ‘? “A fair trial by an impartial jury, according to the law of the lanc.” The law of the land may be hereafter that the jury shall be summoned Boyd county to try a Hick- man county. If it should, then one of the jewels of liberty will be lost, for the old law was, and the law is to-day, that the jury shall come from the vicinagc. \Vhat does that mean‘? It used to mean “ the neighborlmod." It used to be that the jury should be com- posed of men who were supposed to know all the facts, and were the triers of the facts; but under our law in Kentucky ‘the word “ vicinage” has come to mean the ~" county” where the crime was committed, or where the cause of action arose. If the word “vicinage means “county, ” why not say “ county.” Some men in this State, who have not read the decisions of the Supreme Court of his State, may not know from criminal in CI‘ 0 \V 11 ‘what “ vicinage” means. They look to the dictionaries, and they see that it means “neighborhood,” and they will say correct- ly; ” and then they will say that if, in the corner where Caldwell and Crittenden and Webster counties join, a murder should be ‘BILL or RIGHTS. 23 Thursday,] ALLEN. [October 9 . committed within twenty feet of the line, the “neighborhood” takes in a part of Doesn’t it‘? If you apply the old meaning, it would mean that the three counties. 7 “jury of the vicinage’ should come from the neighborhood. Did you ever know that to be done in this State’? No; the jury comes from the county; and if “ vicin- age” has lost its old meaning, and now ‘means county, say county, and then the farmers and the mechanics and blaeksmiths will know exactly what you mean; that the jury by which a man shall be tried for his life or liberty shall come from the county in which the crime was com- mitted; and the Committee further says if a fair and impartial jury cannot be had in that county, then go to the adjoining county, and keep on going; but never’ unless the public weal demands it, shall you rob a fellow-freeman of the right to be tried under the shadow of his own door. If I should ever be brought to the bar of jus- tice to be tried for a crime, God give me the privilege to be tried among those who know my defects and likewise know my virtues. There let me stand among them; let me fall, if fall I must. I demur to being taken out of my county for a trial unless the public weal demands it; and when the pub- lic weal demands my trial elsewhere, my interest must succumb to that of the public weal. Therefore, the Committee says when this fair and impartial jury cannot be had in the county, then go to the adjoining county; and then, as alast resort, if the public weal cannot be subserved, let there be an order of court entered of record saying that the remedies having been ex- hausted, the public weal demands that the defendant shall be carried somewhere else to be tried. I tell you, men of Kentucky, one of the brightest jewels in the coronet of liberty is the right of a trial AT YOUR HOME, and never will I consent that a fel- low-freeman shall be taken from his home and tried among strangers, unless the public weal demands it. Are these thoughts which I have ven- tured to throw out covered by the substi- tute ? I think not. The gentleman from Marion has taken another crack, and missed his mark. Let us look at paragraph 4, section 2, of the substitute. The substitute reads as follows: “No person shall be put upon his trial in any Court for any crime, the punishment of which shall be death or im- prisonment in the penitentiary, unless upon an indictment or presentment by a competent grand jury, except in cases aris- ing in the land and naval forces,” etc. “Nor shall any man. be put twice in jeopardy for the same offense.” the substitute goes on to define what “jeopardy ” is, as I understand it. It takes a good deal to define it. At least the sub- stitute takes up a good many words and a ' good deal of space to define it. Let us'see how the amendment offered by the gentle- man from Boyd, I believe, operates. Strike out of line 1, section 12, of the re- port the words, “be twice put in jeopardy of life and limb,” and insert in lieu thereof the words, “be twice. tried when life or liberty is involvec ,” and the word “tried” to be construed to mean a complete trial from indictment to verdict. I suggest in lieu of the word “verdict,” “judgment.” “Twice in jeopardy” shall mean when a trial has been completed from indictment to judgment. They are few words, but they cover every thing that is mentioned in the substitute. The gentleman from Marion also said, or rather asked, what is felony? It used to be “felony ” to do so and so, and he men- tioned a great many things. Under the old common law there were a hundred and forty or fifty offenses or crimes which were called felonies; but in this day and time—- in Kentucky at least—the Word “felony” is defined in the law of the State. There can be no mistake about it; and when we say in the Bill of Rights, in our report: “ N 0 person, for an indictable offense, shall And then ‘ 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] ALLEN, [October 9. be proceeded against criminally by infor- mation, except in such cases as do not amount to felony,” it means except in such cases as do not amount “to death or im- prisonment in the penitentiary.” The word “felony” is a shorter and more ex- pressive word. It is well defined, and the substitute uses the definition instead of the word itself. What is gained by it‘? Turn to the Criminal Statutes—the various sec- tions of the Criminal Code—I shall not read them you will find the word “felony” defined; and if you make the Constitution to-day and use the word “felony,” it ear- ries with it the definition found in the Criminal Code of Kentucky. I submit that that is true; so there is no use of tak- ing all these twelve or fifteen lines to define what “twice in jeopardy” is. If you do not understand it in the original bill with the light ‘of all the decisions of fifty years resting upon it—~then adopt the amendment offered by the Delegate from Boyd, and you have it in a nutshell. Now, comparing section 2, paragraph 5, “All persons who shall be arrested for crime shall be entitled to bail by sufficient sureties.” oncrs.” Tell me the difference. The Com- nnttee says, “all prisoners shall be en- titled to bail by sufficient securities.” The substitute says simply, “all per- sons who shall be arrested shall be entitled to bail by sufficient sureties.” What is the difference? I submit that it is a play upon words, nothing else. “Except in cases where the punishment shall be death, or ii'nprisonment for life, when the proof of guilt shall be evident or the pre- sumption Yreat, and excessive bail shall not be require nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishments inflicted.” “or unusual” are the words which the substitute uses, which are not in the Com- mittee’s report. nal English Bill of Rights. They are in the Virginia Bill of Rights, if I am not mistaken. What the meaning is of that phrase I do not know that I am able to tell. Our fathers took it out of the present Bill of Rights, and I donot see the importance The Committee says, “ All pris- ‘ They are in the old origi- of putting them back. Still, if some gen- tleman will suggest a good reason why they should be placed back, I will accept it, and will vote for the reinstatement of the old words; but in all other respects in this section I submit to this Convention that there is not one point gained by the substi— tute offered over the Committee’s report. “Nor shall the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus be suspended, unless when, in case of invasion or rebellion, the public safety may require it, and then only in pursuance of such authoritv the Legislature shall prescribe by law. ’ Turn to the fifteenth section of the Com- mittee’s Bill and see: “No power of sus- pending laws shall be exercised unless by the General Assembly or its authority.” No power of suspending laws shall be exercised by anybody, unless by the General Assembly, or its authority. That covers every thing that the substitute does. , It gives us the writ of habeas corpus N 0 power in this State can suspend it ex- cept the Legislature, and when that body is not in session, the Governor may do so if authorized by the Legislature; and I sub- mit that the substitute means the very same thing; then why take the substitute over the ‘ ‘ommittee’s report? Section 6. I wondered, when I first read the substitute, why its author should place in a Bill of Rights a definition of treason. There may be a potent reason for doing it. The definition of treason you will find in the present Constitution under the head of “General Provisions.” W'hat prompted the author of the substitute to bring it out of the General Provisions and put it in the Bill of Rights, I do not know. I do not think he told us yesterday why he did it; but I notice in the substitute there is one important omission. The present law of treason says: “No man shall be convicted, except by the testimony of two witnesses.” It is not in the substitute. Mr. KNOTT. I think it ought to be. I must have left that out. BILL or RIGHTS. 25 Thursday,] ALLEN. [October 9 . Mr. ALLEN. Then I have nothing more to say on that point. N ow we come to the libel matter. What does the Committee say ‘? The _ ('ommit- tee’s report is-—and in all candor and in‘ all honesty we ask that it be made the law of the land—“ In prosecutions for the publi- cation of papers investigating the ofiicial conduct of officers or persons in a public capacity, or where the matter published is proper for public information, the truth thereof may be given ,in evidence; and in all indictments or trials for libel, the jury shall have a right, both in civil and crimi- nal. cases, to determine the facts,” all the facts, and nothing but the facts, “ under the din-action of the Court as to the law.” As we have that phrase here, it seems to me that it has a meaning ; for if there be one principle well established in American and English jurisprudence, so far as I know, it is that the jury in all cases decide the facts, and the t'ourt in a 1 cases tell the law. ()ur Criminal Code so says to-day in Kentucky, and we changed the old Bill of Rights, remembering from what we read in English history that it was worded as it now is for a certain purpose, to achieve a certain end, and neither pur- pose nor end is desirable to-day. Accord- ing to the old common law as it prevailed in the seventeenth century, before and after the great revolution of 1688, it was the law there, or at least there were infamous judges who so said, that the truth shall not be pleaded or given in evidence. That was laid down as the law in the seventeenth century, before and after the English Bill of Rights was framed on the 13th of February, 1688; and out of trials arising in cases of libel there have arisen the most terrible, the most infamous, the most horrible persecutipns that blot the pages of the history of England; and it was to avoid the hole in which the defend- ants were placed by the construction of the law, as laid down by the judges, that the law was finally changed by-the Fox Libel l-d Act, so as to say that the jury should be the judges of the law and facts; and Hal- lam says, “ for reasons that are easily ex- plained, the drafting of that Libel Act by Fox, is neither intelligent or consistent,” and the reason for it is this; that in that day the jury were taken from the public, and they were swayed by the feelings of liberty that then pervaded the land, and the only way of escape for the defendant in a prosecution for libel was by some hook or crook to get the juries to be the judges of the 1.0.1.0 and facts, and Mr. Fox shaped his bill contrary to the great funda- mental principles of English law, in order . to work out a vindication of the men who were prosecuted for libel. There is no persecution to-day; nobody is trying to send the printers and publishers to the jails of the country; thank God, we. live in a day when the liberty of the press .if recognized as the great palladium of our" - liberties, and I will be the last man to stand upon this floor and take from them that which ought not to be taken from them. But the Committee go on further. lish what you please; go into all the de- partments of the Government, examine the public acts of every public officer in the ' land, publish what you please, but if you do not tell the truth, and if you do not tell the truth with a good intent, you shall be- held responsible. Is it not right? Did you ever hear of the truth being told and magnified and spread abroad through the- land for a mean, low, malicious and in-- famous intent‘? lan it not be done? I will use the same illustration I used awhile A young man in his boyhood com-- He brings- shame upon his family; but years after-- age. mits an act of indiscretion. wards, when he has grown, and has about him children and grandchildren, he be-- comes a candidate for the Legislature or Congress; and then it is that the storiesof ' old are revived, after that act of indiscre- tion that has been forgiven and forgotten. Pub-- 26 BILL‘ OF RIGHTS‘. I Thursday,] A LLEN—-DE HAVEN. [October 9 . forty years ago. Some man who is run- ning against him, or some enemy who sees fit to stab him in the back, goes to the newspaper man and tells him that forty or fifty years ago this man who is asking your suffrage did this and did that. Publish it, tell the truth, for it is true, and I will beat him. Is there any good intent about that? Let the jury say whether or not it was done fora good intent. Let the jury say, if you told the truth, and told it with a good in- tent, thou shalt be free; if you told the truth, and told it for a bad purpose, with a bad intent, thou shalt be amenable to the laws of the land. No section, in any Bill of Rights in America that I know of, was ever intended to alter ‘~ or abrogate the com- mon law with reference to libel. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would suggest to the Delegate from Caldwell that the hour for adjournment is very close at hand. Mr. ALLEN. I have only a little more to say. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move that the ses- sion be extended in order to give the gen- tleman an opportunity to conclude. ‘By consent of the House, the motionlwas agreed to. , Mr. ALLEN. We are a Commonwealth of freemen. We have provided for the punishment of crime, and, unfortunately for us, there are too many crimes committed :in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. I ‘would that I could suggest some remedy ‘.to remedy the onward flow of crime in Kentucky; but when a fellow-freeman is arraigned, we must. stand by him to a cer- tain extent, and in a certain way. It ‘is an awful and a solemn thing to see a fellow.- freeman deprived of his life or of his lib- erty; and therefore the Committee, recog— nizing that fact, here in bold relief say what are the rights of a fellow-freeman when an _ It is important to ‘ raigned for a crime. know what theyare. Like the seven ‘in- alienable and inherent rights, of man,yt he ought to be stated vso clearly and so dis-W tinctly, and so intelligibly, that everybody in the land, in his common school-house can see what they are; and for that reason the Committee has grouped in one place all the rights that an accused man can have. “First. To be heard by himself and counsel. “Second. To demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him. “Third. To meet the witnesses face to face. “Fourth. To have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor. “Fifth. In prosecutions by indictment or information, to have a speedy public trial in the county wherein the alleged offense was committed by an impartial jury there— of.” When those five rights are stated, you have grouped together all the rights that a fellow-freeman can demand when he is brought to the bar of public justice. What was the motive and end sought by the Committee when, in the first section, they stated the seven inalienable and inherent rights of freemen? It was that every man, high and low, lettered and unlettered, _ could see at a glance, and take in in one moment, all his rights, inalienable and in- herent. The boys at school ought to be taught those seven inalienable and inherent rights. Give him the substitute to read to-day; give him the old Bill of Rights to‘ read, and give him thirty days to read them, and analyze every section, and draw out of them the seven inalienable and inherent rights of men, and I venture to say that not one in fifty. will . succeed in doing it in thirty days; but by the Bill introduced by the Committee, there they are, shining in the firmament of Liberty like the Pleiades, or the Milky Way, where they can be seen at a glance, andv sink deep in the hearts of men and of the children of our land. I say, and I submit it to the intelligence of this Convention, have we not gained a‘ point over the old~ when you group these sacred, inherent and inalienable rights, so that the eye ,of the unlettered can see them- .at aglance'and take them in, and the boy& BILL OF RIGHTS. 27 Thursday,] ALLEN—MCHENRY. ' [October 9 . of the country may know and understand them. As I stated, Mr. Chairman, in the begin- ning of my remarks, I have no pets and no favorites in this Convention. I am here as a freeman of the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky—I am here to study the interests of my fellow-beings. I will suffer my right hand to be cut off before I will vote for any section or any clause in this Constitu- tion or Bill of Rights, unless I am satisfied it is for the common weal of this State. If I have uttered one word here to-day that is not right, that is not just, that carries with it an idea that ought not to be embodied in this Bill of Rights point it out—tell it—and I will be one of the first to retract every word that I have said, and strike with him who strikes last, and stand with him who stands long- est, to promote the welfare, happiness and prosperity of old Kentucky. (Applause) Mr. MOHENRY. ~I move that the Com- mittee now rise. The CHAIRMAN. It is moved that the Committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The motion being put to the House. was declared carried. ionvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1. FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 10. 1890. No. 26 Friday,] MOORE—BURNAM— WILLIAMS. [October 10 . The Convention was called to order at i 10 o’clock A. M. by the President, and the ‘ proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Henderson. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings 1 was read. Mr.- MOORE. ‘Journal corrected in this: The resolution which I returned and asked to be given to the Committee on the Judicial Depart- ment was not a resolution in regard to Circuit Courts, but in regard to minority representations on the Bench. The PRESIDENT. ‘Without objection, it will be so corrected. Mr. BURNAM. I desire to make a statement that there was only a portion of the report made by the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure I thought should be referred to the I desire to have the, Committee on Executive Affairs. I do not suppose it is very material, but to have per- fect accuracy, I wish to say there was only part of the report I desired to be so refer- , red. The Mr. WILLIAMS. I wish to present a statement from the counties of Bath and ‘ Rowan, in answer to a resolution passed, inquiring for the indebtedness of same. The PRESIDENT. The communication will be referred to the Special Committee appointed for that purpose. Mr. CLARDY. I have a similar state- ment to offer. The PRESIDENT. The communica- tion will be referred to a Special Committee l i. PRESIDENT. Without further objection, the Journal is approved. l l l appointed for that purpose. Mr. WHITAKER. I have a similar statement from the county of Mason. The PRESIDENT. The same reference will be made. Mr. WOOD. I have a petition from the citizens of Taylor, which I desire to have referred to the Committee on General Pro— visions. The PRESIDENT. The rule requires the Delegate to make a brief statement of the contents of the petition. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a state- ment from Breckinridge county as to the indebtedness of that county. The PRESIDENT. The reference will be made to the Special Committee. Mr. PETTIT. I have a petition from R. W. Slack and Quint Owens, of Owens- boro, recommending an amendment to the Bill of Rights similar to that offered by Judge Beckner, and also urging the retention of Section -- of the present Constitution; and, furthermore, that education at public expense be rigidly restricted. I ask that the petition be referred to the Committee on Education. The PRESIDENT. The petition will be so referred. Mr. PETTIT. I have also a petition from O. S. Warner, suggesting that the Convention take steps looking to a greater security of life on railroads. I ask that it ‘ be referred to the Committee on Railroads. The PRESIDENT. It will be so re- ferred. " Mr. BENNETT. I have a. statement of the indebtedness of Greenup county. Mr. JAMES. I have a petition, and de- 2 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] ENGLTSH—QUICKSALL. [October 10- sire to have it read and referred to the ap- propriate Committee. The PRESIDENT. To what Commit- tee do you desire it referred? Mr. JAMES. To the Committee on J u— diciary and Court of Appeals. Mr. ENGLISH. I have a resolution which I‘ desire referred to the Committee on Militia. Sec. 1. The militia of the State shall con- sist of all able-bodied male residents of the State between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, except such persons as may be exempted by the laws of the State or of the United States. See. ‘2. The General Assembly shall pro- vide for maintaining the organized militia, and may exempt from military service per- sons having conscientious scruples against bearing arms;:Prorided, Such persons shall pay an equivalent for such exemption. Sec. The organization, equipment and discipline of the militia shall conform as nearly as practicable to the regulations for the government of the armies of the Uni- ted States. ' SEC. 4. That The Governor shall appoint all general field and staff oflicers, and com- mission them. Each company shall elect its own coin- missioned ofiicers, but if any company shall fail to elect such ofiicers within the time prescribed by law, they may be appointed by the Governor. SEO. The General Assembly shall pro- vide for the safe keeping of the public arms, military records, relics and banners of the State. Referred to the Committee on the Mi- litia. Mr. QUICKSALL. I have a resolution to offer. I indicate two Committees, and leave it to the Chair to decide which Com- mittee is proper.‘ Elective Franchise. SEC. 1. Every male person over the age < of twenty-one years, belonging to either of the following classes, who shall have resided in the State one year, in the county six months, and in the precinct ninety days next proceeding any election, shall be deemed a qualified elector at such election : First. Citizens of the United States of America. Second. Persons of foreign birth who have declared their intention to become- citizens, one year and not more than six years prior to such election, eonformably to the naturalization laws of the United States of America. ' Third, The Legislasive Assembly shall be empowered to make further exten- sion of suffrage hereafter, at its dis-- cretion, to all citizens of mature age and sound mind, not convicted of crime, without regard to sex; but no law extend- ing or restricting the rights of suffrage shall be enfcrced until adopted. by a major- ity of the electors of the State voting at a general election. Fourth, Electors shall, in all cases.except reason, felony, breach of the peace, or illegal voting, be privileged from arrest on the days of election during their attendance at, going to, and returning from such election; and no elector shall be obliged to perform any military duty on the day of election, except in time of war or public danger. Fifth. The general elections of the State’ shall be held quadriennially, and shall be held on the first Wednesday in September, and the first general election shall be held under this Constitution on the first Monday in September, 189—. Sixth. No elector shall be deemed to have lost his residence in this State by reason of his absence on business of the- United States, or of this State, or in the Military or Naval service of the United States. Seventh. No soldier, seaman, or marine- in the army or navy of the United States shall be deemed a resident of this State in consequence of his being stationed therein. Eighth. No person who is under guar-- dianship, or insane, shall be qualified to‘ vote at any election, nor shall any person convicted of treason or felony, unless re- stored to civil and political rights. Ninth. No woman having the qualifica- tions enumetated in section 1 of this article- as to age, residence and citizenship, and including those now qualified by the laws. of the State, may vote for all school ofiicers and upon all questions pertaining solely to school matters, and be eligible to any school ofiice. ~ Tenth. All elections by the people shall be by secret ballot, subject to such regula- tions as may be provided by law. Referred to Committee 011 Elections. The PRESIDENT. If there is no mo-- tion in regard to the resolution just read, RESOLTTIONS. 3 Friday] SWANGO—MONTGOMERY—WEST. [October 10. the Chair will refer it to the Committee on Elections and Elective Franchises. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Chair has not yet called for resolutions. Reports from Standing Committees are the first thing in order. If there are no reports from Stand- ing Committees, resolutions will be in or- der. Mr. BRONSTON. I understand the matter of establishing a Reformatory In- stitution was referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Proce- dure, with instructions to report to-day. I ask leave for further time. We have had that matter under consideration, and the gentleman who offered the resolution de— sires, with the Committee, that further time be given. The PRESIDENT. W ithout obection, jfurther time will be granted. The resolution offered by Mr. Scott Smith read, as follows: Resolved, That the new Constitution shall contain the following sections, viz: 1. Separate schools shall be maintained for the instruction of the white and colored races. 2. A Superintendent of Schools shall be elected in each county by the qualified vo- ters thereof, whose term of office shall be four years, and until his successor shall be qualified; but no Superintendent of Schools ‘ shall be re-eligible to the third succeeding term. 3. No person shall be eligible to the office of Superintendent of Schools who is not at the time twenty-five years old, a citizen of the United States, and who has not resided two years next preceding the election in the State, and for one year in the county or district for which he is a candidate, and who shall not hold a certifi— cate of qualification signed by the Super- intendent of Public Instruction, certifying . his fitness for said office as shown by‘ actual examination. Referred to Committee on Education. Mr. SPALDING. I offered the other day an amendment rather to the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights. I find, on looking at the printed report, that a similar amendment, in exactly the same terms, had previously been offered by the Delegate from Clark, and I desire to with- draw my amendment. The PRESIDENT. That can be done by unanimous consent at this time. The Chair hears no objection, and the amendment is withdrawn. IVIr. SWANGO. I have which I desire to offer. Resolution read, as follows: 1. The General Assembly shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thor- ough and efficient system of public schools, wherein all the children of the Common- wealth between the age of six and twenty years may be educated, and shall appropri- a resolution ate at least one million five hundred thou-' sand dollars each year for that purpose. 2. No money raised for the support of the public shools of the Commonwealth shall be appropriated to, or used for the support of, any sectional school. 3. Women twenty-one years of age and upwards shall be eligible to any office of control or management under the school laws of this State. Referred to the Committee on Educa_ tion. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I wish to offer a resolution, and move its adoption. Resolution read, as follows: That a Committee be appointed, to be composed of the Chairmen of each of the following Standing Committees, viz.: On Preamble and Bill of Rights, Elections, Legislative Department, Executive and Ministerial Officers for the State at Large, Executive and Ministerial Officers for Counties and Districts, Judicial Depart- ment and Court of Appeals, Circuit Courts, County Courts, Education, Revision, Cor- porations, Municipalities, Revenue and -Taxation, Crimes and Punishments and Criminal Procedure, General Provisions, Division, Titles and Arrangement, Charity and Charitable Institutions, and Railroads and Commerce, to be styled the Conference Committee, to whom shall be referred any report that may he agreed upon by any of said Standing Committees, by the Chair- - man thereof, and who shall determine as to what part of such report agreed upon is 4 RESOLUTIONS. Friday,] sTRAUS—WOOD ~PHELPS. [October 10. proper to be reported by such Committee, and what part, if any, by some other Com- mittee; which report shall be made to the Convention according to the said determi- nation, but shall be made to the Convention either by the Chairman or some member of said Standing Committee. Mr. PETTIT. This is a very important resolution. Under the rule it is required to go over until to-morrow. The PRESIDENT. The point is well taken, and under the rule the resolution will lie over one day. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. I have a resolu- tion which I desire to offer, and have it referred to the Committee on Education. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That cities containing a popu- lation of 5,000 or over in this Common- wealth shall have authority to establish and maintain free Kindergarten schools in oonnection with, and as intr have it converted into lumber. There the force of nature produced the tree; the labor BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 I plied to it. Friday,] BULLITT." [October 10 . _ carries it on and carries it through until it is created into wealth that did not exist until the labor was applied to it. might say the same thing as to mining and manufacturing. So that the money of the railroad that comes to pay the interest on these bonds comes out of these original sources of the production of wealth. Now, I believe that that ought to be checked. We may check it in our Constitution so far as Kentucky is concerned, and I have in- troduced a resolution to that effect. There is another objection. In the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States- in the Dartmouth College case—they held _ that every charter granted by a State is a contract, and the provision in the Constitu- tion of the United States against the ‘im- pairing of the obligation of contracts ap- I believe that the State ought never to grant a charter ' unless upon the condition that it .Shall be subject to repeal, and subject to the police power of the State. Just as every in- dividual is, so should the corporation be liable for every obligation that'is im- posed upon the people for the benefit of the Commonwealth. ‘Now, for the purpose of guarding against these evils, I have drafted and submit this proposition. “That all freemen, when they form a social compact, _.are equal, and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate public .-emoluments or privileges from the com- munity, but in consideration of public ser- vice.” All of it is copied from the section itself—is the exact words and letters of the section. But_I have added this: “but in consideration of public service ‘performed in the discharge of a governmental duty.” I did that because that section {of the Bill of Rights has been frittered away, and these corporations that have performed no public service, corporations to carry on mercantile business, to buy and sell real es- tate, to trade and traflic in any and all things, have been created under it Now a corporation ‘cannot be You . formed or acted under without exclusive, separate public emoluments. An in- dividuals property is liable for his debt. A corpora'tor’s individual property is not liable for the corporation’s debts. An in- dividual has to‘sign and acknowledge his deeds ‘with his wife’s signature releasing her dower; the corporation signs its deeds under its seal. and it has these exclusive separate privileges granted to it by the com- munity. I do not care what it is,or how or what its business may be; it has separate, exclusive emoluments and privileges when- ever it exists; so I think this addition, “per- formed in the discharge of governmental duty,” will bring the mind of the court to the fact that we did not intend to let any corporation exist, except in consideration of public service to be rendered to the pub- lic. I added these words: “ Nor shall any exclusive,.separate public emoluments or privileges be granted, except upon condi- tion that they be and remain amenable to the police regulations of the State, and not subject to sale or mortgage; nor shall the property connected therewith be bonded and _mortgaged to secure the payment thereof at a greater sum than the reasona- ble value of the property at the time.” This is done for the purpose of prevent- ing these corporations from mortgaging their franchises. Aye, indeed, they mort- gage not merely the franchise when the mortgage is for three times the value of the property, but they mortgage the labor of the persons who perform the duty of running the road; so that out of the mort- gage upon the franchise, and the mortgage upon the laborers and operators, and the mortgage upon the property, capita‘ists are willing to take a mortgage where the prop- erty is not worth more than one-third of what is advanced. What capitalist would be willing to loan money on land that way?' He generally desires double the value in land for his security; but inasmuch as the railroad can not be run except under certain circumstances, he is willing to loan 14. I BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘years shall be Friday] BULLIT'I‘ [October 10. three times the value of the property,beeause he knows he has his thumb upon the fran- chise and upon the labor of the employes, ‘ and out of the laborand out of the patrons of the read they gather the money to pay the interest on those bonds. That ought to be stopped. Free laborers ought not to he mortgaged by somebody else. “And all such grants for a longer time than twenty subject to amendment or repeal of the State; but nothing herein is intended to prohibit the exemption of houses of religious worship and school- houses from taxation in whole or in part.” Now, instead of the provision inserted by the “ gentleman from Marion, that the property rights shall be protected, I have inserted a provision that after twenty years the whole thing passes. Let the property rights be protected for the period of twenty years. After the twenty years the whole thing passes back into the con- trol and management of the Common- wealth. I think that some indulgence is necessary to encourage the rapid growth of railroads that have started up in the State of Kentucky, and I believe that it is right and proper that they should have twenty years, but after the twenty years let it pass back, not subject to the vested right, being carried on, as has been done with the Adams Express Company. For years and years that express company has not been under a mortgage. Its franchise has passed away long ago, but under the doctrine of adhering and protecting the property rights or the vested ‘rights, it still exercises the rights of an incorporated association, and what would be a disadvan- tage to a railroad, if its charter were to be’ repealed, if the property rights still remain, it would no more inconvenience them than it has inconvenienced the. Adams Express Company. With the property rights car— ried on for all time to come, the railroads would become masters of the government. So I am in favor of checking them. Now, as to the report -of the Committee. The criticisms of the gentleman from Marion are suffieient to show that it opens the door for adjudications. It will call upon the Court necessarily to determine what those provisions and changes mean. The decis- ions of the Court in regard to the Bill of Rights as it now stands have already been rendered, and there will be no necessity for a renewal of the interpretation, but there will be a necessity for a judicial interpre- tation of the report of the Committee. Now what is the status of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Marion ‘I There are but few of features that I desire to call attention to. One is the third section. “That in all prosecutions for crime, the accused shall have the right to be heard by himself and coun- sel ; to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him ; to have the witnesses against him examined in his pres- ence in open ,Court; to have com- pulsory process for securing the tes- timony of witnesses in his defense, and to have a fair trial by an impar- tial ju'ry according to the law of the land, and in no case be compelled to testify against himself. Where is that trial to take place? Are they to have the privilege if an of- fense is committed in my county? Is the gentleman from Pike to have the privilege of sending down and carrying him up there to Pike to be tried, or who is to have the privilege of transfer— ring him from one county to another? What may be the law passed by the Leg- islature in regard to that point. The right of trial by a jury of the vieinage is one of the ancient rights of trial by jury. Why is it that he may be tried by jury of his vicinage‘? It is because the people of the vieinage know the motives that may have actuated him. In some parts of this United States if a cowhide is laid across the back of a man, every juryma'n would say that he could rightly take thelife of the man who attempted it. In some parts of the country the juries would decide differently, and BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Friday,] BULLITT. [October 10- would inflict the rules of the law upon him. In some parts of the country if an insult is offered to a female member of a gentleman’s family. and he takes his rifle and the man who ofl'ersthat insult is made to hear the keen crack of a Kentucky rifle, there is no jury in any part of the State that would in- flict punishment upon him. Now, how it is in Pike county I know not. How it would be in some other parts of the country, I know not. It is not because the citizens knew the facts of the case, but because they knew the motives that were demanded by the conventional rules of society. If a man permitted his wife or daughter to be insult- ed without resenting it, he is sunk in the es- timation of the whole community in my part of the country, and he is forced by the rules of society to resent such an insult. I hope to God no change will ever be made in regard to that rule. You may call it bar- barism, you may call it unwritten law, or what you please. I am attached to that rule, and I hope it will never be abandoned in the Commonwealth of Kentucky; so that I am bound to oppose that amendment. Here is section 8: That the right of the people to peaceably assemble and consult together for their com- mon good or other lawful purposes, or to petition the government for the redress of grievances, shall never be infringed or denied; nor shall the freedom of speech or of the press ever be abriged or impaired; but every person may freely and fully ex- press his sentimeuts and upinions upon all subjects whatsoever, being responsible, nevertheless, for any violation of the pub- lic peace, and for any unlawfui injury to the rights of any other person of which he may be guilty in the abuse of that liberty. How is a man, in expressing his views on a lawful question, in a lawful, polite man- ner, ever to be guilty of a breach of the peace? I cannot see. Now, I want to call attention to the first and second sections—“That all men are en- dowed by their Creator with the rights of life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.” That in the social compact they they en- gage to hold and enjoy those rights subject to just and impartial laws, securing equal protection and equal privileges to each, and imposing like duties and responsibilities upon all under like circumstances and con- ditions. 1. That no person shall ever be deprived of or disturbed of any rights above enumer ated without due process of law. What are the rights above enumerated‘? “The rights of life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.” What is the due process of law as indicated in this sec- tion and in the Constitution of the United States‘? United States that has the control of this sec- tion‘? Is it that provision which author- izes Judge Ballard to send to a county of this State and take from it a man who had shot down his neighbor, and deprived the county of the right of trial to ascertain whether that man is guilty of a violation of the law or not? Is it the provision of the Constitution which authorized the President of the United States to send his Marshal or Deputy Marshal to the State of California to take the life of Judge Ter- ry, and then the Court to say that the man should not be tried by the Commonwealth of California? Is it these encroachments by construction—taking away the life and liberty of this.country—that this section is meant to correct? No, I can never consent to such an inva- sion of the rights of the people. I do not care whether you take it, as advocated by one class of statesmen of this country, that the sovereign power is in the people of the United States, as citizens of the United States; or whether you take it according to another class of politicians and states- men, that the sovereign power of this coun- try lies with the people of the States. I do not care which horn of the dilemma you take. Here is an encroachment upon the rights of the people. The powers of the United States Courts do not reach to an authority to try a man unless the crime has been committed on the high What is the Constitution of the- 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday] BECKHAM. [October 10 . seas. Now, when they take away from the State tribunals -— the only tribunals that were authorized to try such cases un- der the Constitution of 1787—when they take them away from the State tribunals, what are they to do with them? Will they never try them at all, or will they by construction advance another step further, and try them in the United States Courts? Why the idea that a man cannot be tried will ringin the ears of the tribunal with such force that they will be compelled to do something, and what will they do? Will the Courts say that they have got the right ‘ under the 14th amendment to the Constitu- tion to transfer the right of trial for the commission of offenses in the State to the Federal Courts? I hope that this Conven- tion will never consent that any such au- thority rests with the Government of the United States. Here is another objectionable feature. Section 3: “No public emolument shall ever be allowed to any person except in consideration of public’ services, the per- formance of which shall be required by law.” I have no objection to that. “ Or for which the Chief Executive Magistrate, or some other officer of the Commonwealth shall be legally authorized to contract.’ Does it not occur to you that that is taking away from the Legislature a duty that be- longs to the Legislative Department of the Government—tramsferring it to the Chief Executive, or some man that is authorized to contract? Can the Chief Executive have the right to grant away the rights of the State or some subordinate ofiicer have the right to grant away the rights of the State‘? No. The safest plan should be to leave it in the Legislature. I desire to call attention again to the Bill of Rights as it now stands. I ask the gentlemen in this Convention to take the clauses up se'riatim, one by one, and say which one he wants out of the Bill of Rights. When you take it into considera tion, that very section of the Bill of Rights presents the history of the organiza- tion and the history of the condition of the country that demanded its adoption; when you strike it out, is it not like endeavoring to strike out history? Why should it be obliterated? Because of style; because of the lack of rhetoric? What else‘? What other reason has been urged by any gentleman in this Conven- tion thus far? I have heard none. Then, if you can blot it out without defacing history and without calling upon the Courts to reject and interpret the new phraseology, Why strike it out ? Now, it is true that our ancestors, the Anglo-Saxon mind was in tha habit of carrying two principles and inserting two principles in one sentence. You find that not only in the Bill of Rights, but you find it in the laws passed by the States, and the laws in the Episco- pal prayer-books. You find it everywhere that the minds of those pioneers of the present civilization reigned. The great principle of the civilization under which we now live was the establishment and the re-enthronement of reason. Give to rea- son its full sway, and the people will take care of themselves, and carry this civiliza- tion on and on to higher and higher glory than it has. Suppress reason, blot out history, deface the landmarks upon which the civilization is founded, and the laws of the country and civilization of the country go hand in hand with each other. Blot them out, and what is to become of the cizilization under which we now live? I hope that this Convention will stand by those old landmarks. Yes, stand by those that have been bought as the trophies of bloody wars, and those that have been the result of the purest and deepest and most earnest and patriotic reasoning of our ancestors. Are we to blot them out be- cause they were not acquainted with the rhetoric of the present day‘? No. Let them stand as the monument of our civil- ization and of our rights. We understand hem and the people understand them BILL OF RIGHTS. l 17 Friday,] BECKHAM. [October 10 The boys at school understand them; but when you give us something new, we have to begin anew to find the reasoning upon which it rests. Mr. BECKHAM. It is my purpose to detain the Committee but a short time, while I give to them the reasons that will influence my vote upon the report new under debate. I desire to place upon record these reasons, and if I can, by what I may say, influence any gentleman upon this floor to recall, and to regard with some- thing of renewed fervor and esteem, the inestimable principles contained in the Bill of Rights. as it has come down to us, sanc- tified by so many sacred memories, I shall have accomplished all that I could desire, and more than I could reasonably expect. I confess that I came to this Convention with strong predilections in favor of many of the provisions of the Constitution as it now is. There has not been a time that we have voted upon the proposition of call- ing this Convention that I have not voted for it, because I felt that the changed con- dition of things, that the factors in affairs existing now that did not exist in 1849, called for some restraints in the organic law that were not placed in that instrument; but I must say that I have felt all this time, and I feel now, that there is but little pioneer work for us to do; there is but little of radical work for us to do. and scarcely any at all.with this Bill of Rights. The wisest forecast is but a reflex of history. Every prospect is but an in- verted retrospect. We have no better guide for the years to come after than what has gone before. I have felt all this time that safety and security, peace and happiness, for us and our children to come after us, lay in the preservation of much of the Constitution as it now is; that we should follow in the well-trodden way, and _ depart from it only where reason, experience and time demanded it and pointed out the necessity for the placing of some new limit- ation upon power, or of guarding with additional security the right of the citizen. I say that I came here with such thoughts as these in my mind, and have cherished them for years. Some of the wisest men that I know have said to me, unprofessional men, it is true, but thoughtful men, that they were afraid for the Convention to meet so near the struggle that bathed this land in blood; that we had not yet es- caped from the effects of the war. I did not indulge in that feeling, because I be- lieved that this generation of Kentuckians could be trusted with a power like this; but I came wedded. to the old forms. I came determined to make but few changes, so far as my voice could control it, especially in this Bill of Rights. I was charmed by the classic allusions and the chaste diction of my venerable friend who sits near me (Mr. Rodes) in his opening remarks in this discussion. When he alluded to the great Declaration of Independence, I .could but recall in comparison with it the tribute that was paid to that immortal work of Jefferson by a no less distinguished Englishman than Mr. Buckle, when he said that our Declaration “ought to be hung up in the nur- sery of every Kin g,and blazoned on the porch of every royal palacein Europe.” The learn- ed gentleman took us, too, in imagination, across the waters to the memorable meadow where birth was given to this ancient title deed to our liberties. ‘And I went with him in imagination there. I have often thought, while it has never been my fortune to stand upon that sacred spot, with the sky for a covering and the earth for a rest- ing place; if I could stand there, that my emotions could scarcely be greater than if standing in the Garden of Gethasemane and by the Cross upon which was crucified the Son of Mary and the Son of God. (Applause) I said that men were liable to make mistakes, and I did not want to touch this Bill of Rights, except where ne- cessity pointed out that we should do it. We have here a factor now that did not 18 BILL OF -RIGHTS." Friday,] BECKHAM. [October 10. exist in 1849. There was no such thing, scarcely, as a railroad in Kentucky when our fathers met here. There needs, per- haps, to be placed in our Constitution some such limitation as is proposed by the Dele- gate from Marion in the fourth section of article one upon corporate power, but this Bill of Rights, in my humble judgment, is no place for it. I said that I was charmed by the rhet- oric of my friend. I was not only charmed, but well-nigh led captive by the ingenious argument of the distinguished gentleman who spoke in behalf of his own substitute, and who is recognized by us all as a very master of the English tongue; but when that spell was broken, and I remem- bered how much of our liberties was wrap- ped up in these words that are crystallized and sacred, and when I remembered the imperfection of human language, made, as Talleyrand said, to conceal and not convey thought, I could but de— termine to support and uphold it with renewed energy and with renewed fervor, the p'esent Bill of Rights, except where 1 was sure that it had failed to perform its functions in the restraint of governmental authority, or in placing proper guards around the rights of the individual citi- zen. We ought not to change the lan- guage unless we mean to change the meaning. We should not change the setting, unless we mean to change the substance. We ought not to sacrifice force to finish, or power to precision of state- ment. We are short-sighted. Most of us are of mediocrity. Most men are of mediocrity. The spirit of prophecy is given to no man in this day and generation. Look for a few illustrations of this. In 1849 the men who met here met in obedience to the pop- ular will for two leading purposes, namely: To change the judicial system from ap- pointive to elective; and the other and main, purpose was to place the domestic in- stitution of slavery upon a foundation of stone. And yet that institution lasted only eleven years after the final adjournment of that Convention. Lord Bacon, “ the check- ered spectacle of so much glory and so much shame,” though he was—the grasp of whose intellect compassed the circle of the sun—knowing that he had wrought for mankind, and that his system of inductive philosophy was to last through the eomin g cycles, when he went to put in to form and fashion the rejected his native tongue and selected the Latin, fearing the English languague would be forever confined to that little island. How much was he mistaken? T 0-day that lan- guage that he rejected has taken wings until it is the language of three continents —-Europe, America and Australia. I Tovum Organmn, Take another instance, sir, nearer home and better known. When in 1868 the peo- ple of this country, through the Congress and the Legislatures, adopted the Four- teenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, there was not a man in all the land, from Maine to California, who believed that the first section of that amend- ment had application to any thing else, or to any other class of persons, than the col- ored race. And yet, Mr. Conkling—one of the men who helped to make it--only a- few' years , afterwards, in arguing a case in the Supreme Court, said to them: “We builded wiser than we knew,” and invoked the protection of that section in behalf of a railroad to secure equal rights to the rail- road, in the case of San Mateo County vs. The Railroad Company in California, and obtained it by a judicial construction. I mention these things merely for the purpose of showing‘ that we ought to touch lightly that which is secure, that which is consecrated by time, and that which has been adjudicated so many times by the highest courts in the land. Let us look for a moment at the report of this Committee. I have the highest regard for its distin- guished Chairman and every gentleman upon it. And I have also the highest re- BILL or RIGHTS; 19 Friclay,] BECK n». M gard for the gentleman who has offered a substitute for the whole of it; and it is a matter of pain to me personally that I can- not vote for the report or the substitute But my convictions of duty to the people of Kentucky demandthat I should stand by what I believe already secures to us every right that is secured by either the report or the substitute. The section of the Bill of Rights as it now is, and of this report which received so much of the censure and the criticism of the Delegate from Marion, you are all familiar with—the one which pro- vides that “no man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in con- sideration of public services." There may be some obscurity about that; there unques- tionably is, but it has been construed times without number by the highest court in the State, and no longer ago than yesterday that section was construed by the highest court in our State in favor of the right of the public, and against the privi- lege that was claimed by the Louis- ville Water Company. We understand pretty .well what it means now. Let us compare it for a moment with what is offered by the Delegate from Marion: “ That no public emoluments shall ever be allowed to any person except inconsidera- tion of public services, the performance of which shall be required by law.” What law‘? A special law or a general law? Let us for a moment read that in connec- tion withthe second subdivision of this substitute. “ That no privilege, immunity, exoneration or exemption shall ever be granted to any man or set of men, which shall not be as freely and fully exercised and enjoyed by all others under similar circumstances, and on like conditions.” Those words are an experiment; who is to determine, after the grant is once made to a company to have control of a river—for example—who is to determine whether the circumstances are similar or the conditions like? Is that a matter which each succeed- [October1(). ing Legislature is to be the sole and exclusive judge of, or is that matter to be left to the determina- tion of the courts, as it is now under the second section? These are questions that are undecided. Nobody has yet answered them; but a mere suggestion of the fact indicates what a Pandora's box may be there for decisions of all sorts in constru- ing these unconstrued sections. It is an experiment, and therefore I am opposed to it. We are not here to make experi- ments; we are not here merely to trans- pose words. Let us not paraphrase, “ Let there be light, and there was light.” Let us go one step further, “The fore- going enumeration of rights shall not be so construed as to disparage, impair or take away any other retained by the people, but omitted therefrom.” Let us read that in connection with section 4 of article 1 of the substitute. “That no charter or franchise shall ever be granted which the Legislature may not, at any time, alter, amend‘ or re- voke.” Whose right is that that is enume- rated there‘? This is a Bill of Rights. This is a bill prescribing the rights of every citizen. I say that this suggestion is a criticism that may not deserve much con- sideration at the hands of the Convention, but it is, at any rate, of equal force, in my judgment, with the criticism made by the Delegate from Marion upon the word “ are” in the Bill of Rights as it now is. The report of the Committee does not suggest a great many changes in the Bill as it now is but I think those that it does sug- gest are, in the main, improper. It, along with the substitute, for example, has a sec- tion providing that “involuntary servitude or slavery shall not exist in Kentucky.” What need on the face of the earth can there be for putting a proposition like that into the Bill of Rights? That institution was swept away in blooda quarter of a cen- tury ago, when the earth was a shimmer of light, and the air a sheen of fire, and we can-do nothing now to bury it deeper tha 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday] Ronns— BECK HAM. [October 10 . it is, and I do not think there should be a word in any part of the Constitution upon the subject. That objection I make to the report of the Committee, and equally to the substitute offered by the Delegate from Marion. - The report of the Committee makes a change in our present Constitution on the subject of libel that I think is ilLadvised. It is known to all the lawyers, perhaps to some here who are not‘ lawyers, that in the trial of a distinguished Dean in 1784 before Lord Mansfield, where Erskine was his counsel, that it was contended by Erskine that the jury should be the judges of the law, as well as the facts in indictments for libel. The court ruled unanimously against him. Then came Fox’s Libel Act, passed by Parliament in 1792. When our first Convention was in session here at Danville, and that Convention incorporated into the present Constitution substantially Fox’s Libel Act, and it has remained in the same form in all our Constitutions ever since. I can see no reason in the world for making any change in it. Mr. RODES. Allow me to say the words “The truth shall be given in evi- dence” are in our Bill, and not in the Fox Bill. Mr. BECKHAM. The substance is the same. The contention there of Erskine was that the jury, unlike in other indict- ments, should be the judges of the law and the fact of the intention of the parties, and not merely the fact or the question of pub- lication. Now, there is one other criticism that I have to make on this Report of the Com- mittee, and then I will relieve your atten- tion. Section 26 provides: Lotteries and gift enterprises are forbidden, and no priv- ileges shall be granted for such purposes, and I none shall be exercised; and no schemes for similar purposes shall be allowed. The General Assembly shall enforce this section by proper penalties. All lottery privileges .or charters heretofore granted are revoked.” It is conceded by all of us that lotteries are harmful, injurious to society, most in- jurious especially to the young, and it may be that it Will be proper to put somewhere in this Constitution a provision denouncing lotteries. I for one must say that I can- not seethe nesessity for putting a provision againstl,’ lotteries in any part of the Con- stitution more than any other crime in the decalogue. According to the view I have of what a Constitution ought to be, it has no place in it, but especially it has no place in a Bill of Rights. Our Bill of Rights as it now is, is our Magna Charta. Let us read for a moment'the 29th section of that. “ No freeman shall be taken, or im- prisoned, or be disseised of his freehold or liberties, or free customs, or be out- lawed or exiled, or any otherwise de- stroyed; nor will we pass upon him, nor condemn him but by lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man, either justice or right.” If Lord Coke, or Blackstone, or Chat— ham, or Sheridan, or Emmett, could rise from their graves and look upon this work of their ancestors, what would they think to see attached to the Magna Charta a provision saying that “lotteries and gift enterprises are forbidden, and no privileges shall be granted for such pur- poses.” ‘This is no place for it, in this Great Declaration of ours that is to last for all time. Now, I have in a feeble and rapid way given my reasons ' why I shall support and vote in this Convention for the Bill of Rights substantially as it now is. Freedom of speech, freedom of consci- ence, freedom of the press, subordination of the military to the civil authority, the writ of habeas' corpus, the right of trial by jury—these pearls without price, all, all are here. They have come down to us, as has been well said, crimsoned in blood. The Delegate from Marion BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Friday,] STRAUS—MCHENRY. himself said to us that he had simply changed the setting. and had added no new jewels. They have lasted us now since the first Constitution was made, They are about the close of a century of their existence in Kentucky. I trust, I have an abiding" trust, that in the Providence of an eternal God these priceless princi- ples, at the close of a second century, will‘ remain and endure, purified, annealed, and perfected, to pro ect and bless the latest generations of our race. (Applause) Mr. STRAUS. Imove that the Com- mittee rise and report progress. The CHAIRMAN. It is moved that the Committee rise and report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The motion being put, was declared car— ried. Mr. Clay resumed the Chair. Mr. MCHEN RY. The Committee of the Whole, who have had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, have had the same un- der consideration and made some progress thereon, but not having completed their work, ask leave to sit again. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Committee of the Whole. The question being put to the House, was declared carried. Mr. STRAUS. I move that the Con- vention do' now adjourn. The motion being put to the House, was declared carried. The Convention thereupon adjourned. [October 10. ~ tionnention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Saturday,] Convention. Vol. 1. FRANKFORT, OCTOBER 11. 1890. No.27 McELRoY—PHEPLs—FUNK. [October 11 The Convention met at 10 o’clock A. M., President Clay in the Chair. The proceedings were opened with ‘prayer by the Rev. Mr. Henderson. The PRESIDENT designated Mr. P. P, Johnston to fill tle Chair. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings \was read and approved. Mr. MCELROY. Mr. President, I have ‘a communication from the Clerk of my county in regard to the indebtedness, and move that the reading be dispensed with, vand that it be referred to the Committee on Correspondence. The PRESIDENT. The reference will ‘be made as indicated. Mr. BRENTS. Mr, President, 1 have ‘received a communication from the County Clerk of my county (Cumberland), stating that there is no indebtedness in that county. I ask that it be referred to the same Committee. I‘he PRESIDENT pro tem. Without objection, the communication will be re- ferred to the same Committee; that is, the Special Committee on Correspondence. Petitions are new _in order. Here is a communication from acitizen of Hancock county, addressed to the President of the ‘ I am unable to direct the Clerk what to do with it unless it is read. Without objection, the petition will be read. The Reading Clerk commenced the read- ing of said petition. Mr. PHELPS. I move that the reading of that petition be dispensed with, and that it be referred to the ‘Committee on General Provisions. _Mr. FUN K. Mr. President, it occurs to me that this communication ought to be read. I am opposed to referring it. I call for the reading of it. “The PRESIDENT pro tem. The mo- tion is to refer. Mr. JONSON. I‘ believe upon the re- quest of any member any paper before the body ought to be published. The PRESIDENT pro tem. I take it for granted that the Convention can ever- rule that request, and, if the Convention orders, it must be referred without read- ing. - Mr. JONSON. I am not familiar with any rule that does that, and I heard some gentleman call for the reading over there. Mr. PHELPS. I withdraw my m'tion. The PRESIDENT pro item. The mo- tion to refer is withdrawn. The reading can be proceeded with, although the Chair holds that the rules can be dispensed with on a two-thirds vote. The Reading Clerk continued the read- ing of said communication. Mr.~ CLAY again resumed the Chair. Mr. PHELPS. Mr. President, I move you that the communication be referred to the Committee on General Provisions and the Reporter be instructed not to include it in the prrinted debates. I say, as a rea- son for that, it we adopt the precedent of allowing these communications to be print- ed, there is no telling where they will end. It will make our printed debates much more sizable than we expect them to be. Every man will try to have some of his wit in our debates. 2 ' RESOLUTIONS. Saturday,] BURNAM—BULLITT—PUGH. [October 11 ,_ And the question being taken upon said motion, it was decided in the affirmative._ The PRESIDENT. Reports from Standing Committees are now in order. R ports from Special Committees. M0- tions and resolutions are in order. Mr. BURNAM presented the following resolution: Resolved, That whenever three-fifths of the members of each House of the General Assembly shall, by a vote entered on their respective Journals, propose an amend- ment to the Constitution of this Common- wealth, such proposed amendment, to- g ther with the ayes and noes of each House thereon, shall be entered in full on their respective Journals; and said amend- ment shall be submitted to the qualified voters of the Commonwealth, for adoption or rejection. at the next election of mem- bers of the General Assembly, in such manner as may be prescribed by law. The proposed amendment shall be published in full at least ninety days preceding the elec- tion, and if a majority or' the electors vot- ing at said election shall vote for the pro- posed amendment, it shall become thereafter apart of the Constitution; but the General Assembly shall not have power to propose amendments to more than two articles of the Constitution at the same session. nor to the same article oitener than once in four years. Mr. BULLITT offered the following resolution : Resolved, That section 33 of article 2 of the present Constitution be amended by adding thereto the following: Nor shall the General Assembly have power to authorize any county, city, town or voting district to give or lease its credit in. aid of any person, association of persons, munici- pality or corporation. but such county, city, town or voting district may, by special or general law, be authorized to contract for and buy the public convenience of the location of any new railroad about to be constructed within the same. or any branch of any railroad then existing therein. Pro- aided, The same shall not cost more than a sum equal to five per centum of the taxa- ble property as assessed the preceding year for State purposes within such county, city, town or voting district: Provided further, Should any such county, city, town or vot- ing district have previously incurred any debt for any railroad, which debt shall be equal or exceed a sum equal in value to five per centum of the taxable property’ therein, it shall not be permitted to incur" any other debt for any railroad, or branch of any railroad, either by donation by such county, city, town or voting district, or by the subscription of stock in such railroad, or branch of any railroad, until after said debt shall have been paid or reduced below the amount of five per centum of the taxa» ble property thereof, and then shall not be permitted to incur any additional expense for the procuring of any railroad, or- branch railroad, than will bring the whole of the railroad indebtedness of such county, city, town or voting district up to an amount equal to five per centum of the- value of the taxable property therein as assessed the preceding year for State taxes. Referred to Committee on Legislative Depatment. Mr. BURNAM. I wish to ask a change- in the reference of the resolution I ofiered. Instead of going to the Committee on Legislative Department, that it go to the Committee on Revision of the Constitu- tion. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the change indicated by the gentleman. from Madison will be odered. Leaves of absence were granted to the‘ Delegate from Bullitt (Mr. Straus); the Delegate :from Green and Taylor (Mr. Wood); the Delegate from Boone (Mr. Lassing); the Delegate from Wayne (Mr. Hines), and the Delegate from Lincoln (Mr. W. H. Milller). Mr. PUGH ofiered the following resolu-v tion. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Pugh, which is as follows: Resolved, That a Committee of three shall be appointed by the Chair, to be styled the Committee of Petitions and Communications, to whom all petitions, protests or remonstrances addressed to this body shall be referred, and whose duty it shall be to examine such communications- and report such as they may deem neces- sary or proper for the reference to the Ap- propriate Committee. pr for such action as the Committee may deem expedient. ‘Referred to the Committee on 'Rules._ RESOLUTIONS. 3 Saturday,] MILLER—PHELPS—YO UNG. [October 11 . The PRESIDENT. The resolution is in the nature of an amendment to the rules, and, under the rules, will lie over one‘ day. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. The motion is made by the Delegate from Lincoln that the res- olution be referred to the Committee on Rules‘. And the question being taken on said motion, the same was decided in the aflirm- ative. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. Mr. President, on Monday last I offered a resolution, and obtained permission to call it up on Satur- day morning after roll-call. I now ask to have it read The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the gentleman’s resolution will be reported. The Clerk read the resolution of Mr. Phelps, calling for afternoon sessions from 3 to 6 o’clock, after the 18th inst. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to offer an amendment. Mr. Phelps having been recognized- The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate from the First Louisville District yield to the Delegate from Lincoln? Mr. MILLER. I desire to insert, in- stead of “ 13th,” “20th,” and also to st ike out “6” and insert “ 5.” The PRESIDENT. The Delegate had better put it in writing. ’ Mr. YOUNG. I also have an amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. Please put it in writing. Mr. PUGH. I desire to offer a commu- nication from the Clerk of the Lewis County Court with ‘reference to the in- debtedness of Lewis county, and ask to have it referred to the Special Committee on Correspondence. I The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, the communicationcan be referred to the Special Committee. The Chair hears no objection, and the communication is so re‘erred. The Secretary will please report the amendment offered-by the Delegate from Lincoln. 4 The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. W. H. Miller, which was as stated verbally by him. Mr. YOUNG. I will not offer any amendment. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to ac- cept the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Lincoln county. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from the First L‘ouisville District accepts the amendment offered by the Delegate from Lincoln. The question recurs upon the adoption of the resolution. Mr. DeHAVEN. I call for a reading of the amended resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Zack Phelps, as amended by Mr. W. H. Miller. Mr. JONSON. Mr. President, I do not think that resolution ought to obtain just now. It is not a secret to this Conven; tion that very much of the‘ Committee, Work is not yet accomplished. The very same reason that was given in the begin- ning for our one day session, in a more ex- tensive sense, applies now. The Com- mittees have only partially completed their labors. They have gone to work on them and informed themselves on the subjects that have been referred to them. They are now in the midst of those labors, and it would divert their attention from the matters to have a session in the after- noon, and then in the evening. every day in the week. It will vastly interfere with the business of the Committees, and conse- quently retard the action of this Conven— tion. When the right time comes. I am as much in favor of that resolution as any Delegate on the floor, but I suggest now that the time has not arrived, and I do not believe that it will be for the advantage of the Convention for us to adopt this resolu- 4 AFTERNOON SESSIONS. Saturday,] WASHINGTON—PHELPS. [Octhber 11 . tion. On the contrary, it would be very , detrimental to our labor and to the work of the Convention, and I hope it will be voted down for the present. Mr. WASHINGTON. It occurs to me that this is a very remarkable and unpro- voked attack upon this patience of this body. When the 20th of this month comes around,this body either will or will not know what to do. If it does know at that time what to do, then this resolution is en- tirely premature and uncalled for. If we do not know at that time what to do, then we are unfit to be here in the business in which we are engaged; and it occurs to me, while the spirit of economy seems to be the presiding divinity of this body, that the sooner we adjourn and go home the better. I do not know that I have ever heard ofa resolution of this kind being in- troduced into a deliberative body. As sug- gested by the gentleman from McLean, a portion of the business of this Convention is being done in Committee. Suppose we come here and talk for two or three hours in the morning and two or three hours in the afternoon, when are we to do our Committee work? And in addition to that, when are we to bestow any investiga- tion upon the great questions which pre- sent themselves to our consideration ‘2 I do not know how it is with the gentle- man from Louisville, but I occasionally, not very often, but occasionally, find it neces- sary to go to bed. I sometimes find it nec- essary, strange as it may sound, to read something, to take an after dinner and after supper smoke; and I think that when I do these things I am better qualified to per- form my duty as a member of this body. I yield to no man in this Convention in the desire to do my whole duty here. I pro- pose to work, and, to the best of my ability. work well. I propose to earn the munifi- cent compensation which we receive, if it is within the range of my poor ability; but I do not think that there are many people in this Convention who propose to sit here from ten until twelve or one o’clock, and then from btwo until five, and then come back here and sit in Committee until ten or eleven o’elock. That is unreasonable. I do not think it ought to obtain, and I hope that this Convention will place the seal of its disapproval upon that resolution and vote it down. Let it go to the tomb of the Capulets, so that we may never more hear of it. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I have no de- sire to impose upon the patience of this body, nor have I any desire or intention to introduce and advocate any measure that would make me disagreeable to the Convention; but I conscientiously feel that this Convention has not made the progress with the matter in hand that we should have made. At 1 o’clock to-day we shall have been in session five weeks. What have we done? We have consid- ered and passed upon one measure, a measure regulating the formation of new counties. That is all we have done. Com- parisons, though sometimes odious, often teach good lessons. I have taken the trouble to examine the debates of the last Convention which met in Kentucky, and I have been astounded to find how our body sufi'ers by comparison with that body. This body is as able as that. The conveniences surrounding this body are as abundant as those which surrounded that body. The opportunities for work, the lights to be thrown on the subjects, are as abundant now as they were then. I find that at the expiration of five weeks the last Convention which met in Ken- tucky had heard the report of the Com- mittee on County Courts, had discussed it, and had voted upon it. I find that the report of the Committee on Common Schools had been made, read, argued, considered and voted. upon. I find that the Committee on Bill of Rights had re- ported, that it had been considered section by section, and voted upon. I find that the Committee on Court of Appeals at the AFTERNOON SESSIONS. 5 Satu rday,] PHELPs. [October 11 , expiration of five weeks had reported, the report had been considered, and one-half of it had been adopted. I find that the Committee on General Provisions had made their report—a lengthy report; that report had been considered section by sec- tion, and adopted. I find that the Com- mittee on Legislative Department had reported, the report had been considered section by section, and about three-fourths of it had been passed upon. I find that the Committee on New Counties had re- ported, the report had been considered and adopted. Now, I say in all candor, in all fairness amongst ourselves, that our work does not compare favorably with that, and, that there is no reason why we should not give our time to this matter and dispose of it. Now, we all know that there are a cer- tain number of speeches going to be made in this Convention that we have got to give the time to hear. A poll amongst the members last night, I am informed, dis- closes the fact that, on the important mat- ter now under consideration, there are to be, in all, forty-two speeches. Of these we have heard five. These five have taken three days. Now, how long will it take to hgar the other thirty-nine‘? My proposi- tion is simply this: to come here and hear these arguments. I know it is important to hear them. I believe the Convention should have the benefit of suggestions from every member as to this Bill of Rights, and I do not wish to be consid- ered as desiring to interfere with any member’s right to be heard on the subject, but I do say that we should give our time to the matter in hand. It has been sug- gested that the Committees, if these extra sessions are adopted, cannot have time to consider subjects’ referred to them. I know that there are at least three or tour im- portant Committees that are ready to re- port, whose reports are now being drafted, and when those reports come, we are to have numerous amendments and numerous arguments made, so that a great deal of time is necessary in their consideration. Under the schedule of Committee meetings which the Convention has adopted we will have a meeting of a Committee of this Convention every night. It is already provided. The rule which ‘the distin- guished gentleman from Campbell voted for himself and advocated on this floor, I believe, provided that those Committees should meet at night. I am not in favor of any innovation. I simply ask that our whole time be given to the matter in hand. Now, there has been shown a laudable spirit to economize here. We have saved a vastarnount of money to the State by the reduction of our pages from $3 to $2 a day; you have declined to elect an Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms, because it would cost five dollars aday. I say we can in that same spirit well afford to divide the length of this session half in two by sitting twice a dayr and hearing these arguments, which have to be heard. It has been suggested. that the Stenographer would not be able to get up with his work if we hold these afternoon sessions. In answer to that, I simply ask this question: Is it more desirable to employ, or allow our Stenographer to employ, one or two additional assistants-4s it more desirable to do that, or continue to pay one hundred men double pay, or to just divide that half in two’? I say that I have no desire to be disagreeable about the matter, and it is not ofl‘ered in any such spirit, but simply because I know we are, throughout the State, being severely criticised because of the small time ‘that we are giving to the considera- tion of this matter. It is not an innova- tion. The distinguished gentleman from Campbell said that he had never heard of such a thing being introduced into a delib- erative body. I beg leave to inform the Convention of the fact that the Mississippi Convention, now in session considering the question of a new Constitution, at the end of three weeks of their session adopted this very rule 'now offered, and are now 6 AFTERNOON SESSIONS. Saturday,] MAY—DEHAVEN—PHELPS, [October 11 , operating under that ru‘e. I hope the Convention will think it wise to adopt this rule. We will dispose of the matters on hand, and reports of Committees will come in from time to time, and the whole work will fit together properly. Before I sit down, in order that the matter may be dis- posed of, and as gentlemen say they wish it'l'finally settled, I move that the special order be postponed until this matter is finished. Mr. MAY. Mr. Presiient, I am not accustomed to public speaking. I hope, though, before this session adjourns. that I will become more accustomed to it. I concur with the gentleman from Newport and the gentleman from McLean, that— The PRESIDENT. If the Delegate from Pulaski will suspend a moment, the Chair will put the motion made by the Delegate from the First Louisville District, which is, that the consideration of the special order be postponed until the mat- ter now before the Convention be dis- posed of. And the question being taken-upon said motion, it was decided in the affirm- ative. Mr. DEHAVEN. I hope the Delegate from Pulaski will yield the floor in order to enable me to offer an amendment. Mr. MAY. Certainly. The Reading Clerk read the amendment oflered by Mr. DeHaven, which is as follows: The evening session shall be confined to the discussion of matter which has been reported‘ by a Committee as a proposed amendment to the present Constitution Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I accept that amendment. Mr. MAY. Very unfortunately for me, but not for the Convention, I believe that I have not been able to be in attendance and hear the proceedings of each day, and I do think that this resolution offered by the gentleman from the Louisville District is rather premature. He speaks of the Convention of 1849 as having succeeded in doing more work in the same time than the Convention of 1890. That may all be true. The gentleman certainly does not consider that it takes more Work to support a family of eight or ten than it does a wife and two children. There is more work to do now than there was in 1849, because We have more people to work for. The State of Kentucky has a greater population. Great developments have been made in the last forty years, and when there is more work to do, of course it takes more time to do it, and from the fa -t that some of the Committees on the various questions before this Convention meet at two or three o’clock in the afternoon every day, or some of the days during the week, it would be impossible for the members to be in attendance at this afternoon session. I shall therefore vote against the resolu- tion to have two sessions every day,be- cause if ,we work well, as the gentleman from Campbell stated, from ten till one o’clock every day, our sensibilities will be obtuse enough to refrain from any further Work during that day. It is the keen ax that cuts well. When we take rest, take sleep, we develop power to work the following morning, and I shall, therefore, vote against the resolution being adopted at this time. Mr. CLARDY. I agree in part with what has been said on both sides of this question, and I yield to no Delegate on this floor in an earnest desire to facilitate the work of this Convention, and complete it at as early a day as it can be done, to be thoroughly and well done.‘ But I am of this opinion on this subject: While I am desirous that this Convention, just as soon as it can be do: e properly, and to facilitate the business of the Convention, I thought that it should meet twice a day. I am just as anxious as the gentleman" from Louis- ville to have that done, but to act upon it now, it seems to me, would be unwise. We do not know exactly what will be ac- AFTERNOON SESSIONS. ‘ to the Committee on Rules. Saturday,] PETTIT—JOHNSTON, [October 11. Jcomplished this week. We do not know in what condition the work of this Con- vention will be on next Monday, or the '20th of this month; but when that day arrives we will know. We will have some idea then as to what reports are ready. We will have some idea as to what the 'Committees have already reported, and what is yet before‘ them. Now, in order that we may consider the matter wisely and well, it appears that it would be better, _all things considered, to postpone the ac- tion upon this resolution until the time shall arrive that the gentleman proposes ‘that we shall meet twice a day. If it is then thought proper and wise and best that, we should meet twice a day, I believe tha this Convention will be largely in favor of it. Itherefore move that this matter be postponed, and made a special order for 10 ‘o’clock on the 20th inst. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President,_ I desire "to make an amendment to the motion sug- gested by the gentleman from Christian, ‘for the reason assigned by the gentleman ~from the First District of the city of Louis- ville, and by the gentleman from Camp bell and others, who’ have addressed the House ; I move that the matter be referred I do so for the purpose that that Committee may consult with the other Committees of the House and see the condition of the business of the House, that they can intelligently re- port to this Convention what is best to ex- pedite the business of the House. For that reason, I move you that this matter be referred ta that Committee. The PRESIDENT. ‘ The Chair will put :the motion to refer first. Mr. JOHNSTON. I believe that this matter would be better met by laying the whole business on the table. I therefore make the motion to lay the motion to refer sand the resolution on the table. The PRESIDENT. That motion has .gprecedence of the other motion made, and while Chair will put that motion first. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Upon that motion I call the yeas and nays. Mr. FUNK. I second the call, The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion to lay the whole matter upon ' the table, and upon that question the yeas and nays have been demanded by the gen- tleman from Lincoln and seconded by the gentleman from the Seventh Louisville District, and the Secretary will call the roll. The result was announced, as follows: YEAS—38. Allen, M. K. Askew, J. F. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Bennett, B. F. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph B0163, S. H. Bourland, H. R. Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Clardy, John D. Cox, H. Doris. W. F.. Forgy, J. M. Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Holloway, J. W. Jonson, Jep. C. Johnston, P. P. Knott, J. Proctor Mackoy, W. H. May, John S. McHenry, H. D. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. ' Muir, J. W. Sachs, Morris Smith, H. H. Smith. W. Scott Spalding, I. A. Swango, G. B. Washington, George West, J. F. Whitaker,Emery Williams, L. P. V. HAYS—36. Allen, C. T. Amos, D. C. Auxier, A. J. Ayres, W. W. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Chambers, G. D. DeHaven, S. E. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Harris, Geo. C. Hopkins, F. A. Kennedy, Hanson Kirwan, E. E. Lewis, W. W. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Nunn, T. J. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Ramsey. W. R. Rodes, Robert Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay ABSENT—26 Applegate. Leslie T. Lassing, L. W. Berkele, Wm. Martin, W. H. 8 I BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] Bnons'ron. [October 1 1 Birkhead, B. T. Coke, J. Guthrie Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. McOhord, W. C. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. Moore, Laban T. Goebel, William O’Hara, R. H. Hendrick, W. J. Parsons, Roh’t T. Hines, J. S. Petrie, H. G. Hines, Thomas H. Quicksall, J. E. Hogg, S. P. Straus, F. P. Jacobs, R. P. 'Wood, J. M. James, A. D. Woolfolk, J. F. Mr. PETTIT. My colleage, Mr. Birk- head, is at home sick, and I therefore ask leave of absence for him, and would state, if he had been present yesterday, on the motion to elect an Assistant Sergeant-at- Arms, he would have voted no. I also ask leave of absence for Mr. Berkele. Mr. BOLES. I want to ‘ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Boyd, who was called home suddenly. Mr. BECKNER. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Washington. The PRESIDENT. sence are granted. Mr. SWANGO. I ask leave to intro- duce an amendment to the Preamble. The amendment read, as follows: The leaves of ab- We, the representatives of the people of the State of Kentutky, in Convention as- sembled, to secure to all the citizens thereof the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty and property, and of pursuin g happiness,and grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which we enjoy, do ordain and establish this Consti- tution for ‘its government. The PRESIDENT. The hour for the Special Order has arrived, and the Chair will call the Delegate from the Fourth Dis- trict of Louisville to the Chair. Mr. Young took the Chair, and recog- nized the Delegate from Lexington (Mr. Bronston). Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. Chairman, al- ways, when attempting to express my views on any subject, I find myself almost overcome with embarrassment lest I should fail, with proper clearness, to give that expression; but on this occasion, recogniz- ing the great responsibility which rests upon me to carefully and honestly execute a trust committed to my hands Without solicitation and against my protest, and in this presence, composed of men who, by reason of their natural endowments, intel-a lectual attainments, and experience as patriots and statesmen, where I have a right to listen rather than speak, to learn. rather than teach, to be led rather than lead, that ordinary embarrassment has he- come increased to such an extent that when- I arose I found that the power of speech had almost deserted me; and my only hope is that a patient consideration on the part of this Convention will aid me in giving expression to thoughts and feelings which. come, not from the lips, but from a heart. full of love and Veneration for the past and of the deepest emotions for the security and safety of the future. I will-accept, without the erasure of a- single word, or the blotting of a single sentence or thought, all that has been said‘ by the distinguished Delegate from the County of Oldham, as well as the classic review of history presented by the distinl guished gentleman from the County of Warren—yea, and the beautiful peroration of the distinguished gentleman from the County of Marion—as the beginning and the end of what I may say on this occa- sion. But whilst I will accept itin that respect, I must beg leave to say, unless the- instructions which I have gathered from my earliest boyhood, and which have been crystallized by the experience of manhood, were false, I can not accept the teachings that they offer as precepts for the govern- ment of Kentucky’s posterity. I will not ask that you cling to ancient things merely because they are ancient. I will not controvert the statement of the distinguished Delegate from the county of ' Marion, when he said you might as well cling to the old homestead and refuse to adopt the improvements of modern archi» tecture for the convenience of domestic- BILL OF RIGHTS. 9" Saturday,] BRONSTON. [October ll _, life. It is true that one of the greatest pleasures of my life has been to get away, for the time being, from the cares and business oflife, back to the old homestead, although it be covered with ivy and moss, and to wander through its halls, to remem- ber that there my father has stood; that it was there at my mother’s knee that I learned first to lisp the name of Jehovah, _ and under its shade trees to recall the ear- liest impressions of life. 1 find here a purer atmosphere that better fits me for the duties of life and contact with my fellow- men. And if you say tear it down, I, at least, crave the simple boon, that while the ruthless hand of the architect and me- chanic strikes down its walls, you will let me shed a tear at its departing grandeur, and hope the structure you may build shall be better for the comfort of the future. And so I say you may strike down the Bill of Rights, you may touch it with the skilled hand of’ modern architec- ture if you will, but before you do it, may I not ask two things? First, that you will allow me to shed one tear for its departing grandeur, and to demand at your hands that the finishing touches shall add to the substance and not merely to the form. What, Mr. Chairman, is the Bill; of Rights? I have been taught to believe that man, as an individual, has been en- dowed by his Creator, or if you please, by the immutablelaws of nature, with certain absolute rights which have been properly . styled the “liberties of the citizen.” That those rights to man as an individual were inherent, were inalienable, were indefeasi- ble, springingfrom nosource save that source which ushered man himself into existence- The natural rights which authorize a man to dispose of his person or property as he chooses; but such rights are but the liber- ties of the savage, that may have been en- joyed for the time being by Robinson Crusoe on the solitary island, and so inimical were they to the social qualities with which man had been endowed that a sacrifice must be made, and hence arose~ civil liberty, which is but natural liberty,. . restrained by the necessities of the public- good. And yet this was not enough, be-- cause man was confronted of neeessity' with the fact that he could not, either as an‘ individual or as a citizen, properly secure“ to himself his natural rights. And hence- governments sprang into existence, which is the security by the Constitution and the’ government for the enjoyment of man’s- natural and civil liberty. He has made a‘ sacrifice, sacrifice of his natural and civil» rights, in order to better secure their en-- joyment. ment as an agency to secure‘and protect. his natural and civil liberties, out of which government he expects to have, and from' which government has a right to demand, political liberty. It is as familiar as the- twice-told tale to every man on this floor ;. and would it not be almost an abuse of your patience for me to repeat here what- are these absolute rights of men? Per- sonal security; security of life, limb and body; security of health, security of hap- piness and security of reputation. Per- sonal liberty; liberty of locomotion against. restraint or arrest. Liberty of speech‘ against restraint. Liberty of consoience.. Right of property; to hold it; to de- mand from your government its absolute‘ and unqualified security. Security in its- possession, its enjoyment and its disposal But, Mr. Chairman, when man, as an individual and citizen, delegated authority to this agent, government thus established. when man proposed to submit to a rule by- a majority—because the agents or repre- sentatives, either in the Executive, Legis- lative, or Judicial Department, must be selected by vote of the majority-1 say, when man delegated such authority, be reserved to himself certain natural and civil rights which that majority, through its agency, can not touch. Then I say that the “ Bill of Rights” is He has, in a word, in order to- attain force and power, created govern-v 10 BILL OF RIGHTS. @down from ancient tyrants 'nized by posterity , “and Saturday] Bnons'ron [October 11 but the residu um of man’s natural and civil liberty, and the compensation which is given him for the sacrifice that he has made thereof. And in that Bill of Rights, ‘in that residuum, in that which you take ' tout ofthe order of government, and which the government cannot touch, let there be nothing save this relic of natural liberty and the compensation by civil liberty for the sacrifice you may make. Our fore- fathers, in the Bill of Rights before us, ‘recognized that doctrine and that alone. At the beginning (and I read not for the 'edification or instruction of this Convention, but for my own good, for I love to near ‘the sound of those words) that the "gen- eral” not special, “ great,” not small, and ' ‘ essential,” not important principles of lib- berty, not civil liberty, not political liberty, but natural and civil combined, “the es- sential principles of liberty and’ free gov- -ernment.” Government, the agency that we have created, an agency that is not handed down to us from a klng or tyrant, an agency that is not inherited, an agency for our own protection and for a security of these absolute rights that we of our own 'will have created. And hence, we say a -“ free government,” and not one handed or despots. Therefore, they say “ in order that the es- sential principles of liberty and free gov- ernment ” may be “recognized,”_recognized by the world, recognized by us. recog- established,” not simply erected, not simply giv- ing existence, but “ established,” “we de- clare.” That is the beginning. What is the end? “To guard against transgression of the high powers which we have dele- gated to our representatives, we declare that every thing in this article,” this re- siduum of liberty, “ is excepted out of the .general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate.” We will not .submit to the fluctuations of the future. Majorities might arise that would under- :take to infringe upon these liberties which l v'e seek to secure, and, therefore, we will not submit them to the rule of that major- ity. If I am correct, Mr. Chairman, in my interpretation, let me ask of the gen- tlemen of this Committee, if those prin- cipli s be true, why did you strike out sec- tion No. 2, which declares, in unmistakable language, man’s right to thus reserve these ' absolute rights? It is this: “The absolute, arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.” You say it has become obsolete; that there is no longer any necessity for that. How do you know? Do you judge the future by the past‘? The past was guarded by that provision. Strike it down. and how long will it be before a majority might seek to make abject slaves of a helpless minority? How long do you know that it might be that the majority might demand the life, the liberty, or the property of the citizen? And hence I say to these gentlemen, give me a reason before you ask permission to strike that stone from the wall. The serious reflections that were forced upon me by the discussion upon this floor induced me to takefrom the shelf in my library that great compendium of English law by Blackslone, and in a foot note by Christian I find these words, which I sub- mit to the consideration of the wise and patient meninow before me: “But some who are zealous to perpetuate these inesti- mable blessings of civil liberty, fancy that our political liberty may be augmented by reforms, or what they deem improvements, in the Constitution of the government. Men of such opinions and dispositions there will be, and perhaps it is to be wished there should be, at all times but before any seri- ous experiment is made, we ought to be convinced by little less than mathematical demonstration that we shall not sacrifice the substance to the form; the end to the means; or exchange present possessions for future prospects.” Gentlemen of the Com- mittee, have you observed that principle in ' BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 Satuday,] your efforts to change this Bill of Rights? Let us see. We are told by the Chairman that the first arrangement under article 1 was done by adistinguished member of that Commit- tee, in order to present in a group the seven fundamental principles upon which the liberty of man depends; that it was done in order to get them togethi r in these times when governments were disposed to be magnified and the individual was dis- posed to be minimized, that you might hang them on the walls of the school-room, and allow the children to learn by rote those immortal principles. You say that you gathered them from the Bill of Rights. You say that they are the gems that you seek to give a new setting. Is it true? You say in the first sentence that “all men are by nature free and equal, and have cer- tain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned.” Where did you get this expression? I defy any member of that Committee to put his finger on it in the Bill of Rights. I agree with the distinguished Delegate from Marion when he says that it is nonsense to an- nounce upon this floor that all men are born free and equal. Did you get it from section one? If you did how hast the beauty been marred? Section one reads: “That all freemen when they form a social compact are equal.” Did you get it from section fcur? If you did, the substance has been destroyed-in seeking for the form. .Section four reads: “ That all power is in- herentin the people, and all free govern- ments are founded on their authority, and instituted” for what? For “their peace, safety, happiness, security and protection of property.” We have in the very first subdivision as one of these important les- sons which you will have learned, as an in- herent and inalienable right; a right that you cannot touch; a right that you can not modify; a right that you did not sub- mit to the government in any sense of the word; “the right of enjoying and defend- BRONSTON. [October 11. ing their lifes andliberty.” Where did you get those words and what do you mean by it? Is it an absolute right? The right of self defense is inherent, but gov- ernment is formed in order to aid in the se- curity of liberty and the protection of life. The Committee, in another section, show what they mean by “the right of man to defend his life and liberty;” “ the right to bear arms in defense of themselves, thei families and of the State, or in aid of the civil power, when thereto legally sum- moned, subject to the power of the General Assembly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons.” Where did you get that expression, gentlemen of the Committee? I ask it, and have a right to demand, that when you propose to strike these stones from the bulwark of liberty of my people, I ask, Where did you get the words? Possibly you would answer that you have paraphrased these words from the old Bill of Rights; ‘that the rights of the citizens to bear arms in defense of them- selves and the State shall not be question- ed. Did you attempt to extract the essence from that? If you did, what has become of the substance? Do you mean to limit the right of the citizen by an interpolation of words? Was it carelessly done? Look at the language of the committee-“ The right to bear arms in defense of themselves, the‘rfamily, and of the State.” Why put in the word “family.” Do you mean to limit the right of self-defense to one’s own family? The Courts of this enlightened age have announceda doctrine which ought to be dear to every Kentucky heart, and that is, it is not only our right but our duty to defend even a stranger clothed in rags and tatters, if we see his life is about to he unjustly taken; and yet the gentlemen of the Committee for the sake of beauty, interpolate the word "family,” and say no longer shall the right of defense extend to any one outside of the immediate family. Again, you have put in the words: “or in aid of the civ l 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] BRONSTON. [October 11.. power when thereto legally summoned.” Why put these words in the Bill of Rights? The old Bill said, “to defend one’s self and his State.” .Now, you say, that a citizen cannot do that unless he is summoned to do it by the civil authority. Suppose the civil authorities should stand aside, would you deny him the right to defend the law of the State, and to carry arms to do it? No; gentlemen of the Committee, have you not destroyed the substance in seeking for the form ? Again, they say, “the right of- seeking and pursuing their safety and happiness is an inalienable right. Is that an inherent and inalienable right? Do you extract that gem from the Bill of Rights, and propose that it shall stand out in this new setting? Where did you get it‘! “The right of pursuing happiness.“ In my pursuit of happiness I might trample upon my neighbor. In my pur- suit of happiness I might trample upon the very foundation of my State. My taste, my happiness and desires may not be compatible with good mo als or good order, and yet the gentlemen say I have an inherent and inalienable right to pursue it, no matter where I go. Do you mean that gentlemen of the Committee? Let us see the particular section of the Bill of Rights from which you took that. With all due respect for the distin- guished Chairman of the Committee, I would like for him to tell where he got them and what he means. He tells me in one breath that I may pursue happiness as an inalienable right, yet he says in another when he comes to speak of liberty of con- science, “but the liberty hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affiirmation, or to excuse acts of licentiousness.” But gentlemen, can you tell me what he means by excusing acts of licentiousness ‘.7 Who is to be the - judge of an act of licentious- ness? Some men in this Com- monwealth of ours might say to smoke a cigar is an act of licentiousness. Some men might say to attend a horse race 18 an- act of licentiousness; some man might. say to take a social drink is an act of licen— tiousness. Do you mean to deny that to‘ the citizen? If it adds to my happiness or' pltasure, which you say I have an aliena- ble right to pursue, you will take it from me The Chairman of the Committee don’t stop there. He says, “all practices inconsistent with good order.” What practice is inconsistent with good order? And what does that mean‘? You propose to invest a man in this Commonwealth. with an inalienable right to pursue happi-v ness, and yet prevent him to do what. some prude may say is inconsistent with good order. Shall the majority judge, or‘ shall he who sits upon the court bench. judge? As a further inconsistent restriction, the: Committee adds: “Or peace or safety of the State, or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” Why put these words into the Bill of Rights? How difi'erent is the pro- vis‘on in the old bill ; we are told here by gentlemen of that Committee that this is- done to prevent any possibility of Mormon- ism being introduced into Kentucky; and in order to prevent that, we indulge in this circumlocution of words attempted to be construed to deny every citizen of the. Commonwealth those little licentious prac-- tices which are a source of a great deal of ' pleasure to gentlemen who love to smoke and drink, and occasionally go to a horse The old Bill of Rights contains this pro- vision: “- That all men have a natural and. indefeasible right'to worship God accord-7 ing to the dictates of their consciences ;, that no man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship or maintain any ministry against his consent. That no human authority ought in any case whatever to control or interfere with the. rights of conscience, and that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious societies or modes of worship.” Now, do I. understand, gentlemen of the Committee, \ BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 ‘Saturday,] ‘his religion.” enough? Is it not clear enough? law says I shall have but one wife. BRONSTON. [Octeber 11. ‘that our forefathers had not sufiicient fore- thought to anticipate the possibility of some _man, by reason of his religious con- ‘victions, claiming an enlarged civil liberty? .Do I understand by this interpolation of words that they mean to place such a mark as that upon a noble ancestry; if so, let me call their attention to this language of the old Bill: “That the civil rights, privileges or capacities of any citizens shall in no wise be diminished or enlarged on account of Is not that language broad The My religion makes me satisfied. The YMormon say “my religion teaches me I 'may have twenty, and, therefore, I claim under this provision I shall have them.” ‘The question is solved by reading the pro- vision of the old Bill of Rights, which says “your civil rights, your privileges, your capacity shall not be enlarged over ‘mine by reason of your religious convic- tion.” Again, the gentleman says, as a fourth provision, which he wants the children to learn and never forget, that ‘another inalienable and inherent right of -man is, “the right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions.” That might do for Robinson Crusoe on the lonely island. He might to the trees, stocks and stones freely express his thoughts and ‘opinions, but here, where he is surrounded by human beings, whose reputations are ‘as dear to them as to him, he dare not. Where did you get that? Turn over and find in section nine of old bill this provision : “the free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the invaluable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, Write and print on :any subject, being re- sponsible for the abuse of that liberty.” Now, in order to make a beautiful picture, the gentlemen extract one-half of that sentence, and set it up as an ina‘ienable right and destroy its substance because no man can speak or express his opinion, ex- .cept that he accompnies such liberty Lof expression with the responsibility for the abuse of that liberty. Now, again, as the fifth clause of this group the gentlemen want to teach my children: “the .right of acquiring and protecting property.” Where did you get that? Did you find that in the Kentucky Bill of Rights‘? Did you find it in any Bill of Rights‘? -Have I a right, in- herent and inalienable, to acquire property? I might acquire it by theft; I might ac- quire it at the gaming-table; I might establish a lottery to acquire it. You say it is inherent and inalienable in me t1 ac- quire it in any way I please. You set up, as unqualified, “the right of acquiring property.” The gentlemen of the Com- mittee were not satisfied with the correct- ness of that principle; for I find that they add a new clause to the Bill of Rights, in saying “that lotteries and gift enterprises shall be forbidden,” and so forth. You say I have a right to acquire property that is inalienable and inherent, and yet you pre- scribe a limit to the exercise thereof. I simply advert to this example, not to oppose inhibition of lotteries, but by the inconsistency of the Committee to show that the Government must prescribe pro- tection for propertv, and the mode of exchanging it. What you reserve out of the order of government ,is the “right of property,” and that you ask the Govern- ment to secure to you; and it may protect‘ each and every man’s rights, prescribing the way in which he shall aiquire prop- erty. Man has reserved personal liberty ; the right to move where he pleases, to go where he pleases; the right to engage in any profession or business he pleases, not inconsistent with public good, but the Government prescribes certain rules of law which say what is his and what is others, and the mode in which it may be converted. Gentlemen of the Committee, you say one of the inalienable rights is “the right of protecting proper- ty.” Is that true? Have I a right to protect my property as an in- 14. ' BILL or RIGHTS. Satu rday,] BRONS'I‘ON. alienable and inherent right? Let me see I find in the 25th section of the report you say, “no armed person or bodies of men shall be brought into this State for the preservation of the peace or the suppression of domestic violence except upon the application of the General Assem- bly or the Governor when the Assembly may not be in session.” if you believe it. You give to me in one sentence, as inal- ienable, the right of protecting my prop- erty, and yet you say if I find that a num- ber of men have banied together striking down property and destroying it, that I shall not call to my assistance men who by reason of superior skill can help me to do it. I mention that simply to show the in- consistency in this confusion of language. Governments are established to protect and secure my property, and I have the right to rely upon that Government with all its force and wealth and intelligence to secure tome that protection. I desire to pass on. The next provision which the gentle- men insert in their report is a relic of sec- tion 1 in the Bill of Rights. Let me read section 1: “That all freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal, and that no man or set of men are entitled to ex- clusive, separate public emoluments or priv- ileges from the community, but in consid- , eration of public services.” The Committee have preserved the latter part of that after extracting the first part of the sentence; but the distinguished Delegate from Mar- ion ofi'ers as a substitute a provision which I must admit has demanded from me, as all things emanating from him would demand and receive, the most careful, the most prayerful, and intelligent consideration that I can give. It gives me pleasure to state in the presence of this body that when. I came against my will, and doubting my capacity to stand as a Delegate upon this floor, I found consolation and hope in the reflection that his superior intelligence and wisdom would be the guiding star that would lead me into the proper paths. Sad indeed is the thought to me that it has been dimmed somewhat. I cannot indorse what he has said. to admit here that out of the construction of this section the evils to which he re- ferred have partially grown, but I deny that they entirely grewout of it. I will admit that the Legislative Department of the Government, in the exercise of that- unrestrained power to pass local acts, aided by the judicial construction of those acts in the light of this sentence, have im- posed unjust burdens upon the people of‘ the Commonwealth of Kentucky. But I deny that the remedy offered by the dis- tinguished Delegate will meet the case. These evils have grown out of the pro- vision, “but in consideration of public ser- vice,” which was placed as an inhibition. In the provision offered by the distin- guished Delegate he removes the inhibition entirely and opens wide the field. You may strike down the charter of Green and. Barren river, which creates a monopoly because you say that it is in viola'ion ‘of the Constitution, that it is not any public service; but under your section, if you give them the charter, and there is nothing to prevent you, the courts could not do it, and then every other person, or set of per-v sons in the Commonwealth, can get ex- actly the same privilege if they want. it. It either means that or it means something else. I might‘ have been unjustly led to another con- clusion by reason of whatI have gath- ered from whisperings among the Dele- gates upon this fioor. I understand that in this nineteenth century we, as Kentuck- ians, can stand and say with pride to the civilized world the boastful words, that Kentucky has never refused her aid to education and to Christianity; that she has been willing to exempt and exonerate from the burdens of government her churches and her school-houses, believing, as she did, that no better, no grander, nov higher public service could be rendered. [October 11.. I am willing BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Saturday,] BRONSTON. [October 11 ._ than to educate and christianize the youth of the land; and yet, if this provision of the Delegate from Marion be adopted, which says that such privileges and emolu- ments shall be extended, not simply to every set of men, but to every man, the humblest citizen in this Commonwealth, could claim, You shall not exempt, be- cause I am not enjoying like benefits. I, in my humble way, Mr. Chairman, would suggest that it has been the experience of all ages that time is required to properly apply such fundamental abstract principles as vcu,have defined in the Blll of Rights. The trouble has been, not with the prin- ciple, but the application thereof. Three instances have been mentioned in which that was abused—the Green and Barren river, the Louisville Gas Company, and the Lottery franchises of the State. I would suggest that had the Legislature not had the power to grant spe'cial legislation, could either of those have existed? Cor- rect the evil by abridging the power of your Legislative Department; but do not correct the evil by striking down what I believe to be the best evidence of Ken- tucky’s progress and Christian advance- ment, and that is the cherishing of the churches of the State. That is not all. The gentleman says that you do not wart any benefits or emoluments extended even for public ser- vices; and yet he prop ses to convert Kentuckyby her Legislature into what‘? Into actually a commercial mart. “No public emoluments shall ever be allowed to any person exceptin consideration of pub- lic services, the performance of which shall be required by law.” What does thatmean? Can the same law that creates the emolu- ment require the service? and if required by law he says it shall be exempt. What would prevent the very act of the Legisla- ture that created the emolument ri quiring ‘by law apublic service to be rendered? What a provision, “except in consideration of public services which shall be rrquired by law l” It does not say general law. It goes further, and in order to avoid what I know from my experience to be a praetica1 example of “employment by the govern-- ment of an agent to go and bring back a fugitive from justice,” he says: “No public emolument shall ever be allowed to any person except in consideration of pub~ lic services for which the Chief Executive Magistrate, or some other officer of the: Commonwealth, shall be legally au- thorlzed to contract.” afraid of the Legislature. You say _that the Legislature has delved'into this- lair to bring out the infamous lottery; and yet you want to invest the Legislature with: power to authorize the Governor, or any other ofilcer of the Commonwealth, to make- any contract he pleases for public services, and then the State is b'iund by it. This encourages rather than prevents the evils, for what would hinder me, if I were the- representattve of such alcorporation as I know to exist within the Commonwealth of‘ Kentucky, by the use of unfair means to procure legislation that would authorize a constable, or some subordinate officer of the Commonwealth, to make a contract with me by which unjust burdens would be im- posed upon the people of the Common- wealth. stand it and the exclusive emoluments shall be enjoyed. Have you avoided the evil ?‘ sacrificed to the- Has the end not been means? I suggest, with the greatest rev- erence to the distinguished gentlemen and to this Convention, that we had “better- bear the evils we have than fly to those we know not of.” Let it stand as it is. The experience and the wisdom of the highest- Court of the land has at last given a true and satisfactory construction to that provis- ion, and made a proper appilcation thereof. Yes, I might say that the human intellect. may have been beclouded at times. but I am proud to be able to say that with. that great Court of the Commonwealth of Why, you were‘- Yet you say, because that contract, has been authorized by law, the Sta‘e must- 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] BRONSTON , [October 11 , \ Kentucky the mists have blown away, and . they have struck bottom rock, and to-day, as to the Louisville Water-works, they have defined, in a way that is satisfactory, this provision in the Constitution. So they “did as to the Louisville Gas Company, but the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the decision. Gentlemen of this “Convention, lifting my hat with great re- spect to that Court, I say let us not strain our intellects or our consciences in the hope to make a law that can not bv that Court be twisted to antagonize the inter- sets of thewCommonwealth of Kentucky. Growing out of that same subject, the distinguished Delegate from Marion says this: “No charter or franchise shall ever be granted which the Legislature may not at any time alter, amend or revoke, saving, however, the owners thereof, and to their legal representatives, all such property rights as shall accrue or be acquired there under.” There are two provisions of the Constitution which we can understand; one specially in this connection, which says that ‘-no law impairing the obliga- tion of contracts shall ever be passed.” The gentleman wants to destroy that now. In his reference to the de- cision in the Dartmouth College case, he says it has received so much abuse from the 121W_\61‘S that he wants to strike down that provision. Do you mean to say that you will invite gentle- men to form themselves into a corporation and give them a franchise to build a raii- road from the borders of the Ohio to Ten- nessee, and induce them to expend million dollars in its construction, and that at the pleasure of the Legislature you will strike down the franchise and simplv leave them the road-bed and the rails ? Is that what you mean by saying “saving the right of property?” If you don't mean that, what do you mean? Because the Courts have already said, in the construction of bat provision of the Constitution,that whilst you may alter, repeal or modify, yet you cannot do it so as to interfere with the obligation of the contract on the part of the State, which was, “if you do this thing, if you invest your money, and make these improvements,” you shall not be divested of the right to their full enjoyment and profit. Do you mean to stand upon the borders of the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky, and sound through the trumpet, far and wide, that we want no capital brought in Kentucky; but if you will come, we will let you invest it here, as was said by the distinguished Delegate upon yesterday, and enjoy it fora while, but then we will take it away, your franchise and property too? Once more. The gentlemen of the Committee have said that “printing presses shall be free to every person who under- takes to examine the proceedings of the General Assembly, or any branch of gov- ernment, and no law shall ever be made to ,restrain the right thereof. Every person may freely and fully speak, write and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.” There is the security of freedom of speech. Now as an additional security, our forefathers have made this provision : “In prosecutions for the publication of papers investigating the official conduct of ofiicers or men in a pub lic capacity, or where the matter published is proper for public information, the truth thereof may be given in evidence, and in all indictments for libel, the jury shall have a right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court as in other cases.” Both the Committee in its report, and the distinguished gentleman from Marion in his substitute, ask an in- terpolation. The Committee these words : “And it shall be sulficient defense in any case that the matter published was true and was published with good intent.” The Delegate from Marion, if I caught the words that he said he wanted to add: “And the truth shall be a sufficent defense.” Why do you insert those words‘? Gen- tlemen have recited with graphic beau- BILL OF RIGHTS. 17 Saturday,] BRONSTON. [October 11. ty the history of Fox’s libel law. That is very nice. He presents it, possibly, in more classic language than we could have found it in the book, and, had he been making his argument at the time that this was originally drafted, it might have car- ried with it some force; but I stand here as a representative of the nineteenth cen- tury in Kentucky, and ask of this Conven- tion what abuses have grown up under this provision, what rights have been trammeled that demand a change? I did not have the time to do it in the midst of my con- flicting duties, but I asked a younger brother to take the Constitutions of the various States in the Union and find for me—which he did, and wrote upon a sheet of paper-_the expressions in each and every Constitution in the Union previous to 1876. I find there is but one State, and that State Nebraska, that has sought to interpolate such words into this provision. Gentlemen say that the necessity for those words arose out of the peculiar character of the times. What in our time has changed the character ? It is very nice for them to stand here and talk of the press as the “ palladium of human liberty.” Di not we ,all agree to that? But come to the practical ques- tion, have the rights of the press been abused? Have they been restrained in the right of criticising men in 06%, whether in the Executive, Judicial or Legislative Department of the State ? Have they been abridged even in their rights to go into the innermost recesses of domestic life, and there, for the purpose of gratifying a pruri- ent taste, publishing to the world things that had better been kept quiet? Are they dissatisfied? You say to them—and I would that the press of the Commonwealth of Kentucky would open wide their eyes to this effort on the part of the Committee --you say to them that the only little change that you make is to say that the Courts shall determine the law and the jury the facts, and that the truth and good intent combined will be a defense; and that that does not abridge their rights. 1 have not had in my limited experience but one case of libel to prosecute. That was for a libel upon a Court of Justice. Nar- rowly, sharply, to my mind, was brought the wisdom of the provision in this Bill of Rights. Every lawyer here knows that if you authorize the Court to determine the law he can easily dec‘ide, by peremptory instruction, whether the case shall or shall not go to the jury. If you allow the Court to determine the law, he can determine whether it was with “good intent” or not. The humble. citizen who goes before such concentrated power, and who has dared to charge the judge upon the bench with corruption in the rffice, who has by that act of his arraigned the combined wisdom and sympathy of the entire Judiciary of the State against him ; who goes poor and in tatters, if you please, and says I published it. It was “true,” and “with good intent;” and here is my evidence. The Court, who has the right to judge of the law, says: “Under the law, your evidence is not sufficient, and I will not permit it to go to the jury,” and he turns to them and says, ‘Gentlemen of the Jury, find the man guilty.” Take it to the Court of Appeals, and that Court, how- ever much it might desire to protect the poor and the innocent, might yield to sympathy for men in like position, and say, for the protection of the Court, “we will afiirm the ruling and let the man be punished.” Will you permit it? Our forefathers were wise when they said the Court cannot and shall not do it. The Court may lay down the law, but the Court cannot, dare not apply7 those princi- ples of law to the facts. The jury must do it. In no case shall the Court undertake to determine that question, on the one hand for the protection of the press, and on the other hand for the protection of the individual. Why, the distinguished Chairman of this Com- 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday] Bnon s'ron . [Ocf ober 11 . mittee, as I read from his reported speech, said that such is the law in murder, and asks, “ Is libel worse than murder ‘?" I answer the gentleman, in the presence of this intelligent audience, yes, it is worse than murder. You may kill a man and put him away beneath the sod, and there, over his mouldering body, may grow the green grass, and his children and grand- children may come about and shed a tear; but take from him his reputation, and he is a living corpse walking among men- a stench in their nostrils—a being subject to the scorn of the human race. Worse than murder; because the man who strikes down his fellow-man invokes at once the anger and the determination of every hu- man being to prosecute him; but let him, by the insidious means of the press, strike down a man’s character, and the people have their prurient taste gratified fora moment, and then they forget, as it were, and leave the poor wretch to wander de- graded throughout this life. Gentlemen of this Convention, I have a right as a Kentuckian upon this floor to say that you shall not, you dare not, if you are men, sacrifice to the power of the press of this country your rights and your family rights. What do you mean by “good intent?” They might say that it was with the intent to cor- rect him in his manner of life; that was good. They might say that it was with intent to serve my friend who opposed him for the ofifice. That was a good intent. Will you stop and draw the line? Is it not better to standby the law, which brings no complaint from the press on the one hand nor from the individual on the other? Open not the field for construction and con- fusion, but leave it as it is, although we might love to gratify the taste of the gen- tlemen of this Committee for the form and beauty of their expression. One other thing. There are two separate provisions in the present Bill of Rights and the Constitution with regard; to trials by jury. One says in the Bill of Rights I‘thal a man shall be entitled to an impartial trial by the jury of the vicinage.” The other provision in the Constitution says: “The General Assembly shall not grant a change of venue in a criminal or penal case, but may provide for a change of venue in such prosecutions by general law.” There has been no difliculty on the part of the Courts to determine what vicinage meant. Gentlemen announced upon this fioor that the Courts have de- termined that it means county, and only county. I am not familiar with such de- cision. On the contrary, I am familiar with the decisions of the court which have authorized, and which have recognized as in conformity with the provisions of this Constitution, the right to bring a jury from adjacent counties when an impartial one cannot be had in the county. The gentlemen, however, have said that the General Assembly may provide by law for a change of venue in favor of the defend- ant in such prosecutions. The Commit- tee differ it seems. The Chairman wanted that to stand. The distinguished Delegate upon my left said, in beautiful and eloquent language, that if he was arraigned for crime, that he wanted to be tried in the county where he was born and raised, the home of his friends who knew him, his in- comings and his outgoings, but if the pub- lic weal demand it as a last resort, in order thatjustice might prevail, even if it had to be at the sacrifice of the individual, let the venue be changed. That is right. That is all we ask. The only purpose of trial is the ascertainment of truth. No man hasaright to claim protection as a citizen who will not admit that, when he is charged with transgressing the rights of the citizen, that he shall be tried by a fair and impartial jury. No one could ever have anticipated scarcely that in Kentucky the occasion would ever arise when communities would become so barbarous and uncivilized as to BILL or RIGHTS. 19 mockery of justice. Saturday,] BRONSTON. demand a change of Venue for the Com- monwealth as well as the defendant; but as a part of the history of this Common- wealth, however much we might love to blot it out, yet we must admit it is true. There are sections of the Commonwealth to-day where, if you were to undertake to try a man in the county where the offense was committed, it would be worse than a Whether it be for the defense—whether it be for the protection of society at large—I say the framers of the Constitution meant, and we should so ex- press ourselves, that the Legislatuie may provide the necessary means to secure a fair and impartial trial. So in the close of the section where the gentlemen interpolate the words, “no per- son for an indictable offense shall be pro- ceeded against criminally by information except in such cases as do not amount to a felony.” Why put that? Do you mean to invest the oflicers of the counties and the Commonwealth throughout this State with the right, without oath, without warrant, without anybody testifying, just at their own volition, either to gratify a feeling of avarice or spite, to institute against any one any number of informations, drag- ging him from his home, forcing him to employ counsel, bring him to the bar of justice, and there demand that he shall give his time and money and energy de- fending a change which was not founded upon any evidence? You say that little misdemeanors amount to nothing. Under mi=demeanors in Kentucky today a jury would have the power to impose an in- definite fine and indefinate im- prisonment in the county jail. Yet you say that that will amount to noth- ing. And yet again you say, “which do not amount to a felony.” You admit that a man is entitled to trial by jury, and that before he shall have that trial he shall be arraigned by indictment, when chargel with felony, and yet you leave it in the power .of the Legislature to change the meaning of the word “felony.” It now means _“ all ofi‘enses punished by confinement in the penitentiary or by death.” They might change it. You put it in the poweréof the Leglslature absolutely to wipe out that pro- vision of the Bill of Rights which guaran- tees to each and every citizen that, before he shall be arraigned upon a serious charge, he shall have an investigation by a Grand Jury of the country, and it shall be based upon the testimony of sworn wit- nesses. There is but one other expression in the report of the Committee to which I desire to call attention, and that very briefly, In section 12 they change the provision of, the present Bill of Rights by inserting words that I repeat: “No person shall, for the same ofiense, be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of himself or his representa- tives, and without just compeasation being previously made to him in money.” They add these words: “ or paid into Court sub- ject to the order of the owner thereof.” I do not object, of course, to that pro- vision. I do not assume that any Delegate upon this floor objects to that; and I be- lieve I am correct in saying that the Court of Appeals of Kentucky have so construed the law at present that compensation must be made in money; that to attempt to sub- stitute bonds or securities did not comply with the provisions of the Constitution. So that is the law now; and, therefore, I do not see any necessity of putting it in; but let me ask of the Committee what do you mean by these next words that you have added, “No special tax against the owner of such' property shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the property so taken; nor shall any person be deprived of his property without due pro- cess of law 7" What does that mean? I learn that 1here is a (31133 of citizens in the Commonwealth of Kentucky who believe that if land was condemned. for rail'oad 91,‘ [October 11 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] BnoNs'roN. [October 11 . ‘street purposes, and there was a subscrip- tion voted by the people of the county to that railroad, or tax levied by the city for streets, that, although the man might, by the intervention of a jury, get full value for his land and sometimes two or three times as much, that he ought to be exempt- ed as a citizen of the county from paying any part of the tax levied to meet the county subscription or the city levy. Is that what you mean? If that is not what you mean, what can you mean ‘? You pro- vide if a man’s land is taken for public purposes he shall be paid its full value be- cause you must pay him the full value, of the land and then the incidental damage; yet you say that if there happens to be a spe- cial tax being levied at that time upon the property of the county or city in which he lives, that he shall be exempted from his part for the payment of that tax. Will you accept that provision? If it don’t mean that, what does it mean? Mr. Chairman, one other thought, and I shall have done. The Preamble that is offered to this Bill of Rights has in- vited from me an examination which has forced the most painful reflection. It pains me to know that we are subject to thejcritcism of never having inserted in a Preamble an expression of gratitude to Almighty God; and when I learned of the wish of the distinguished Chairman of this Committee to insert those words, it filled my heart with inexpressible joy. But, Mr. Chairman, when I read the man- ner in which he has expressed it, I fear-d that I would be unable to explain with accuracy my objection. It is this: “We, the people of Kentucky, grateful to Al- mighty God for the civil, political and re- ligious liberty which we enjoy.” I might truthfully say that I am grateful—that I am grateful that He has permitted me to live, and I am grateful that He has per- mitted all of us to be here, and be with our families, and to go in and out as free and independent citizens. The Committee couples w.th that, as it were, an expression ofhope that such political liberty as we now enjoy shall be continued in these words: ‘And in order to secure to our- selves and to succeeding generations the continuation of these blessings.” What blessings? “The blessingsIof politicai, civil and religious liberty.” Here is my difii- culty. I must be true to my Maker. I cannot go into his presence, and lift my voice and say, “ I am grateful for the po- litical liberty which I enjoy,”and yet speak a lie. I will not trammel the conscience of any other man on this floor. I am willing, out of the fullness of a grateful heart to say, “I am grateful for the blessings which we enjoy.” But if you ask me to en- by that expression of gratitude the political liberties which I do not enjoy, but of which I have been deprived, I say no. To the government we have delegated power. 'We have submitmd to the majority the ' right to do certain things. As I passed through my home this morning, the beau- tiful city of Lexington, and 1 saw the blacksmith, the carpenter, the merchant, the servant, the laborer, the farmer, all spread out before me, and I remembered that this government of ours was created under a solemn pledge that just and im- partial laws should prevail, there should be equal and exact justice, taxation alike to all, and when by the rule of the majority- and I refer not inapolitical sense, but as an American citizen—when I find by the rule of the maj itity that my people have been made slavesi and but hewers of wood and carriers of water in paying daily tribute to a favorite class in this country, I may not, I cannot, I will not, say without this protest that I am grateful for such political liberty. It is not political liberty. Why say it then? Can we not find words of ex- pression which will give all that could be asked and yet avoid it ‘? I think we can, and, as a conclusion,I will offer to add but a few words to the Preamble in the present Constitution, and. BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 _— Saturday,] BRONSTON. [October 11. it is this: “We, the representatives of the people of the State of KentuclS. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Smith, H. H. Straus, F. P. Tw'yman, I. W. West, J. F. Williams, L. P. V. Young, Bennett H. McChord, Wm. C. Miller, Will. Phelps, Zack Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George ABSENT—34.. .Amos, D. C. .Askew, J. F. ‘Beckner, W. M. Blackwell, Joseph Brown, J. S. QCarr 011, John D. Kirwan, E. E. Lassing, L. W. Martin, W. H.‘ Miller, W. H. Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. Chambers, G. D. O’Hara, R. H Coke, J. Guthrie Doris, W. F. Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. Farmer, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W. 'Wood, J. M. Johnston, P.. P. Woolfolk, J. F. The CHAIRMAN. The result of the roll-call is that fifty gentlemen have an- nounced their intention of speaking, and sixteen of not. speaking, with ‘a large roll of absentees who will likely speak. We will proceed with the matter under discus— The Delegate from Hardin has the Phelps, John Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Smith, W. Scott Spalding, I. A. a - Washington, George- Whitaker, Emery sion. floor. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, on yesterday I proceeded long enough to give a slight definition of what I‘considered natural liberty and civil liberty—the race that had propagated that liberty, had pro- tected it and won it by natural self-govern- ment. In the Bill of Rights—since the Magna Charta—and in all the Constitutions of the State and of the United States, has been reserved the natin'al liberty as opposed to the civil liberty—that'is, that a man had certain natural liberties inherent, which were reserved in the Bill of Rights, and were higher than any authority whatever. I shall- detain the Committee but a few minutes, but it seems to me, in discussing this question, latitude of debate ought to be given, and in pursuance of that idea, I will proceed to answer in a moral way some of the objections urged to the Committee’s report, and some of the eloquence paid in tribute to the old Bill of Rights. About four years ago I had occasion to visit my old homestead, and as I went down the little pathway close to my native home, up on the- hill where an old corn-crib had stood for many a day—and where I had killed many a rat—I saw two men at work upon that crib. It seemed that they were tearing it down. I went up‘ to .them and stopped, and asked one of them what he was doing. BILL OF RIGHTS.’ '7' nesday,] SMITH. [Obtober 14 . Why,” he said, “we are tearing down his old structure-4t doesn’t hold enough We are going to take it‘ away So this, it grain. and build a new one.” ‘seems to me, can readily apply to the sold Bill of Rights. for that great charter from which we have derived our liberties. I have no disparage- 'ment for the men, great and patriotic, who have given to us and to whom, by virtue of "that gift, we expect to give the same liber- ties to our posterity; but it seems to me "that with the vast improvements that have ‘come with time and with civilization and with the‘ progress in the world’s history, 'there is a chance and opportunity, as well .as a fitting capacity, to amend the old I have no disrespect ‘charter of liberties without destroying any -of those great rights whieh vhave been _given us. Why, the distinguished gentle- . :man from Oldham, I believe it was, referred ‘to it as the beautiful, a magnificent picture. ‘“Why will you destroy it?” he asks. "“ Why take away the adorning beauties of the picture, dear to my childhood and to my “early memory?” Why, for one instant, I would point the gentleman to that old pic- ture of George Washington, hanging on 'the wall. Look at it for an instant. Let :any gentleman look at it and see if he does ‘not think it needs about three coats. So it :may be said that the old Bill of Rights 'needs adding to ‘or restricting. I have heard, in course of the debates, the seven Pleiades and all this kind of talk. wonder they have not resurrected the bones -of George Washington and Thomas-Jeffer- :.son. Had we not the living Washington with us, I have no doubt that it would have been done long ago. But to ' this discussion. I will deal mainly with the Committee’s report, and ‘my other remarks will be restricted to "the subject of the amendment offered by 'the distinguished gentleman from Marion, whose scholarship and whose literary hand 'is seen in his substitute for the Committc e’s ‘.report, as well as for the old Bill of Rights. _ Itisa_ I have some objections to the distinguished gentleman’s. substitute, and I have no doubt he has after he has considered it; but it seems to me that the Committee’s report does not, in any manner whatever, amend the old Bill of Rights to our satisfaction or to the satisfaction of the people, in com- parison with the substitute offered by the distinguished gentleman from Marion. As I said upon yesterday, my criticism upon the Preamble offered by the Committee is this: “ We, the people of the Common- wealth of Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which we enjoy, in order to secure to ourselves and succeeding generations the continuation of these blessings,do ordain and establish this Constitution.” I find that, in about one-half of the Constitutions of this country,the word “ ordain ” is taken out, and as I said yesterday, we should not keep it there simply from the fact that it is in the Preamble of the Constitution of the United States. That Cor stitution was made over a hundred years ago. If We have not progressed in a whole century, if we have not learned ‘something about the English language, we ought to adjourn to- morrow and go home without attending fur- ther to the duties which the people delegated to us. Now, the way I would amend the Pre- amble would be so as to make it read this way : “ We, the people of the Commonwealth of. Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil and natural liberty which we enjoy, in order to secure for ourselves and to succeeding generations these blessings, do ordain and establish this Constitution ;” thereby, you see, leaving out the word “continuation, ” which is a contradiction to “secure,” and leaving out also the word “ ordain, ” as well as the conjunctive words “ political and religious, ”. and inserting “ natural ;” for political and religious liber- ties are nothing but our natural liberties. That is, that before the law, and before our God, we are entitled to our equal rights under_the Constitution of our country. We 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. ' Tuesday] SMITH. [October 14 are also entitled to our rights so far as ‘re— ligious liberty is concerned, and they are but natural liberties. When we come to put it in words, if we can, we should make the matter precise. This Constitution is not only going to be read by this Conven- tion, but it willa'be read by scholars, by men first in the English language in the State and throughout the country. If we make a Constitution which is not acompliment to the learned of our State, it will be criticised by the ‘scholarship of the country. I do not mean to say that we have come here to please the scholarship of the country, but we have come here to make a Constitution as concise as possible, containing all the ele- ments of law and rights that we can possi- bly get in it. Now, here is this oft-talked of seven stars, Pleiades, or something of that kind. It is, indeed, a compliment to the genius of the gentleman who sits be- hind me in its arrangement, but it seems to me that he might have put it in better lan- guage. For instance, they start out by saying “ all men are by nature free and equal.” All men are free and equal before the law, and under the Constitution they . have certain inherent and inalienable rights. They have the right to worship whatever God they desire. They have the rights to be skeptics if they desire, and they have a right to entertain any political faith they may desire. It seems to me that “by nature” should be stricken out, and then it would read, “all men are free and equal, and have certain inherent ‘and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned,” &c. Now, the next objection I have to this report of the Committee is in the seventh ' section, under article one, “ the right to bear arms in defense of themselves, their fam- ilies and of the State, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned.” I’agree with the distinguished_Delegate ‘from Lexington in saying that where and why put in this word “family?” Has not a man the right under the law to de- fend his friends when they may be in immi nent peril‘? Has he not the right to de- fend a helpless and tattered beggar when he may be persecuted? Will you take away‘ that right? Are you going to say, here are» separate rights and separate privileges for- particular persons‘? Are you going to say that a man may not have the right to de- fend his best friend, but only himself, his. family and the State‘? Again, it seems to, me that it is not tautology, but a bad use- of English, to say that a man shall have»: “ the right to bear arms in defense of him-- self, his family and of the State, or in aid. of the civil power, when thereto legally - summoned.” Would it not be better to say “the right to bear arms in defense of ' themselves and of the State,” etc, subject to- thc power of the General Assembly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying con-- cealed arms‘? Is ,there the slightest differ- ence between “ of the State or in aid of the» civil power ” and “when thereto legally summoned?” It seems to me “ and. of the State” covers the ground entirely. “When thereto legally sum» moned” would be covered by the sec-- tion “and of the State; ” me there is little use for both of these lines_ or phrases in there. They might easily be- stricken out. The next objection to the re-~- port of the Committee is to section 2, under article 1, which is that very much lamented “ no man or set of men are entitled to- separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in con- sideration of public services.” The gentle‘ man from Henry, a few days ago, moved to strike out that section entirely, thereby‘ leaving to the Legislature the entire arbi-< trary power to consider what were public- services, and _ grant any special privileges- they might see fit. Let us turn to the substi-- tute offered by the gentleman from Ma- rion: “That lic-privilege, immunity, exon- eration or exemption shall ever be granted to any man or set of men which shall not... be as freely and fully exercised and enjoyech it seems to- BILL or» RIGHTS. e ] ‘ SMITH. hers under similar circumstances kecondition.” He adds also in the “That no public emolument shall )e allowed to any person except in consideration of public services.” Riglfy/there the Committee stops, and the gentleman takes it up by defining what is public services, and under the law of the State nothing has given rise to litigation except this very clause, stipulating, as it does,‘ “ in consideration of public services.” But gentlemen say that the section intro- duced by the gentleman from Marion opens a wider gate to litigation for a new con- struction under this paragraph. He de-' fines public services, and the only trouble that ever existed in this State has been by reason of the Courts defining what were pnb- lic services. Men or corporations were not entitled to separate, exclusive public emolu- ment or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services. I say the trouble has been to find out what are public services. But the gentleman from Marion defines it very' nicely. It seems to meet perfectly that which shall be required by ‘law. As I understand it, some legislative enactments or some judicial or- der shall be required before it shall be con- sidered a public service, “ or for which [the Chief Executive Magistrate‘ or some other officer of the Commonwealth shall be legally authorized to contract.” ‘What is a [public service? authorized by law, by the Chief Executive Magistrate, or some agent of the law or by the Legislature. Can the Courts come and say we don’t know what a public service is under this section‘? > They have but to lookat this simple section here to see it de- fined. say, “No man or set of men‘ are entitled to separate, exclusive public emolument or privileges from the community, but in con- sideration of public services.” Gentlemen ‘say that the courts have defined it. Why, don’t ‘ you know that the courts have been trying- for years and years to define what a pub- It is a service which is‘ But the Committee stopped; they _ lic service is‘? One institution claims that it is performing a public service, and it is decided by the Court of Appeals that they But why will you leave it barren of any defini- are not performing a public services. tion whatever‘? tee’s report this old section which has given. rise to the litigation. of halfl'a century, when. you can define it in very few words of the- English language, and simple ones, too ‘2' Can you come in and say, as was said pre* viously, what are public services under the: definition of the ‘gentleman from lVIariQn ?‘ I think net. It seems to me that the best. thing the Convention could do would be, if ' we are not going to adopt the substitute as- a whole, to put this particular section of it,. “that no privilege or immunity, exonerae- tion or exemption shall ever be granted to: any man or set of men which shall not be: as freely and fully exercised,” and so forth.. Why “ exoneration ‘.7” Some gentlemen have objected to the word “exonerationf’” _ as I take it, exoneration means preventing; clerks of courts, sureti'es, &c., from being exonerated by the Legislature. All you gentlemen, and especially the members- from Louisville, remember the case of Cain of Louisville. The next objection that I have to this is; the section “that no charter or franchise shall ever be granted,” etc. Section four under article first of the report of the gen- tleman from Marion, “which the Legisla-~ ture may not at any time alter, amend or" revoke, saving, however, the owners thereof and their legal representatives, all such property rights as shall accrue or be ac-< quired thereunder.” Now, the gentleman from, Lexington, in a very eloquent way, says that property rights are the only. things to be acquired thereunder. He says the Legislature would have the right to _ take away-the charter of this L. & N. Rail-- road, and leave nothing but the road-bed there. It would be suspended if the Leg- islature did not see cause to grant a new [October 14 . Why put in the Commit-3 30 ' BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday] I SMITH, [Oct \charter. The road would be suspended for gate fromLeXington is ‘a fallacy, ever. to the ground. I take it that the I simply call the gentleman’s attention ‘to a little legislation on this section, and I 'presumethe Delegate from Mar-ion intended to follow out this special legislation on this 1"subject. He says: “That no charter or franchise shall ever be granted which the Legislature may not at any time alter, 1amend or revoke; saving, however, the owners thereof, and to theirlegal represent- atives, all such. property rights asv shall accrue thereunder.” vThat is. vested prop- erty rights, that byjreason a charter might have accrued to an individual, and is, in ifact, made on the faith that thelState would continue this charter. I find in Chapter +86, page 861,. General Statutes: “All char- ters and, grants of or to corporations, or ‘amendments thereof, enacted or granted since the 14th of February, 1856, and .all “other statutes, shall be subject to- amend- ment or repealat the will of the Legisla- ture, unless a contrary- intent be therein plainly expressed: Provided, That whilst ‘privileges and franchises so granted may be changed or repealed, no amendment or , “repeal shall impair other‘ rights previously ‘vestec .” That is, following out this section, :saving to the owners thereof and their legal representatives all such property rights as -shall accrue or be acquired thereunder. Not :as the Delegate from Lexington says, that. ‘the railroad would be suspended forever; ‘that it means you should not have protec- “tion of rights which were vested by reason ~0f contract between this corporation and the State, upon the faith that the State ‘would grant this privilege as long :as this corporation desired it, but Y-that certain individuals would have the ‘right ‘to run this road under special :grant of its charter; but as a corporation it ‘should not run unless it was subject to oer-.- ltain conditions, butv that the rights pre ‘vi'ously vested by reason the faith'of the. L‘State should, not be disturbed. ‘And it Seems to me that the argument of the Dele- _ .from Marion is only intending to’ out the legislation as now understo that subject. I find in several decisions s . - that question, Griffin vs. Insurance Co., in 3 Bush: “A legislative enactment of March 4, 1865, incorporated ‘The Ken- tucky Insurance Company,’ without ex- pressly reserving in the charter power to repeal it; nevertheless, an act‘ of the 9th of March, 1868, repealed the charter; and the only question for our consideration on this appeal is, whether the repeal is constitu- tional. “The charter was certainly a contract with a legal obligation, which could not be constitutionally impaired by ordinary legis- lation. But what is its obligations? Had the charter itself reserved the powerto re- peal it, that reservation would have been a part of the contract and have moulded its obligation accordingly; and such qualified obligations would not have been impaired by ‘an exercise of the power. , But although there was no such reservation, yet a statute of February 14, 1856 (chapter 62, page 121, of Stanton’s revision), applying to charters to be- granted, thereafter provides ‘that all charters and grants of or to cor- porations, or amendments thereof, and all other statutes, shall be subject to amend- ment or repeal at the will of the Legisla- ture, unless a contrary intent be therein plainly expressed: Provided, That whilst privileges and franchises so granted may be changed or repealed, no amendment or repeal shall impair other rights previously vested.’ ” . _ It seems to me. that is enough on that subject. Now I am taking up the sub.- stitute. That no title of nobility or hereditary rank, dignity or distinction shall ever be established or conferred by law; nor shall the tenure of any ofiice created under or by authority of this Constitution be for a longer periodthan a term of years. i BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 SMITH. [October 14. .ucky girl should marry any foreign lord . and right here I am reminded of a little :story. A very smart American girl went ‘to London a few years ago, and in her ~quaint style she got‘in conversation with .an English lord, and she says “how is it _you very wealthy people over here enjoy yourselves—and pass away your time?” "‘ Well,” said the lord, “we go from house to house and from place to place.” “Well,” said the young lady, “we have people in my country who go from house to house and place to place—tramps.” We come next to the fourth section of 'Committee’s report: 4. N 0 man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry against his consent; ‘no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience (I have moved to add in “matters of religion”); and no preferences shall ever be given by law to any religious societies, denominations or modes of wor- ship. But the liberty of conscience hereby :secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations; excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsist- rent with the good order, peace or safety of the State, or opposed to the civil authority ‘thereof. The civil rights, privileges and ‘capacities of any person shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion. I have about the same criticism to offer as the Delegate from Lexington and other Delegates have offered. What in the name of conscience is the use of putting in such words in this section—“excuse acts of licen— tiousness ‘2” The Delegate from Caldwell :said it was to prevent Mormonism in this :State. My God! has he come to believe that the people of this State are going to resolve themselves into a Utah country? 'Where does he intend to extend this sec- tion? It seems to me that the Committee wisely have intended to prevent something which may occur in time, but it may pre- vent something that occurs to-day. “Excuse acts of licentiousness” might mean you could not have a horse—race, or take simple mint- julep, or smoke a cigar, or cook a supper or breakfast on Sunday. I Now this section, that ancient mode of trial by jury. As I. ‘heard suggested sev- eral days ago by the Delegate, we know a great deal more about antiquity and an- cient things than antiquity and ancient things do about us. What was the ancient mode of trial by jury? It was simply se- lectin g jurors who knew the most about the facts in the vicinage where the particular act was committed. Now, is there any fine- cessity for putting in this word “ancient,” when you can say just as easily “the mode of trial by jury?”--that is, the mode that - has been common in this country, that has existed for a thousand years, or five bun; dred, at least. That is a mere verbal crit- icism;_ but we are making this Constitution for the people to read, and they will crit- icise it as well on verbal matters as well ‘as on other points. _, Then in this tenth section, in the fifth enumeration of the rights of the accused, that he shall have a speedy public trial in the county where the alleged offense was com- mitted, by an impartial jury ther'eof, I don’t 7 see the necessity of the word “thereof.” In section 11 we find the words “criminal- ly by information.” I see no necessity for the word “criminally.” It would read just as well and mean just as much to say, “no person, for an indictable ofi'ense, shall be ' proceeded against by information, except,” &c. There is also the use of the word “limb” where might be used the word “lib- erty ;” but, as I said, these are mere matters of verbal criticism. In the substitute we find: Second. That no bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retrospective law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall ever be passed; but that courts shall be 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] opened to all persons, wherein certain and speedy remedy shall be afforded, and justice shall be publicly administered according to the law of the land in all cases whatsoever, , - Whether for the prevention or punishment of public wrongs, the protection or enforce- ment of private rights, or the redress of civil injuries. Now, as I understand it, retrospective law is intended as a curative law that is passed to cure some defect by a court or clerk, and applies more particularly to civil matters, while as post facto applies to criminal. There is also the word “what-- soever” in the same section which might be left out. I do not think, if a Legislature should wish to correct any defect that might happen in» a judicial proceeding, it should be prevented from doing so, and by the word “retrospective” it would be so prevented. Now we come to section 12: 12. No person shall for the same offense be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; - nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of himself or his representatives. Now there has been a great deal of adju- dication upon what is “being twice put in jeopardy of life and limb.” The Committee don’t attempt to define; but look to the substitute of the Delegate from Marion. He does not leave it to the courts to determine, but defines carefully and fully exactly what it means. It seems to me further, that all vestige of slavery could be left out of the Consti- tution. I know that slavery was once a great institution in this country, and I know also that we had a little war a few years ago, and that the Union wears the victor’s wreath, while- the South wears the melancholy of defeat; but I don’t think sen~ timent' should cling around a ‘Preamble and Bill of Rights anymore than a legislative enactment. I don’t think any reference to the dead system of slavery should be put in the Bill of Rights. There is no sec- tion of this State where we have any slav- ery, and there should be no reference to it SMITH. [October v14; in the Constitution. If I had been a stran ger in this Convention I would probabl have caught myself listening to hear the‘, lash of the slave-driver’s whip in the Capi- tol yard, or looking to see slaves driven down the streets of Frankfort. In section 15 of the substitute, I move to strike out the whole of it, and insert :1 “ Perpetuities, combinations and monopolies- are contrary to the genius of our govern-~ ment, and shall never be enforced in this; State.” There is no doubt that such a sec- tion ought to be put in the Constitution, so- that it will be a restriction on our Legislav ture allowing such things to be formed. I also move to strike out the whole of‘ the 15th section of the Committee’s report,.. and inserting “the writ of habeas corpus- shall be granted as a writ of right in all cases where the Legislature shall not spe-- ~cifically confer a discretion therein on the- court; and said writ shall not be suspended by the Legislature, except on the most urgent and pressing occasions, and for a limited and reasonable time; but the Leg- islature may prescribe preliminary proceed‘ ings to the obtainment of said writ.” I understand that the writ of habeas corpus has been a writ of right and granted as such, but it seems to me a better wording; as I have it here. Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I have to- say that I have, since the first time in my life, when but five years of age, I saw and heard the distinguished Delegate- from Marion, I have been a follower as- well as a student of the illustrious patriot. and statesman. I am, sir, willing to follow him to-day, not because he is great in rhet- oric and statecraft, but because he is right ; because he stands on the broad platform of - statesman ship. “ Yonder is Rome,” said a traveler to his: companion. “No,” said his companion, “it. is but the wrecked remains of a mighty em- pire,” and so it may be said of the old Bill of Rights. An impress on our posterity- by the “fitting deeds of this day is the high- BILL OF RIGHTS. 18 .stop; you are bigger than the mule.” ‘granted. 'Not so with us. ; served by uesday,] AUXIER. [October 14 . est boon we could hope to have attained. ~.Even if we strike down the old Bill of Rights; even if we leave it bereft of friends :and fortune, let it meet the quiet of that most virtuous and holy sleep which is its _just reward; and I am sure that the tute- lary divinities of the new one will guard .well the immortal legacy that is bequeathed in the memory of the old. Mr. AUXIER. ' I realize in addressing ‘this Convention that it is not an ordinary ‘occasion and not an ordinary body of men. .I realize that the work before this Conven- ‘tion is vast, and I realize further that we ‘have some men in this Convention who are really and truly great. I was crossing the street the other day, and at right-angles there was coming down an Irishman seated -on a two-wheeled vehicle driving a mule, .and I stopped to give him the way, about which time he said, “You' go on, I will This Convention has had smooth sailing for about four weeks, and has gone on in the -even tenor of its way~ until at last we struck " this question of Bill of Rights, and we are about to realize that the question is bigger ' than the Convention. ' 'termine whether or not we have the capac- ' ity to grapple with these questions that .arise in the formation or adoption of a Bill --of Rights. ' day for a Bill of Rights that they had in - the time that the Magna Charta was wrested Now, we are to de- We have not the necessity to- from the hand of King John. England was controlled without a written Constitu- ‘tion; no written Constitution ever before governed that Kingdom. Therefore the people demanded from the Ruler, the King, the Commons, and the Lords a Bill of Rights, a Petition of Rights, and it was Our govern- ment would be as adequate, the powers re- the people would be as full and complete, had we to—day nothing :. about a Bill of Rights in our Constitution. Another idea of a Bill of Rights sometimes ‘prevails in the thoughts of men, which is ‘incorrect, and that is that the people get certain privileges and immunities—that the enunciation of the Bill of Rights is to create certain liberties for the people which We gain nothing by the Declaration of a Bill of Rights-it makes no new ‘rights to the in- These decla- rations are declared because they have existed from time These rights that are declared under ‘this bill are doctrines as old as the foundation of the world. They are declared because they they would not otherwise have. dividual or the government. immemorial. exist, and they do not exist because they ' are declared. I have a reverence for ancient things. There are many things-of antiquity that I love, but I do not wish to adopt any thing because of its antiquity, and I am one of the members of this Convention who contend that we have a right, when we find any thing in our Constitution, any thing- in ” our Bill of Rights, any thing in our Magna Charta, that does not conform to modern wants and modern demands of the govern- ment, to eliminate it from the bill. The gentleman from Henry, in his speech the other day, asserted that he was in favor of striking out section 1, and that the only question upon which he hadany doubt was whether or not that would destroy to the State the right of eminent domain. I have ‘taken upon myself the trouble to in- vestigate that question to. some extent, and I find that that will not be in the way. The right of eminent domain‘ is not of Constitutional sanction. It ex- ists with the people, who are the govern- ors of themselves. It is a power that exists in the legislative department of every State; and Mr. Lewis, in his work on Eminent Domain, uses this language in reference to it: “We conclude, therefore, that eminet domain is not of the nature of any estate or interest in property, reserved or otherwise acquired, but simply a power to appropriate individual property as the public necessities require, and which per- 14. ‘ .. BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] AuxIER. [October 1 tains to sovereignty as a necessary, constant, and inextinguishable attribute.” Mr. Cooley, in speaking on the same, uses this language: “ Whatever may be the theoretical found- ation for the right of eminent domain, it is certain that it attaches as an incident to every sovereignty, and constitutes a condi- tion upon which all property is holden. When the public necessity requires it, pri- vate rights to property must yield to this paramount right of the sovereign power. ' We have repeatedly held that the character of the work for which the property is taken, and not the means or agencies employed for its construction, determines the question of power in the exercise of this right. quires no judicial condemnation to subject private property to public uses. Like the power to tax, it resides with the legislative department to whom the delegation is made. It may be exercised directly or indirectly by that body, and it can only be restrained by the judiciary when its limits have been exceeded, or its authority has been abused or perverted.” Therefore, the power of eminent do- main will exist, even though we strlke the second section from this Bill of Rights entirely. Those authors who have written upon the subject declare that it exists in the legislative department, and the people themselves possess this power to ap- ply and appropriate private property for public uses. As the able gen- tleman from Marion has said, that section has been the cause of much improperlegis- lation. Monopolies have grown up under it, taxes have been imposed upon the people by various acts of the Legislature for the maintenance and upholding of lotteries and improvements of certain rivers, under the statement in the act that certain public services were rendered by those corpora- tions. There ean be no harm, then, in striking out this clause entirely, for in doing so we do not deprive our legislative body of the right‘ to the ancient doctrine of eminent domain. I know we have a veneration for what has been written and repeated from age to age. I know that very lawyer, when the great vvwrit. or right It re— _ of Magna Charta is named, will venerat and reverence it. It has been stated, believe, by the Delegate from Warren that; certain clauses in the Bill of Rights have- been sanctified by being adopted by three or four Constitutional Conventions; that that makes it sacred. Why, sir, the great- writ, the great book obtained at Bunny- mede trom King John, and confirmed by Henry III, declaring the rights of the people of the English Government, has‘ been ratified thirty times, and yet. there are clauses in that great Bill of rights that are a disgrace to- the people of the present day, and ought to have been eliminated from it hundreds of years ago. And yet because it is six. hundred years old, men of this Convention say lay not the hand upon it. I will read one of them—section 7 of the Magna Charta ;. “ No widow shall be destrained to marry herself, so long as she has a mind to live- without a husband; but yet she shall give- security that she will not marry without. our assent, if she holds of us; or without, the consent of the lord of whom she holds, if she hold of another.” A Magna Charta wrested from the ty- rant with sword in hand, Magna Charta declaring the rights of all the world, hav-- ing in it a proposition that the widow Whose- protector had gone to worlds unknown should not marry herself without the con- sent of the owner of the land upon which she lived. Do we want to hold on to that. in this the nineteenth century, in the day of equal rights? and although it is in that great book so much boasted of in American and English liberty. There is a. clause unworthy of human language and unworthy to be perpetrated in the annals of our government. Another clause in the same Magna Charta (section 84) reads this way: “No man shall be taken or impris- oned upon the appeal of a woman for the death of any other than her husband.” Talk about barbarism and cruelty; talk about. civilization and enlightenment; talk. about. BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 ’ would cut it out. AUXIER. [October 14a v:at Bill of Rights, the charter of lib- v which declares that a woman shall not "before an officer of the law and swear J out a warrant and have arrested any per- son for the killing of her own son or daughter! Her father or her mother, her brother or her sister, may be wilfully, cruelly, and murderously assassinated, and yet this llfagna, Charta, declares that she shall not give information or cause the ar- rest of any one for homicide, unless it be for the killing of her husband. And yet, we are told by gentlemen in this Conven- tion, because these things are old we should adhere to them and adopt them as the fun- damental system of our govarnment, the corner-stone, the rock upon which we build. I wish to give my dissent from it‘. Why, sir, if I had the power of a gladiator I would stand, with uplifted arm, with the knife in my hand, and I would penetrate it into the very midst of that section, and I would destroy it from center to circumference. I would demolish it from base to summit. I would place it where it never would be read by our chil- dren, and I would not have it hung up on- the walls of the school-houses to be taught to rising generations. I know not what ven- ation other men may have for such doctrine as this. I, for one, want to root it out, never let it come in contact with the eyes of this Convention, nor future generations which shall succeed us in the administra— tion of the laws of our beloved Commons wealth. There is nothing so sacred in the formation of our government but what we can revise, reform, or abolish. We are now the representatives of the people of this State, and all power of government is left with the people. We. have the right to take from this Constitution any section, to take from the Bill of Rights any declaration or section of the great M'agna Char/"ta. We have a right to expunge from it such sections as are objectionable to the enlightenment of the present day. We, the people of this State, enact the laws. We, the people of % ‘the Commonwealth, form the Constitution,. and when that Constitution is formed, limiting the Legislative Department,. prescribing the duties of the Judicial Department, and arranging in perfect. order the Executive Department; when all the powers, rights and privileges of each. one of these departments are defined, then recognizing the fact that all civil govern-‘-~ ment, to use _the language of the Delegate from Marion, is with the people, we need not devote so much time to this question of Bill of Rights. Some gentleman argued because of the revision of this bill, and the- various clauses in it by different Conventions, that we ought to leave it stand like the picture on the wall,__ ‘untouched. ‘ Why, sir, because my grand-. father crossed the Blue Ridge in an old-fashioned covered wagon when he came- to this State, shall that be argued as a rea- son why I should not go back to the mother- State in a palace car, and instead of going over the mountain in a wagon ride beneath it upon the open locomotive which propels. us along? Are we, because our grand-- father used the wooden plow-share, to do away with the modern improvements in agricultural implements‘? Because our be-- loved Franklin, in his wisdom, ‘brought. from the clouds the lightning and placed it. in a bottle, are we limited in the use of that. electricity to the uses for which he applied it? When messages are sent over- the deep from one section of the world to» another, with all our modern improvements. and advancements in science, in education and in government, are we to withhold our- hand and say it is desecretion to touch these old clauses and sections of the Bill of‘ Rights? Some of the most unreasonable and. impure statements and sayings have become sanctified by time, if time indeed can sanc-~ tify any thing. Witchcraft and’ many other things, that even our forefathers not. many years ago advocated and believed in have now disappeared. I wish this Con~ vention would realize the fact that we came 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. .hand on a subject because -'T uesday,] AUXIER. [Oct "here to amend, revise, repeal, or do any .thing with our Constitution that the wis- ldom of this Convention deems proper. I do not believe that we should refuse to lay our it is old There are some amendments proposed in y the Bill of Rights that I know are accepta- ble to the present day. The Delegate from vMarion has one, and the gentleman from Boyd has introduced another, to amend that section in rference to being twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, and he showed ‘on yesterday the conflicting decisions of the Court of Appeals on that question. I shall address myself to that amendment for a few moments of time. What do we want in Kentucky to-day? Our reputation has been held in line with that of our fore- fathers in the early settlement of this coun- try, when the rifle was used by the early settlers to protect themselves. That doc- trine seems to have followed us all along the line to the present day, and we are denounced outside of our limits of jurisdic- tion by the press of the whole country as being .a lawless and bloodthirsty kind of people Tragedy after tragedy has occurred. lVIuch precious blood has been spilled in feuds that have existed from year to year, and various counties in our State have been subject to them. Not only various counties have been subject to these feuds, but every county has been suf- fering under more or less bloodshed. The cry is that crime is not punished, therefore a license to commit crime is understood to exist in our beloved Commonwealth. The quibble upon words declaring what is put- ting a man twice in jeopardy for the same offense, leaves the law of homicide under- stood to the world as to the modes of pun- ishment and bringing the parties to justice. Either one of the propositions introduced by the gentleman from Marion or Boyd will forever settle this question, and put it beyond a peradventure or a doubt. In enumerating the many shields, which he did so beautifully 011 yesterday, the Dele- _-,gate from Boyd omitted one. After speaking ' . was a pardoning power vested in the Gov- ' ers. of all the privileges and shields lai the defendant when he was arraigi _ trial, he omitted to say after all this ' ernor that gave him rights even after con- viction to be respited or pardoned. ‘We want the State of Kentucky, as a modern State, to come up with her sisters and vie with them in the civilization of the world and in ‘the enforcement of the law. No Commonwealth of this Union of ours is more blest with natural facilities for devel- opment and the enrichment of the country than Kentucky. Emigration is kept from among us by the name we ‘bear, the name that we legislate and our courts construe laws in favor of_ criminals. Place in this Constitution a section that requires that the party shall be tried fairly and fully before it should be construed that he was twice put in jeopardy of life or limb. I do not expect to take up the sections of this Bill of Rights, nor discuss them; but there is one other question that I wish to call the attention of this assembly to, and ' that is the first section of the Magna Char- ta: “ We have granted to God, and by this our present Charta, have confirmed for us and our heirs forever, that the Church of English shall be free, and-shall have all her whole rights and liberties inviolable.” There is that great charter of which so many of us boast declaring freedom to one of our church sects and denominations, and giving not the same privileges to oth- And yet we boast of it as the great palladium of our liberty. I beg to dissent, and decline to pass an eulogy upon that whole document, because there are certain ‘things contained in it which do not accord with my ideas of right and justice. We declare in our Bill of Rights that all men are created free and equal. And in an- other section we declare that the liberties and privileges of no one shall be enlarged or diminished on account of their belief; and yet, in our present Constitution, we have a clause which declares that no min- ister of any religious denomination, or BILL OF RIGHTS. 17 .Bill of Rights. ‘unalterable as the laws of the Persians, and as unchangeable, whether we :adopt them as part of the Constitution or express ‘son that actuated us in .sday,] A PPLEGATE. [October 14. icher of any religious society, shall ver be a member of the Legislature. That assertion and declaration in the Bill of Rights, and that clause in the Con- :situation are utterly and absolutely contra- Idictory and inconsistent. _I am in favor of wiping out one of those clauses, and I pre- ifer to take that one in the-Constitution ‘which forbids a man, on account of his re- Zligious ideas, from being a member of the 'General Assembly. I propose to leave that -out of the present Constitution, and let ‘every man have a right to represent his people, no matter what his religious faith may be. The religious belief of some re- quire them to teach the doctrine of their divine Creator, and they are here made to suffer for it; and if~ they choose to teach 'they are forever cut off from the privilege --of representing their people as members of 'the Legislature. :sistejncies, let us take up the Bill of Rights 101' Constitution and say we shall not put our 'hands to it. Now, if these are incon- But there are more important ‘things to discuss than the Bill of Rights. As I have stated in the outset, it would not make a bit of difi'erencewhere we have a written Constitution if we leave out the Those rights will exist as Hedes and not. Mr. APPLEGATE. I don’t know that 'I should desire to have spoken upon this question at all, had it not been that I was ~one of the Committee that assisted in fram- ing and reporting this Preamble and Bill of Rights to this Convention; and I sup- pose it is well enough that I should to the Convention the rea— making the changes that we have, and in reporting the, whole Bill as it is. As an apology to ‘the Convention, after having heard the _great flood of oratory that has been poured out upon this Convention, I must say that ~“we did not know it was loaded,” gentle- men, or we would never have brought it in in this shape. I have not heard half the oratory that the Convention has been treat- ed to, and I will probably not hear the half that is to come before this Conventidn upon this Bill. Like the glories of Solomon, as the Queen of Sheba said, “the half has not yet been told,” and it may not be my priv- ilege to hear all of it. I have been somewhat amused at the character of sentiment expressed up to the present time. We have had. all of the pet phrases that I know of. We have had the I jewels garnered up, and we have had our right arms given up, and we have the pyra- mids and the mythological Deities of the past brought before us. We have had everything except that time-honored ex= pression: “May my tongue cleave _to the roof of my mouth.” But there are no cleaving tongues here. If there is any.‘ cleaving done, it will be the ceiling above us that will be cleft. Some persons stand before this grand old Bill of Rights, the work of the fathers, and weep like Mark Twain’s friend over the grave of Adam, because he was one of the fore-fathers. I feel a sympathy for them, but I cannot weep over it in the manner that they do. And still I do not propose to touch it with foul hands and deseorate it any more than is'necessary; yet weknow that we have passed the pyramids of Egypt; we have passed the mythology of Greece and Rome; we have passed Runnymede and the Declaration of Independence; and we have come down to the year 1890, which is a practical age, in which we have telegraphs and telephones, and a company organized, as I see recently, to build an air-ship that will go at the rate of three hundred miles an hour; and yet they say don’t touch this grand old Bill of Rights for the reason that ‘you may cause some of our forefathers to turn over in their graves and disturb their quiet rest. , One objects first to the Preamble. I don’t believe that my piety exceeds that of 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. TuésdayJ APPLEGATE. the average professing Christian, and I am not ashamed to admit that I am a follower of that lowly Nazarene; and yet I feel that we cannot injure our Constitution by ac- knowledging a gratefulness to Almighty God for the many blessings bestowed, among others the old Bill of Rights that has so long protected us. I think the Preamble needs no defense. Now, as to- the language in which the present Bill of Rights as reported by this Committee is couched. I am not %particular about that, and I care nothing about it. I don’t care about the Pleiades or any other constellation. There are some great and grand geueral principles involved which, if left out, the development of the State of Kentucky and the protection to each of its individual citizens would be just as secure as if you had them in there. What are they I? As one gentlemen says, these were given to us not as the result of sentiment and edu- cation as they exist to-day, but they were the outgrowth of a rebellion against tyr- rany and against oppression and against corruption in high places. ~We have not those now, and they simply stand as mile stones that mark the progress along the course of time. That is all I want to keep them there for and nothing else, and I don’t care whether you express them one way or another. Yet some of these princi- ples are vital to the issues of the day. We have labored somewhat upon them and have altered them some. Why ? Because the experience of time has shown that along in 1849 or in 1850, and even going back to 1792, they didn’t mean what the men who used them thought they meant; and while I have the profoundest respect for our courts, yet they have turned their forces upon it, and they have turned the light of reason upon it, and we have found that these expressions are deficient to pro- tect men in their private rights, and for that reason we have enlarged upon the ex- pressions here. It is strange to me the ob- jections that have been made to this report-— first, on account of the things it does cont v and, secondly, on account of the things does not contain. It'is wonderful. debate reminds me very much. of what I heard a gentlemen, lecturing on China, say was the custom that the Chinese had in wedding ceremonies. You know the groom never has the pleasure of seeing his beloved until after the wedding has taken place, and then she is brought to him, and the guests are invited in, and, instead of en- couraging the poor wretch if he has made a bad bargain, they go at him in this man- ner. One says: “Hasn’t she horrible eyes?” Another says: “What miserable hands and terrible feet she has,” and thus they tor— ture the poor'groom, and. make him dissat— isfied if it is possible. And thus it is with the Committee’s report. It would seem that it contains everything had, and every- thing good is left out; but if you were to hear it discussed fairly and impartially, un- like the manner of some gentlemen in treating it before this Convention, you would find there has been nothing left out.. But as one gentleman has said, you would find all the jewels there. They may be set in a different shape from what they were before, but not so differently that you can not recognize them. One gentleman begins by saying that he is opposed to this Bill of Rights, first, be- cause he says it does require an oath or an affirmation from a witness that is called into Court. That gentleman certainly did} not deal sincerely with this Convention when he made that expression because, be- ing a scholar, as ‘he is known, this section does not mean that, because in the first place, this Bill of Rights does not prescribe any oath or afiirmation; but in dealing with the question of liberty of conscience, it simply means that a man pretending to exercise the liberty of conscience, shall not come in and defy the court, and say I shall not submit myself to an oath or afi‘irma-- tion. It was for that reason, in order to prevent the liberty of conscience being car—- This‘ BILL OF RIGHTS. ' - .19 Jay,] APPLEGATE. [October 1'4 , i that far, when a man is not willing to arm in the open court that what he be- llQVGS to be true. It prescribes no oath or aifirmation, but merely negatives the prop- osition that the great liberty of conscience on his coming to testify in court. shall not be construed to mean it will ever ex- cuse a man from that duty when the law prescribes he shall not do it. Another gentleman objects to this report of the Committee because it says: “ No in- dictable offense shall be proceeded against by information, except where it does not amount to a felony.” A felony is well un- derstood by all lawyers to mean that it is' any offense against the public laws of the Commonwealth, the punishment of which is either his life or imprisonment in the Penitentiary. Now, it matters not what we express in this Bill of Rights. The Court of Appeals, in a decision in a case where the statute prescribes that a man found guilty of carrying concealed deadly weapons, have said that it does not require an indictment, and a Justice of the Peace can try' him on a warrant or information- If they have so construed that section of the Bill of Rights to vmean that an indict- ment is not necessary, then what is the use ' of our quibbling about whether it shall be an indictable offense or whether it is a felony or whether a misdemeanor? It matters not what you write here or adopt in this Con- vention, it must all he handed down to the courts for interpretation when issues arise upon it; and if issues never arise, it cannot be dangerous. While I do not wish to tax your patience to discuss the objections ‘raised to this bill by sections, yet it is proper that we should notice the great ‘changes that we have made. One change made in this bill is in - section 12, in which we make this provis- ion; I will read it to you: “No person shall for the same offense be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to pub- lic use without the consent of himself or his , representatives, and without just compensa- tion being previously made to him in money or paid into court subject to the order of the owner thereof. And no special tax against the owner of such property shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the property so taken; nor shall any person be deprived of his property without due process of law.” There are numerous objections made to that whole section. The gentleman from Boyd on yesterday delivered his whole argu— ment against the provisions of that section ; that no person shall for the same offense be put in jeopardy of life or limb. I must admit that I would like the word “liberty” there better, but as it is judicially known that “limb” means “liberty,” I am not particular as to which you‘ use. One gen- tleman says he wants that so clearly speci- fied that there can be no mistake what the word “jeopardy ” means. If you can ever use language so plain and specific that the; Courts will not at some time or another make a change in it, then I would like- you to employ it, because this morning I sat down in the Library and took down Barbour’s Digest and found that that Court has overruled itself more than one. hundred times in its history; then if they themselves cannot say what they mean- and, stick to it, how in the name of Heaven can we use any language that will be always construed as we wish it, and which they will stick to. (Laughten) The individ- uals that occupy that Court to-day sit down and construe that word just as their conscience and learning determine them. Next year, or ten years later, it is thesame Court, but the same individuals are not in it. The question comes up again, and a different state of circumstances are con- nected with the afi'airs, and they take into consideration all that, and they apply the letter of the law as they construed it, and, like the younger generations generally, wishing that our forefathers and predeces- sors were more wise than they were, con~ 20 _ BILL or RIGHTS. . Tuesday,] APPLEGATE. [Octob‘ clude that the Court was in error and consequently they overrule them. The Court is perpetual, but the members die and new men take their places; but the Court, when they come to construe the section, do {so as the issue then stands, and it is utterly impossible to lay down lan- guage here that that Court will always construe the same way, because it will not always be the same Court. ‘ The gentleman from Boyd said that this is a shield to the criminal. It was notintend- ‘ed as a shield to the criminal, but it was in- tended as a shield to every citizen of this Commonwealth, that a man should not be put in jeopardy twice for the same offense. Isn’t that right? Isn’t it proper? You talk to us about the integrity and the things that have come down to us from our fathers. It certainlyis a proposition which we should bow down and reverence, that when‘ the great Commonwealth of Ken— tucky, with all its powerful machinery, ar- raigns me before its tribunal—brings me face to face with my accuser—and submits me to a trial of twelve citizens, that it ought to be estopped evermore from charging me again, and putting me in jeopardy for that same offense, and if the courts have dis- turbed the proposition as he assumes, then they have to do an injustice. We cannot disarm the court by the employment of any other language. He was not satisfied to make this attack upon the courts and upon the Constitution as a shield and protection to criminals alone, but he names the great number of shields that they are protected with. He says that they have the shield that upon. a charge it requires twelve out of sixteen to find an indictment; that the defendant has twenty peremptory chal- lenges, and that he has the presumption. of innocence to start with, and, one gentleman adds, that he has the “burden of power” to wind up with. None of these are con- stitutional provisions. Do we propose to invade the organic law by Legislative en- actments to prevent the Legislature from doing an injustice to the State‘? Certa not. That clause is as I would like to see stand—that a man shall not be put twice in jeopardy for the same offense. Give a man some guarantee of his personal liberty, and wipe it out as he would probably like to see it wiped out, or modify it as he would like to see it modified; but we know not where the court will go in con- struing that language; but if you wipe it out we know not what excitement may arise in the course of time in which the powers of the State may continue to try and try a man until he is convicted, and conclude he is never tried until there is a judgment of guilty. As for me, I would prefer to see that section stand it is. I should like to know, if I were ever to be so unfortunate to be accused by my State of crime, that I would have the right to chal- lenge witnesses and say, “once you must try me, but forever after you must hold your hands off for that accusation.” The State and the individual are not equal. There is a‘ great inequality between them, one probably helpless and the other all powerful so far as resources are concerned in prosecution of cases. “ Nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the con- sent of himself or his representatives and without just compensation being previously made to him in money.” We have added these words “ in money,” because the courts of some States, construing the like clause in their Constitutions, have said it didn’t mean any thing, that it might mean some- thing else than money. We didn’t want any doubt about that. “ Or paid into court subject to the order of the owner thereof.” . One gentleman said, “Where did you get that jewel? Who handed them down to us ?” Thank Heaven, we ,were not cle- dependent upon our ancestors for all the jewels. We are willing to accede to them all they have given to us, but experience has taught us that and not a few more. We did not care to leave it for statutory or for ‘BILL or RIGHTS. 21 I State? ,0... sv ‘(4 ] APPLEGATE. [October 14 . ical construction as to what the pay- I ent of money. meant. If you grant to corporations, cities, towns, or any municipality the right to condemn prop- erty, let us concede that it is right. If it is right, give them the power to carry it into full execution or not give it at all. This question was presented to the Committee: That if action is instituted to condemn prop- erty, and the property after the service of process upon the party was condemned, verdict and judgment rendered, and the man should gather himself up and go into a far country or another State, it is left for either the Leglslature or for the court to determine what is a payment '01 money. How are you going to find the defendant‘? How are you going to reach him? Then why not make it specific as to that point and say “either to him or into court subject to his orders.” It is the spirit and purpose of that that he should have his money and not destroy the operation of the law by his own acts, and it can do no harm. Can this injure any individual‘? Can it injure the If not, why not make it specific and prevent judicial construction any further if we can possibly do so, and not necessitate Legislative enactment upon it, But here comes one of the additions that we have made to it, and we have made it after investigation of the matter, feeling that it was our duty to protect the individ- ual against the masses. Mr. Chairman, what is the purpose of constitutional gov- ernment if it is not to make a permanent form of government, and to protect the individual against the masses, and when " you have accomplished that, have you not accomplished all that a constitutional gov- ernment is intended for? This question has been determined by the Courts. They have so construed'that old section that I conceive it is an injustice to the citizen, that the citizen is at the mercy of the masses, and we desired, if possible, and if we could get this Convention to assist us, to properly protect the individual. A case is reported, which came up from the city of Covington, in which a gentleman owned property in that city and the city desired - to project a street through the property which had no street through it. They had an ordinance in that city, authorized by the charter of that city, that when they created a new street, whether they ac— quired the title by purchase, condemnation or otherwise, they might, by a special assessment of the property abutting upon that new street, raise the fund required not only to improve the street, but to pay‘ for the title or the cost of the condemnation. Now here is a man that owns the property and i all that abuts upon it, and the city pro- jects a street out through it, and condemns and confiscates his propcrty.' After they have condemned his property, they levy a tax upon the abutting property, not upon the city at large, but a special tax upon the abutting property, and taxes him upon the property he owns there to pay for what they took from him. What did it matter to him whether he got a verdict for $3,000 or three cents ; he had to pay it all back to himself‘? You think that it is not an in- justice? Is not that an invasion ‘of the principle that the people of this State, as citizens, cannot tax another ‘? If it is true that a man may say to me, your property needs an improvement, and we will im- prove it, and we will tax you for improv- ing it; we will charge you for the attor- ney’s fees and for all of the costs of the Court necessary to compel you to give your. consent to improve it; it is the meanest kind of confiscation. Had they gone in there and taken the property without a condemnation suit and improved it, it would have been less burdensome than it would have been to go through the farce of a proceeding to condemn and to charge him with the cost of condemnation, and it was for that reason that we use this lan— guage,’ “ N 0 special tax against the owner of such property ‘shall be levied or col- lected to reimburse the payment for 22 BILL OF RIGHTS. ' Tuesday,] the property so taken; nor shall any person be deprived of property without due process of law.” We don’t want any special taxes; we don’t think this Convention wants it when they understand it. It not a constitutional provision to meet a special case. It is a constitutional provision to protect the whole public against the law as it now stands. That is what it is. It is defect in our original Constitution that experience and the progress of time have found out, and we wish to add that to it because we think the citizen ought to be protected against the massess. Another gentleman urging an objection to this bill. shows to me the character of objections that are coming up against it. They come from an undue consideration of the whole Bill. One says that if the Com- mittee can explain section 18 and section 27 so as not to be incompatible, it is more than he can do. I do not know what he can do, but it seems to me that if you read the two carefully, you will see they are‘ not inconsistent. I will read them for your consideration now and give my interpreta- tion of them, and you will decide whether I am. right or he right. “ No ex post j‘acto law nor any law impairing the obligations of contracts, nor a law making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities shall be passed by the General Assembly.” That law means simply that the Legisla- ture in the future shall have the right to con-, trol all grants that are given by them; that iii-other words, when you create or incorpo- rate a company of any kind, that they hold their incorporation subject to the sovereign will. The other section is this: “.No per- petuities of estate shall be allowed except for charitable purposes, and the General Assembly shall pass all proper laws in re-. gard to the same.” He says they are in- compatible. VVhat is incompatible—that I shall not grant irrevocable rights, and that AJ’PLEGATE. perpetuities shall not exist? What perpetuities mean‘? There is not a lawy here but knows that it means the continu- ation, perpetual in its duration, of the title of some real estate. Not a right, or a priv- ilege, or a grant that interferes with any- body else, but just simply for the conven- ience of the matter that the title to charita- ble institutions shall not be destroyed, and the Legislature may authorize’perpetuities in thatline. It has nothing more to do with irrevocable grants and privileges than the sun has‘ to do with the opinions of this Convention. I cannot understand how men will distort language and principles n. this manner to raise a prejudice against the reports of Committees" for the purpose of going back to their dearly beloved idol that has stood so long in the State, un- touched and unharmed. One gentleman says he has discoursed upon it for the purpose of instructing those that are not versed:in the law like himself, and that gentleman has got constitutional law and statutory law and common law all mingled up so together that a man not versed in the law would know nothing about it, and one versedin the law would be terribly confused before he could see through it. The next section in which we have made a change is the one about the law of libel. It is section 8. “In prosecutions for the publication of papers investigating the official conduct of officers or persons in a public capacity, or where the matter published is proper for public information, the truth thereof may be given in evidence; and in all indictment or trials for libel, the jury shall have a right, both in civil and criminal cases, to determine the facts, under the direction of the court as to the law, as in other cases ; and it shall be a sufficient offense in any case that the matter published was true and was published with good intent.” What particular change have we made in this section '? WVe have made this: Under the old Bill of Rights it is said that the jury should be the judges of both law and fact under the directions of the court. I do not know hardly what that means. I suppose BILL OF RIGHTS. '28 lsday,] APPLEGATE. ‘ [October 14. means, if you take it literally, that the court shall preside and keep order, and the jury, after having heard the evidence, shall imagine what the law is. Their interpre- tation of the law is very much like that of a Justice of the Peace up in my country, in a case where the .law- yers had wrangled for three or four hours asking for instructions, and he wanted them to agree what the instructions were, and of course they were not there to agree, and finally he instructed the jury and said: “Gentlemen of the jury, the law is very much mixed in this case; you will take and de- cide it as you think best,” and that is the way the juries in these libel cases would do if you leave it to a doubtful construction as it is. That may have done very well when the law was so supreme and rigid and se- vere upon the individual, that he had not a fair chance against the powers that be‘; but in this enlightened age, where the gov- ernment is but a figurehead, we, the peo- ple, don’t want that protection, but let us ‘come down to the times and keep up at least with the Legislature, if we can’t get ahead of it. The objection is raised here that we ought- aiot to provide that the truthfulness, when published with good intent and for public information. shall be a sufficient defense. The Legislature has come down that far, and they say it is admissible in all civil cases. The Code of Practice provides new that you may give the truthfulness in evi- dence, it matters not whether made with‘ good or bad intent. We do not say the Legislature shall not go further than that; but we say the Legislature shall not recede from that position it has already taken; that if a newspaper, acting with good inten- tions, publishes a matter that is for public information, and it is true when it is pub- lished, that it shall be a sufiicient defense against that paper; if it publishes a matter that is calculated to injure the reputation and the standing of that citizen. The pa- per is not responsible for his acts. He is - made public. responsible for it himself, and when noto- riety is given to it, he ought to be con- demned by public sentiment in that man- ner, and the press that will expose him ought to be protected. The idea of a man that is guilty of an offense that was suitable for public information, and that a paper will in good faith publish it, that he has a right to go in the court-house and sayv it is true, but you must not tell it upon me. I have no sympathy with that sickly sen- timentality of private rights that goes that far. If it is published with good intent, suitable for public information, true when published, the man who is guilty of the offense ought to be exposed. It is bet- ter that he should suffer than that the whole community should suffer from a man that is moving among them guilty of those things, and no one dares to expose him; a fraud upon society and a shame to the country that it cannot be told or I do hope that this Conven- tion will not throw such shields around the law-breakers as that. The gen- tleman talks about shields that they have now, but we tried to strip from them one shield that they were not deserving of, because that is the shield that applies only to the guilty, not to the innocent; because it must be true when published, or it is no defense at all. Another gentleman has urged as an ob- jection to this section that we have here reported upon the question of lotteries. He makes the point, not that he is in favor of lotteries, but that the Bill of Rights and declaration of principles should not con- tain any charge against lotteries. One gentleman says that he never had any luck in lotteries; he has no particular interest in them, but he does not care about seeing such a clause engrafted into the Constitu- tion.‘ If we have no right, and there is no precedent for placing in the Bill-of Rights, which I assume is a declaration of princi- ples, that apply chiefly to the individual as against the State, if you can maintain 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] APPLEGATE. [October that proposition, you can maintain the other proposition that is contained in the Bill of Rights, that no exclusive privileges shall be granted to any man or any set of men. Granting an exclusive privilege to you, or to you, how does that effect myinterest indirectly? If I have a right as individual to complain of it indirectly, and ask this Con- vention in its organic law to protect me in that manner, have I not the same right to ask this Convention to protect me against the in- direct effect of granting lotteries. Lotteries of this country are like the octopus. They have us embraced in their multiplied arms, and they are sapping the life out of numer- ous institutions. They are a moral shame to the community, and the members of that Committee were of one opinion that we should do every thing that could be done to strangle them to ‘death; to uproot them by constitutional pro- vision or otherwise, and not to tolerate them in the land, and I have no apology to offer for having possibly invaded the work of any Committee by reporting that provis- ion here. We want to stop the granting of future lottery privileges, and not only stop the granting of future privileges, but to root up by constitutional provision the existing charters. If vested rights have been acquired, as somebody suggests, let the courts take the responsibility of saying so; but we, as the representatives of the sovereign power of the State, owe it to the people whom we represent to say that we are of the one opinion, that the sovereign should in no manner give its consent to the further existence of these institutions. These are the objections, or some of them, that have been urged against this report. My conception of the Bill of Rights is not that, it is a box containing jewels. It is not that it is a picture that hangs upon the wall, which the ravages of time may desecrate, but that it is the great bul- wark that defends the citizens against the aggregated masses. It is the ship of State that’ carries him above the waves be, to improve it if we could. in the storms of popular sentimen and in the course of time some of its tim-. here may become decayed and others may_ have to take their place, and thus it is that we have so construed it. Some are de- fective; some have been injured by winds, and some by the battering process of the Court, and others by legislative invasion,.. until we believe that by the conscientious- discharge of our duty we should bring to the notice of this Convention the condition of things in which we found it, and, it may If, in the wisdom. of this Convention, however, we: have made a mistake by attempting to patch up the broken ‘places, then it is for- you to decide; but, as for me, I am satisfied that we have made no invasion upon the old Bill of Rights that experience has not. taught us that we need; and as for the- language or the verbiage or the grammat» ical construction, and the complaints that had been made against it, I care nothing’ about it. If you can find better language- than is employed here, use it, and I will. vote cheerfully with you for the adoption of it; but I do sincerely hope that you will not permit these defects to remain longer, that, I believe, and it is a belief of the- great majority of those who have investie gated the subject carefully, now exist in. that bill. If you do correct them, correct them so that they will be effectual. (Ap- plause). The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, these gentlemen who have already spoken will have their names called at the end of the roll in the order in which they spoke. The Chair will consider that as the rule. The next speaker will be Mr. Beckam; but having already spoken, the- next gentleman is the Delegate from. Greenup. Mr. BENNETT. I am here represent-- ing the little county of Greenup. I will not trouble this Convention very much, and do not expect to take up much of its time in giving my idea. I do not know that I ' BILL OF RIGHTS. 25 D.‘ an ‘.4 ] BENNETT. [October 14-. -uld have spoken on this subject had it .Jt been that I introduced a resolution which was referred to the (‘ommitteee on Revenue and Taxation, and I find that Mr. Phelps. of Louisville, has introduced an amendment to this Bill of Rights embrac- ing my proposition, to the effect that poll- taxes were grievous and oppressive, and should not be longer tolerated in this State. He has moved that as an amendment to this Bill of Rights, so-called. I think it is more a Bill of Prohibition than a Bill of Rights. If I understand the question of rights properly, governments have no rights except what they get from individ- uals, and all rights are inherent in in- dividuals. The Bill of Rights introduced here is, in my opinion, merely a restraint upon the Legislative, Judicial and Execu- tive powers. I understand that every in- dividual has three rights, and three rights only, which are the right to life, the right to liberty, and the right to make the ele- ments of nature produce and to consume the same. We are here to frame articles of rights for the protection of the people. My rights 'end where another gentleman’s rights commence. I have no right to en- slave my neighbor, neither have I a right to consume what my neighbor produces. It has been my theory and is my belief that our Government is not properly or— ganized; that a government so organized as to produce one millionaire and a thousand paupers is not properly organized. There is something wrong some place (applause), and we should try to find it out. I do not know how it is that so many men live lives of leisure, while there are so many other men who produce every thing that con- duces to wealth, who are mere laborers. Not even a pin has its value fixed to it, ex- cept by some person’s labor. Therefore, in my estimation, labor is the most honorable thing in the world, as it is the producer of all values. But that is not the case with us. In our formation of government, we seem to have lost sight of the fact that the government , belongs to the people, and that the people do not belong to the government. The ar- gument of nearly every gentleman, it seems. to me, upon this Bill of Rights has been taken from the stand-point that the people That used to- belong to the government. be the ancient doctrine, whenever a man was subject to the crown, even his own life__ Now, these rights that they are attempt-- ing to give to the people already be-- government has. to them. The only taken away from the people, in a republican form of government certain rights. There is no monarchy here. long in this Bill of Rights from taking rights away that already belong to the people! and not pretend to grant them rights that they already have. I would like to see the proposition in this Bill of Rights, but I do not think it properly belongs here, but in a different place; butI believe that some State- Constitutions have that proposition in them.. I find it in the old Bill of Rights of Ohio7 adopted in 1802: “That taxes levied by the poll were grievous and affective, and there~ fore could not be longer toleratedin the- I think that properly be-- State of Ohio.” longs to another class of restrictions, but I am not particular where it goes. I would like to see it go in. I do thisfrom this stand—~ point : I find that a man out laboring—I swinging a pick on a railroad, following a. plow, or any other ordinary business— earns in the course of a year in the neigh- borhood of three hundred dollars. Upon that he has got to live and support his wife- and children. I think he loves his wife and children probably as well as I love mine. We put all the burdens of government on him because he is a producer of all value in the- world. I practice law when I am at home, and I cannot see where I have-ever pro- duced any thing. ‘We lawyers have a very good faculty of changing a fee from some- But. man’s pocket that earned it into ours. I do not see where I ever produced any We- want to restrain the governmental power- 26 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] BENNETT. thing in the practice of law. I can get a thousand dollars at the practice of the law. I have a thousand dollars to live on; but the men that produce it have only got three hundred dollars to live on. There is some- thing wrong, and I want to help this labor- ing man out; and I propose to do it by tak- ing a dollar and a half—sometimes it is a dol- lar and a half in my county and sometimes it amounts to four dollars—I propose to take that ofi'of that man’s head, for the only privilege he has is the privilege of breath- ing God Almighty’s free air. He has got no property to be protected. He has his life and liberty, and some say he ought to be willing to pay something for that privi- lege. I presume he is willing to pay the money, and I think he is, but then their wives and children would have to go bare- footed when we required him to pay it. We require him to keep up all our roads, and to spend three or four days for that purpose. I think-it is an injustice to him, and I want to see that proposition go into this Constitution somewhere; and to get a reve— nue to take the place of that, I propose to make a tax upon those who can pay it. I propose to have an income tax levied. Some gentlemen make four thousand, six thou- sand, eight thousand or fifteen thousand dollars a year. There is no hardship for them to pay a little tax that we take off this fellow that is swinging his pick on the railroad, or following the plow, or rolling logs on the river. I will give him a thousand dollars to live on, and will not. tax him until he has an income of over one thousand dollars, and then I will commence taxing him, and I want to con- tinue taxing him as his income increases. He has the money and can pay it. This poor fellow has no money. and if he pays it his children go ba-refooted. If we will let that much off of him he will be that much better off, and the man that makes one, two, or three or fifty thousand dollars a year can pay it and not feel it. I willgive him a thousand dollars to live on, and ex- empt him to that extent. He can live that I know, because I do it, and I li It does not cost me over a thousand dollars to live. I have a wife, and she is in the city now with me. I think she and I will eat up all we make down here. (Laughteix) I want to see this inserted somewhere in the Bill of Rights. about as well as anybody. There are several good things in the report of the Committee, and ‘it contains some excellent reading. There has been a heap of talking about jewels. I have not seen any jewels. I think, though, that to . this fellow that swings his pick out there it would be a jewel to take thista-X off of him. That is the jewel I am after now. I prefer Gov. Knott’s substitute to the Com- mittee’s report, but there is some mighty good reading left in this old one. I could make a very good Bill of Rights out of this by very little work. We might have saved the people money and time, and they would have been fully as well sat- isfied with our work as they will be when we get through with all of our oratory. Some desire to strike out the whole of this third section. I don’t want that whole struck out. I want this clause retained, so much of it as reads, “ The right of prop- ertyis before and higher than any Constitu- tional sanction.” Then the balance of that relating to slavery can go out. In the first section, I would strike out four letters, so so it ‘would read, “all men,” in the place of “all freemen.” We are all free now. In the fourth section, which reads, “All power is inherent in the people, and all free gov- ernments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, hap- piness, security and the protection of the property.” I would add in there, “ of the individual.” Then I would pass on over this until I would come down to the eighth section, which reads, “ The ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, subject to such modifications as may be authorized by BILL OF RIGHTS. 27 esdav,] U BENNETT. [October 14. .JlS Constitution.” I would strike out “the ' ncient mode; ” then it would read, “Trial by ury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, subject to such modifications as may be authorized by this Constitution.” I would pass on until I came down to the 12th section, and would strike out the word “vicinage,” and insert “county.” ‘That term used to denote the neighborhood ‘or village. We have passed away from that system. We all understand what a county is, and I would insert county in the place of that. Then I would pass over this, and come down to the proposition of_ my friend from Boyd. I am not very par- ticular how this got in, but would like to see it in, whether it goes‘ in exactly as he wants it or this way: “When once tried or acquitted, cannot again be tried for the same offense.” I think everybody will understand that, and I think the Court of Appeals would have no ‘trouble in constru- ing it. ‘ I will pass on over this, take the old Bill as it is until I come over to the fifteenth ' section, and then one little word I would strike out there. That is “sale.” The whole section reads: “All courts shall be open, and every person for an injury done ,him in his lands, goods, person or reputa- tion shall have remedy by the due course of law, and right and justice administered without sale, denial or delay.” I would leave the word “ sale” out there. I do not see any use in it. “ Without denial or de- lay,” I would leave that in. I would pass over all of that and come down to section 22. There are one or two others that might go, but I don’t care any thing about them. Section 21 reads this way‘ “No person shall be attainted of felony by the General Assembly.” I would let that stand, but abolish what follows. There is no use or common sense in it: “No attain- ders shall work corruption of blood; nor, except during the life of the offender, for- feiture of the estate to the Commonwealth.” They first say the Legislature shall not at- taint anybody, and then put in that clause I think the whole clause ought to come out. Then I come down to this: “The Genera1 Assembly shall not grant any title of no! bility or hereditary distinction; nor create any ofiice, the appointment to which shall be for a longer time than for a term of years.” I want to add there, “Or authorize the levying of a poll or per capita tax for State, county ‘ or municipal purposes.” Then I am willing to take that old Bill of Rights just as it is. I think we would save time, and save our credit, by just taking a that up and going through it and adopting it, and letting our oratory cease. (Laughter and applause.) Mr. BIRKHEAD. When my name was called I did not explain why I answered yes. I supposed I would have the oppor- tunity to do so when my name was reached. I did not suppose I would be called on to- day, knowing as I do that there were many gentlemen who had arranged and prepared speeches. I think it would be treating them with‘ proper courtesy to yield the floor to them. I do not know that I will have any thing to say afterwards. Mr. BLACKBURN. I ask that my name be passed; I have nothing to say at the present time. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the name of the gentleman from Woodford will be passed. Mr. J. C. JONSON. I will ask until what time it will be passed ‘? The CHAIRMAN. I suppose at the foot of the docket. Mr. BOURLAND. I had no idea of be- ing called on to-day. There were a number of gentlemen whom I expected would oc- cupy the floor, and I supposed it would take at least a week to get down ,l'ilO my name. Consequently the Convention has, to some extent, slipped up on me. I wish to say that since the beginning of this Convention, up to the present moment, I have been a silent observer of its proceedings. While I 28 BILL or Riei-rrs. Tuesday,] BOURLAND. [October ‘ have been a silent observer of its proceed- ings, I have also been a close observer. I have listened attentively to every thing that has been said upon this floor, and I have watched minutely every action of the members of this great body. Recently, since the debate on the re- port of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights has been before the Com- mittee, I have been profoundly impressed with the eloquence, rhetoric and logic that have been displayed by the members 011 this floor. I have also been impressed by their earnestness—the earnest desire that they have manifested to work earnestly in the interest of the people. I am aware that they have been liberal in dealing out to us - from the great store-houses of their minds jewels, as they have been aptly designated by a number of gentlemen on the floor. But if all things were converted into jew- els, we would soon begin to pine for the re- turn of the homely iron, the steel, the wood and the clay. I do not propose to deal in jewels to-day, but with your per- mission, and the permission of the Conven- tion, we will have a plain, practical, cona- [mon-sense talk. I believe that in changing the fundamental law of our State we should be governed very largely by the same rules that govern us in our business relations. I presume there is no intelligent business man on this floor who will hastily conclude to make a change in any of his business relations until he has considered well both the existing state .. of affairs and the changes that he proposes to bring about. I presume that no lawyer on this floor would for a moment change the nature of his pleadings or the nature of his practice; neither would the doctor change the nature and character of his prescription in the treatment of diseases; neither would the storekeeper consent to change his store- room or the arrangement of his goods; neither would the farmer agree to change the general arrangement of his business, the general construction of his houses out-buildings, until .he had asked himsel two very simple questions: First, will the i, change which is contemplated be an im- provement over the present arrangement?’ and secondly, will the impmvement, when brought about, be worth what it has cost or- would cost to bring about the change, I believe that these simple 'rules should govern us to a very considerable extent in changing the organic law for the great State- of Kentucky. "We should not change one: single phrase of the present Constitution,‘ either the Bill of Rights or any other sec-- tion, until we have asked ourselves this sine-i ple question: Will the change which we propose be an improvement over the pres- ent arrangement, and will the change thus brought about be worth to the people of Kentucky what it will ‘cost them to bring; it about. In my humble judgment there- has been many changes proposed that will. not be an improvement; yet I believe we‘ can, by proper thought, by proper consid- eration, and by proper investigation, bring about changes in the Constitution that will be an improvement, and the improvements thus brought about will be worth to the people vastly more than it will cost them to bring about the change. In the few. remarks that I pro- pose to submit, I desire to confine myself exclusively to one clause in the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, and that clause has been discussed perhaps more fully than any other clause in the Bill. It is not my purpose to investi- gate any matter that pertains to the Bill of Rights not contained in the second section of the report of the Committee, and in the first section of the original Bill. I have been profoundly impressed with the debates on this floor upon that single section. The gentleman‘ from Marion has eloquently pointed out to this Convention many of the evils that have grown out of‘ this clause in our organic law; and there is scarcely a gentleman who has. BILL OF RIGHTS- 29 _ guage: .esday,] BOURLAND. [October 14. spoken upon this subject who has not pointed out more or less of the evils that ‘have been the result of this clause in the Bill of Rights; and I do not at this time remember any gentleman who has pointed out to us one single good that has ever re- sulted from that clause in our organic law. 'Then, if all the results that have emanated from this clause in our Bill of Rights has been evil and only evil, I ask where, in the name of common sense, is the justifi- cation for this Convention retaining this clause in the Bill of Rights? The gentleman from Marion, representing the results that have grown out of this 'clause, and that have been the direct result of it, has represented corporations claiming their rights under it as vampires that have fastened themselves on the very vitals of the people. With all his great learning and talent, and from the great store-house of his ‘ mind, he was unable to bring forth -one single good that had resulted from that clause in our Bill of Rights. I desire to examine that very briefly. Under our first Constitution, which was adopted, I believe, in 1792, about the time. of the birth of our State, we find this lan- “All men when they form a so- cial compact are equal, and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the com- munity, but in consideration of public ser- vices.” .About eight years after that experience had taught the people of the State in that short period that there were ' defects in the first Constitution of the State, .and another Convention was convened for the ‘purpose of changing or altering that Constitution. That Convention assembled, I believe, in 1799. We find in the report -of that Convention, in the Bill of Rights adopted by.- it, substantially the same clause was re-enacted I believe the only change made was in substituting the word “ free men” for ‘1 men.” The fact that, the second Convention re-adopted this clause is con- ~clusive evidence to my mind that, up to ‘no evils had resulted from that time, that clause in the Bill of Rights. Al- most fifty years after that, in the year 1849, another Convention was called by the people of the State in order to change that second Constitution, and they, in their wisdom, saw proper to re- adopt that clause in the Constitution with- out changing one word of it. That, in my estimation, is evidence conclusive that be- tween those two periods no evil had re- sulted from that section in the Bill ‘of Rights. Consequently they re-adopted it, and if the same state of affairs existed to- day, and no evils had grown out of it, and no unjust privileges had been granted under it, and been held by reason of the judicial con- structions placed upon it, then I would say let us re-adopt it now, and‘ thus show that amount of courtesy and respect for the wis- dom of our forefathers that is due to them. But, soon after the adoption of our present Constitution, one of the most gigantic civil _wars of modern times broke out in this country, and for five years that war raged with all the intenseness of patriotism and valor, stimulated by sectional hate. During the progress of that terrible war it seems that the very nature and disposition of the American people changed. It seems to me that, at some period in the progress of that fearful ‘contest, grasping avarice and oiii- cial corruption entered into an unholy alliance, and it seems 'to me that surely the devil himself officiated at the altar. What has been the result of that alliance? Be- fore the war was scarcely’ over these pro- lific parents began to send out broadcast over the country their offspring in the shape of grasping, soulless monopolies and corporations, each one of which had secured special and exclusive privileges by special acts of the Legislature. I am satisfied that of all people in this country the legal pro- fession has done more to build up society, to elevate its tone. They have given to it a refinement that we could never have had without their, assistance. Consequently, so BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] BOURLAND. [October r We owe a debt of gratitude to the legal profession of the United States, and especially to the fraternity in the State of Kentucky. And I believe that they are as patriotic a people as Kentucky has ever produced, and the only thing, in my judg- ment, that has prevented them from taking advantage of this clause in the Constitu- tion has been their wisdom, their patriot- ism, and their goodness of heart. What is there under the present Constitution and Bill of Rights to prevent them from organ- izing themselves into a corporation, and securing the enactment of a special law exempting them and their property for- ever from taxation, underv the plea. that they are performing a public service‘? Is it not true that they are performing a pub- lic service? Is. it not true that they are performing a public service that places under obligation to them the entire people of the State? Was it not for their influ- ence before the Courts of the State in preventing the execution of law, the entire people of the State would be bankruptcd in order to build penitentiaries sufiicient to accommodate the great army of criminals that would rush into these institutions. (Laughter and applause.) Consequently, you see that they might well form themselves into a corpora- ' tion, and go before the Legislature and ask of that body to grant them a charter, and exempt ‘ their property from taxation; be— cause it is a well known fact that they are performing, in one sense of the word, at least a public service, by throwing a shield of protection around the criminal, and thus relieving the people of a burdensome taxa- tion, which they must of necessity impose upon themselves to increase the capacities of their penitentiaries to that extent that would be necessary to ' accommodate the great army of vicious and evil-disposed per- sons that would be rushed into these institu- tions, were it not for the intervention of that great fraternity. (Laughter.) I amyvcry thankful to them, and I am. sure that the whole people of the State " ar‘ under obligation to them, from the fact that _ they have not ,taken advantage of this- clause in the Constitution, and secured the- enactment of a law that would exempt their property from taxation. We have an institution in this State called the Farmers and Laborers’ Union, and, by the. way, I am not ashamed to say that I am a member of that organization. Neither am I ashamed or afraid, in any community or- before any association of men (and I do be- lieve that this is as august a body as ever assembled in the United States); yet I am neither ashamed or afraid to say here, in my place, that I ‘am not only a member of' the Farmers and Laborers’ Union, but a plain, practical, common sense farmer. I say that we have an institution in this country called the Farmers and Laborers" Union. We are incorporated under a char- ter, and I am exceedingly anxious that no- wrong should be done to others by the law~~ making power of this country, in order to build up the interests of the farmer; be— cause it is one of the fundamental principles upon which our order is founded, that equal and exact justice should be done to‘ all, and that exclusive privileges should be granted to none. But suppose that no additional. .safeguards are thrown around the people by the proposed Constitution ;; suppose that this section of the ancient Bill of Rights was preserved in its entirety, as has been suggested by a number of Dele- gates upon this fioor; what is to prevent the Farmers and Laborers’ Union from going before the Legislative Department of the State and asking for the enactment of‘ a law that would exempt them from taxa- tion, and give them the exclusive privilege of carrying on, and engaging in, the pur-» suit of agriculture in the State‘? It is a well-known fact that they could main- tain the position that they are. performing a public service. They are feeding the peo- ple of the State. They are producing the‘ wealth of the State, and to all intents and BILL OF RIGHTS. 31 .Tuesday’] BOURLAND. [October 14. pP-rposes they are not only performing a public service, but they are performing an absolutely necessary service for the suste- nance of all other classes of society. I ask this assembly to strike out from the Con- stitution of the State, and from the Bill of Rights, that clause under which we might, in the future, secure to ourselves these ex- clusive privileges. I hold in my hand a volume of 112 pages, and it 'is composed almost exclu- sively of veto messages from the Chief Executive of the State of Kentucky at the 1888-9 session of i the Legislature. If I could have found the corresponding volume covering a period of the last Legislature, I would have been glad to have found it. A large majority of these vet-o messages are of bills that were passed by the Legislature of the State granting special and exclusive privileges to some corporations, or exempt- ing from taxation their property, and giv- ing to them privileges that were dangerous to be confided to their hands. I also at- tempted to secure the original draft of a bill that was passed by the last Legislature of the State, which was vetoed by the Chief Executive, chartering (I believe it was) the Norton University. It was to be an itinerant concern that had the right to travel all over the country. They were under no obligation, under the charter, to establish a university anywhere, to teach any thing or anybody’s child, and yet their charter granted them the right to acquire and hold an unlimited amount of property, and for- ever exempted ‘their property from taxa- tion. Suppose that we had had in the Chief Executive’s office a man whose soul was not in sympathy with the interests of the great masses of the people, and through careless- ness, or from vother motives or causes, he should have failed to notice the objectionable features in that bill, and the thousands of other bills of the same character passed by the Legislature, and affixed his signature to them, and fastened upon the people of this State other gigantic soulless corporations, whose peculiar province it would have been to draw from the substance of others and fatten upon their labor. What do we propose? I have been listening with a great deal of interest, thinking that surely the intelligence of this Convention; surely some‘ of the great legal minds that adorn this body would be able to point out some good that has resulted from this clause in the Bill of Rights. But, up to this time, and I hope that from this time on, those who are so favorably impressed with the necessity of the adoption of the old Bill as it now stands, will point out some good that has resulted from this clause in the Bill of Rights, in order that we may weigh it well and see whether the good or the ' evil which has resulted from it predominate. If more evil results from a law than good, common sense and prudence dictates to us to repeal it, although that law may be as old as the eternal hills. The gentleman from Bullitt, in his dis- cussion of this matter the other day, repre- sented the Bill of Rights as coming down to us from our forefathers covered all over with the blood of our revolutionary sires. And yet he failed utterly to point out one single good that had resulted from this sec- tion or clause in this Bill of Rights. And I hope some of the able gentlemen who will follow me will point out some good that has resulted from it. The question is, what evil will result if we strike out the entire second section of the report of the Committee on Peeamble and Bill of Rights, and the first section as it now appears in the present Constitution‘? What evil would result from the destruction of that clause from which so many evils have already sprung? Some gentleman has told us if we destroy that section we would have no right to compensate public oflicials for their labor. I have been searching with some diligence to find how many States in the Union contain that provision in their or- ganic law, and, from the best information that I can gather, there are but four States in this entire confederation of States that 32 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] BOURLAND. . ‘— [Octobelr 14 have any such provision at all in their fun- damental law. And I have yet to hear the first complaint from any State that has suffered any inconvenience whatever by reason of not having this section in their Bill of Rights. It is unnecessary for me to enumerate the evils that have resulted and grown up under this section. They have been more elo- quently portrayed before this Convention than I could possibly do it; and the strang- est feature of the whole proceeding is the gentleman who have spoken the most elo- quently in pointing out to this Convention the evils that have grown up, and which have. been the direct result of this clause in our Bill of Rights, has utterly failed to show wherein evil would result by striking it "out. And yet they desire it should remain in the bill. I am one of those that believe that we are here to look after the interests of the ‘entire people of the State. It has im- pressed me very forcibly, from the general tenor of the debates that we have had upon this floor, that the people of Kentucky oc- cupied a secondary position, and that incor- porate wealth occupied the first position; and that the interests of the people must be secondary to the interest of the corpora- tions. Some gentleman has eloquently dis- coursed on what would be the result if we destroyed this section ; that we would banish capital from our State; that corporations would be forced to go to other States, where ‘they could get more extended privileges, and that the development of the resources of our grand old Commonwealth would be set back for, perhaps, a half a century or a century. My observation has demon- strated to me that wealth is abundantly able to take care of itself; that great corporations are able to take care of themselves; that majorities are abundantly able to take care of themselves, and that the primary object of all law is to secure minorities against the encroachments of majority, to protect the weak against the aggregations of the strong, and to protect the poor against oppressi»on by the rich. Is there a case on record when?’ the rich have been oppressed by the poor? Is there a single case on record where one single right, one single privllege, has ever been wrested from a corporation by a poor, humble citizen of this Commonwealth—or of this Nation‘? I defy any gentleman on this floor to point out one single, solitary instance where the rights and privileges of the strong have been invaded by the weak. Then I believe,'sir, that the primary object of this Convention should be to throw a shield of protection around the honest toiler of this country, and see to it that he shall be allowed to reap at least a just propor- tion of that which is produced by his own labor. It is a well known fact, that to the extent property is exempt from taxation, the rate of taxation must be increased on that which remains subject to taxation; and whenever the property of a corporation is exempt from taxation, that leaves an ad- ditional tribute upon every day’s labor per- formed in the State of Kentucky. When- ever the property of a corporation is ex— empted from taxation, or where special privileges are granted to them that are not granted to others, the very fundamental principles upon which our government is based are violated, and if we perpetrate this evil we will be held responsible for it in days yet to come. Much has been said about the jewels; much has been said about the Pleiades, and much eloquence has been expended; they have ascended into the stars; but, in my judgment, if this Convention does not guard well the interests of the people, J ob’s coffin will be brought down, and in it will be in- terred the members of this Convention (Laughter and applause.) I stand here as an humble representative of the people, and I believe that the district represented by me is as worthy of representation as is that rep- resented by any other gentleman upon this floor. I recognize my inferiority, so far as education is concerned. I recognize my in- I BILL OF RIGHTS. 33 Tue=day,] BOURLAND. [Oct ‘ber 14. ' feriority so far as oratory is concerned. I recognize my inferiority so far as promi- nence is concerned; but I yield to no man superiority so far as my rights and ‘privi- leges on this floor are concerned, and I shall contend earnestly for the people. While I have been a silent observer of the proceedings of this Convention up to this time, I intend to be true to my people, and whenever I see and believe that I can ad- vance their interest by speaking upon this floor, I shall not hesitate to demand and ex- ercise that privilege. But I have already detained you too long with my scattering remarks. I hope that the wisdom of this Convention will dictate to them to strike out this antiquated passage, this bloody pas- sage, this passage that has come down to us covered all over with the blood of our revo- lutionary sires, and I believe that it is also covered with the blood of the innocent women and children of this country who have been ruthlessly robbed under its pro- vision. I say if the Convention sees proper to retain it, I do hope they will strike from it the latter part of the section, which will close effectually theloophole through which these grasping corporations come in to rob the people. (Applause) Mr. BURNAM. I move that the Com- mit ee rise and report progress. The motion being seconded, was put to the Committee and carried. The President resumed the Chair. Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, the Com- mittee of the Whole‘have been in session, and had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again. _ The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Commit- tee of the Whole. The question being put before the House, it was carried. Mr. BURNAM. I Wish to read to the- Convention a communication. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no- objection, and the gentleman can read the communication. Mr. Burnam read the communication, as- follows: WHEREAS, Intelligence has ceived by this Convention of the death in Washington City yesterday of our illustri-- ous countryman, Justice Samuel F. Mil» ler: Resolved, That a Committee be appointed by the Chair, who shall report such resolu- tions as will appropriately express the sentiments of this body in view of the: great loss sustained by the Nation in the: death of this eminent jurist and citizen,. and as shall mark our profound respect for.- his memory. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. The question being put before the House, the President declared the resolution adopt- ed. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will ap- ' point the-Delegate from Madison, the Dele- gate from Hart, and the Delegate from Shelby as the Committee indicated by the resolution. The Convention thereupon adjourned. been re-- Qonvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1. ,. .Wednesday,] FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 15. 1890. CLARDY—MOORE——TVVYMAN. No. 30 [October 15 . The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Dr. Neville. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order will be the reception of peti- tions. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to offer a peti- tion from the Farmers and Laborers’ Union and others of J eflerson countv, Kentucky, and the rule requires I shall state it. If there is no objection, I will read it, and ask that it be referred to Com- mittee on Legislative Department. The petition was read, and referred as in- dicated. Mr. MOORE. I have an answer to the letter addressed to the Mayor of the city of ‘Catleltsburgin regard to its indebtedness, and desire to have it referred to the Special Committee. The PRESIDENT. The communica- tion will be referred to the Special Com- mittee of which the Delegate from Ander- son is Chairman. I Mr. TWYMAN. I have a similar re- ‘port from Larue county. The PRESIDENT. The report will be referred to the same Committee. Re- 'ports from Standing Committees are now in in order. Reports from Special Committeesf; there being none, motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. BOLES. I have a resolution pro- posing a change in the rules, which, under the rules, will lie over one day. Resolution read, as follows: -~ Amend Rule 19 by adding these words thereto: Nor shall any Delegate, in his first speech, speak longer than a half-hour; nor in his second speech longer than a quarter of an hour; and this amendment shall apply to the proceedings of the Conven- tion when in Committee of the Whole, after the debate on Preamble and Bill of Rights in Committee of the Whole shall have terminated. The PRESIDENT. Unless the rules are suspended, the resolution will lie over one day. Mr. MoCHORD. I offer this resolu- tion. The PRESIDENT. Report the resolu- tion Mr. Secretary. ' Resolution read, as follows: Resolved. That the Committee on the Revision of the Constitution be, and is hereby, requested to report to the Conven- tion, at its earliest convenience, a clause providing a mode of revising or amending the Constitution to be adopted by this Convention. Referred to Committe on General Pro- visions. Mr. MCCHORD. My purpose in offer- in; that resolution is to enable the Con ven- tion to understand how the Constitution to be adopted may be amended. Many sug- gestions have been offered to this Conven- tion which, of themselves, are radical changesin the present Constitution. While I might hesitate to vote in favor of those resolutions or that amendment, at the same time I would be willing to exercise my judgment on those propositions if I knew how the change could be made in that portion of the Constitution. Therefore, it seems to me it would be well for this Con- 2 PRINTING. Wednesday,] KnNNEnY—FUNK—PETTIT. [October 15 - vention to understand how the change could be made in a clauseineorporated in the new Constitution, without, I might say, going through the same formality of changing it as we have under the present Constitution. I have heard it suggested by various mem- bers, if there was an open clause by which mistakes could be corrected, they would be willing to vote for new measures offered that seemed to be good. Therefore, I be- lieve it would facilitate the business of the Convention if a clause of that kind could be adopted before a great portion of the Constitution ( ould be adopted. l l Mr. KENNEDY. I am a member of i the Committee, and I think the Committee 1 will be able to report the latter part of the ‘ week. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution just read. The question being taken on the adop- tion of the resolution,'same was adopted. ThePRESIDENT. The Chair heard several low calls for a division, but as no gentleman arose, did not order a division. Mr. FUNK. I heard several low voices, and I now call for a division. The PRESIDENT. Although it is against the rule, I will, under the circum- stances, allow a division. The Chair thinks it is not necessary to recognize the gentle- man unless he rises. Mr. BRONSTCN. I move that it be referred to the Committee on Revision. The question being put on the motion, it was declared carried. Mr. PETTIT. I did not have the re- port ready to present from the Commit- tee on Printing when the Committee was called. I therefore ask leave to present it at this time. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the report. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the report, as follows: To the Constitutional Convention: Your Committee on Printing and Accounts would respectfully report that it had .want of eificient management. nothing. to do with the arrangements made for having the printing done in the earlier stages of the Convention. It found the work behind, and has, as yet been un-- able to relieve a situation which is vexa- tions and annoying to the Delegates, to say nothing of the severe consequences which may result when ourlabors come to be re- viewed by publieopinion. The reports of our daily proceedings become so stale be- fore reaching our tables that they are rarelyreviewed, and we find from the statements of Delegates and from our ob‘- servations that they are quite imperfect pre- sentations of what really occurs during our deliberations. We had hoped that at the opening of this week the reports would have been up with the work of the Convention, but re- gret to be compelled to state that during the last few days we have lost rather than gained ground. We will report the facts, and leave the matter to the wisdom‘ of the Convention. At the beginning the printer lacked‘ tvpe and labor. Of course, he could not have been expected to keep on hand a sufficient supply of these to be prepared’ for as much work as the Convention re- quires, when he had no assurance that he would be given the position. After much delay, he has greatly increased his equip- ment, and seems to be sincerely anxious to do his whole duty in the premises. We are not sufficiently advised as to the tech- nical details of the business to determine‘ as to whether the trouble of which the- Convention has such serious cause to com- plain is in the lack of facilities or in the- It is part 1y due, in our opinion, to the action of the Convention in having extraneous matter‘ printed, which compels the withdrawal of hands and type from the work of printing the reports of the daily proceedings, The reports have not been satisfactorily printed. The first work was done in old type, which did not always show clearly.v PRINTING. 3 -Wednesday,] PETTIT. [October 15. The proof has been poorly made. We fear that it will not be satisfactory to the Dele- gates, when they look over their work as reproduced in the printed debates, to think that their culture and precision of speech . will be judged from what these pages show. We do not charge that the fault is wholly with the printer. ’The work has been go- ing on without a responsible editor. The stenographer has his notes reproduced by the type-writer in great haste. He is liable to make mistakes, and no doubt does. He has undertaken, and it is understood to be his duty, ‘to prepare the reports for the printer, who, of course, cannot go behind the copy that he receives. Some of the members look after the printing, so far as it relates to what they themselves have said; but in the main, however, the work is going on with no supervision save that which the stenographer gives it. We are trying to make a faithful report, so that the Convention may understand the situation as it is, and act accordingly. We have no power over the matter, and can only state the facts as they appear to us. The trouble has reached a point where a heroic remedy is needed. The compensation of the Printer is fixed by an act of 1878. In our. opinion, he is entitled to the rates therein established for the public printing we have ordered. Un- der the resolution passed early in the ses- sion, 125 copies of the daily proceedings are being printed to lay on the desks of the members, which they have the privilege of revising and correcting on the same day they are received, and then returning them to the Printer. When corrected, 3,000 copies are sent ofi“, of which 2,500 copies are either furnished to the members or sent off under directions left at the print- ing-ofiice. The remaining 500 copies are sold, subject to the order of the members of the Convention, and, in some instances, even the copies to which they are each entitled daily from this source have been withdrawn.‘ In addition to the foregoing, 1,000 copies are printed, to be bound and furnished to members, as ordered heretofore by the Convention, and to be sold to those who may desire them. ‘ We would suggest that the Committee call on the printer for a plan by which the work may be so expedited as to give each day the work of the session preceding. It is important that this should be done, and the expense now incurred should secure what the public interests demand. Your Committee has been charged by resolution with the duty of reporting as to the work of the stenographer and the com- pensation to which he is fairly entitled. We have corresponded with the oflicers of several States in order to ascertain what was allowed for similar work in Conven- tions held there, and return herewith the responses received. It seems that the pro- ceedings of the Mississippi Convention are not being stenographically reported. The- last California Convention declined to sub- mit to the demands of those who were ap- plicants for the stenographer’s position, but the bill was paid by the Legislature afte"- ward for the report made on private ac- count. showing that it would have been better to have made an arrangement about the matter at the beginning. We are of opinion that the stenographer, and not ex- ceeding two assistants,_ can do the work needed by this Convention, and that he should have the aid of two type-writers after adjournment each day. It seems to have been the understanding that he should be paid a per diem of $35 for the services of himself and his assistants, which, from the information we can gather, is a fair and liberal compensation. We recommend that it be fixed as the regular permanent allowance, to be in full of all services rendered by his department‘, including correcting and reading the proof of all matter that goes through his hands. Your Committee has labored diligently to do its duty, and has been animated by a 4 PRINTING. Wednesday,] PETTIT. [October 15. desire to do justice to all the interests in- volved. It does not undertake to censure any oflicer, nor to lay blame at the door of any one, but it seems that all with whom we have been called to consult are anxious to secure the results which their employ- ment was intended to obtain. The delay in furnishing the reports of daily proceedings is a serious matter, and cannot be too carefully considered. Respectfully submitted. T. J. ELMOBE, Tnos. S. Pn'rcrnr, W. M. BECKNER, SAM’L GRAHAM, J. M. Former, E. E. KIRwAN. JACKSON, MISS., Sept 26, 1890. Clarence E. Walker, Frankfort, Ky: DEAR SIR: This Convention has no re- porter, and no official proceedings will be published until the Journal is printed. At the beginning of the session a special Committee was appointed to ascertain the cost of stenographie reports, and they re- ported that $50 per day, $10 each for two reporters, and $30 for transcribing, etc., printing of course additional. The report was laid on table. Will you please ascer- tain from your Secretary the amount of his compensation, number of employee, etc., and if the whole allowance is made to him, or the pay of his assistants fixed by the Convention and paid directly to him. Yours, truly, R. E. WILSON, Secretary. SACRAMENTO, Sept. 29, 1890. Hon. T. J. Elmore .- DEAR SIR: The last Constitutional Con- vention of California consisted of 152 mem- bers, and was in session 167 days. Messrs. Willis and Stockton reported the proceed- ings at their own expense, and without the _ authority of the Convention. The Legis- lature at the next session paid them $18,000 for transcribing and preparing the debates tor publication, and they were printed and bound at the State Printing Office. Respectfully, J. C. GoRMAN, Ex-Delegate Const. Convention, Clerk Controllor Oflice. OLYMPIA, Sept. 20, 1890. Hon. J. M. Forgy, Frankfort, Ky. : DEAR SIR: Yours of the 29th inst., in- quiring as to compensation of Stenographer at our Constitutional Convention, has been received. In reply, I have to say that Mr. A. C. Bowman, of Seattle, took down the whole proceedings in shorthand (without any contract, however, as to price), depend- ing upon the subsequent Legislature to purchase the notes for publication at the legislative session. Mr. Bowman made a proposition to furnish the shorthand notes for $1,200, but the bill to appropriate the money failed to pass. There were seventy- five members of the Constitutional Con- vention, and the session lasted sixty days. The debates were quite voluminous. The $1,200 asked for represented compensation of two shorthand reporters for sixty days, at $10 per day each. Very truly yours, ALLEN WEIR, Secretary of State. CHEYENNE, WYO., October 3, 1890. J. M. Forgy, 117.99., Frankfort, Ky. : DEAR SIR: Replying to your inquiry of d September 23d, I have to inform you that during the session of our Constitutional Convention, we paid our Stenographer, who reported all proceedings, including debates, $15 per day; such proceedings and debates being transcribed from short- hand notes into type-written matter. Very respectfully, J OHN W. MELDRUM, Secretary of Wyoming. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I would like to make an inquiry. I understood there was a resolution introduced to appoint a super- vising critic, or rather a supervisor of the reports of the Stenographer before they PRINTING. 5 Wednesday,] MCHENBY—SMITH. [October 15 . went to the Printer. I would like to in- quire what has become of that resolution. That might facilitate business and help us out. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is un- der the impression that the resolution to which the Delegate refers was referred to the Committee on Rules. Mr. MoHENRY. There was a resolu- tion to appoint an additional engrossing clerk referred to the Committee on Rules. That Committee has never had a meeting since it came to our hands. I have an im- pression that when they take action there will be no one to vote for it. The gentle man from Hardin says his object is to make the Enrolling Clerk asupervisin g critic. I do not think that is the resolution. I do not think the Committee understand the object, unless it is to provide for some man whom some one wants to get into an ofiice. We have not been sufficiently impressed with the importance of it to call the Com- mittee together. While I am on the floor I want to express my regret at the helpless- ness of the Convention and State of Ken- tucky in regard to the printing. We elect- ed without opposition, at the beginning of this session, as Public Printer, a man whom we thought, or I thought, rep- resented the biggest printing concern in Kentucky, that strikes off a pa- per in one or two hours-twenty or thirty thousand copies; said to have one ‘of the finest presses in the whole United States. It has all the appliances for print- ing-any number of compositors—and yet .we are herein session generally from two to three hours in the day; and they say that there is no printing machinery to keep up with them here in Kentucky, and that this Convention is helpless. We have not been parsimonious. We have not said any thing about prices. The disposition on the part of the Convention is to pay liberally and well for the work. What we say in three hours’ debate, taken down by the Stenographer, they say can’t be printed —fi in twenty-four hours. I reckon they can do it in Oregon, Washington, Texas, or in any State of the Union. Why can’t it be done in Kentucky, where the concern that does our printing claims to be the biggest newspaper south of the Ohio. I am will- ing to say I will vote for the repeal of the whole thing. and not have any Stenog- rapher, and go back and make a common journal of the proceedings, rather than let this thing run on the way it is. It is the complaint made by the whole people of Ken- tucky; and I, for one—and I believe I am backed by every other member of the House—have been complaining at the way this thing is going on. Something ought to be done. We have been here five weeks, and the gentleman elected Public Printer says he did not know he was to be Printer, and did not get started for six or eight days; and yet be had no opposition for the place. And I think it was antici- pated that, on account of his popularity, high standing and high character, he was going to be the man, and nobody dared to oppose him. I move that this thing be re- ferred back to the Committee on Printing and Accounts to see if some improvement cannot be made. If not, let us stop the employment of the Stenographer and the printing of the record. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I move to amend by inserting that the Committee be in- structed to employ some printer to catch up the back work, and let the Public Printer proceed with the printing from this time on. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman willput his motion in writing. Mr. MILLER. I hope the Delegate from Ohio will withdraw his motion for a moment. Mr. MOHENRY. I will say I am mis- taken in the statement I just made. I find that the Courier-Journal has nothing to do with the publication of this, matter. Mr. MILLER. That is the statement which I desired to make in this connection. 6 - PRINTING. Wedn esday,] I desire to state further, that in my opin- ion the Legislature of Kentucky is largely responsible for the situation ofl' affairs at present. It indicates in the statute under which this Convention is assembled that it was the desire of the people of Ken- tucky to have a stenographic report, and publish the report of the proceedings of this Convention. Nevertheless, the Legis- lature made no provision whatever for the printing ofthe proceedings of the Conven- tion; and this Convention ought not to expect any gentleman engaged in that line of business to be so presumptuous as to . conclude he would inevitably be chosen as the official printer of this Convention. It if true that Mr. Johnson was the Public Printer of Kentucky, but it would have been a presumption on his part to conclude that he would be chosen for that position. And it is expecting too much of Mr. Johnson to say that he should come to that conclusion and make ample preparations and spend his money without his position already being fixed by law and without his compensation being provided for. Now, I lay this responsibility, as I say, on the Legislature of Kentucky in the first instance, and in‘uthe second instance, I think this Convention itself is responsible in not proceeding in this work in a more regular manner. Here is the rule under which the Committee on Printing and Ac- counts acted: “A Committee on Printing and Accounts, which shall supervise the printing that may be done for this Con- vention, and examine, audit and report upon all accounts created by this Con ven- tion. This Committee shall consist of seven members.” That rule does not pro- vide for the Committee to give any direc- tion in regard to this printing at all. It has no authority, and to this day that Committee has no authority to act in re- gard to this matter; and we are spending a large amount of money every day, and we are having a large amount of stuff printed-in the stenographic report of the MILLER. [October 15. proceedings that is entirely unnecessary to go on record anywhere. It is simply a waste of time, a waste of labor, and a waste of money; and I think the whole matter ought to go to the Committee on Rules or some other Committee to have authority to act and say and report what shall be printed in the stenographio report, and let it be done regular. Let us shorten these reports as much as possible, and let it be done with some system and some order. While on this point, I desire to call the attention of the Convention to this fact, that we have no Journal, and no provision is made for the keeping of a Journal, and I do not think ten members understand how our Journals are kept. There is no printed Journal. We only have a printed report, the Journal is written on legal cap, then reported and corrected, and then it is sent to the Public Printer, who prints that report and then the manuscript goes to his Waste basket. And there is no printed rec- ord of the Legislative proceedings of this State, in my opinion, for the last fifty years; and this Convention is, I think, acting al- together under a misapprehension in re- gard to that matter, and has gone on and committed what, I think, is great folly by saying this Convention shall have no printed Journal of the proceedings. I would far rather have a printed Journal of the proceedings of the Convention than to have its debates, and I believe the people of Kentucky had rather have that printed Journal also. And when this Convention is over, unless we direct the manuscript to, be recorded in a well bound book, we wil1 have no Journal at all. I do not think fifteen members of the Convention have understood how this matter has been done. I have had some experience in this matter, and I say I know a Journal of the Conven- tion ought to be kept. It is the most val- uable history of the transaction we can pos- sibly have. We have in the printed debates nothing except the expression 0 PRINTING. 7 Wednesday,] MCHENRY—PETTIT—MILLER—KNOTT _ [October 15 . opinion of the members. We have no rec- ord of the action of the Convention on various matters, but simply a record of the opinions of the various Delegates as ex- pressed in debate. I think this whole matter ought to be referred either to the Committee on Rules or to some other Com- mittee, with instructions to give direction as to the printing of the proceedings or Journal, or both, of this Convention ; and - at the proper time, if I can get the floor for the purpose, I will make a motion to that efi'ect. I now yield to the Delegate from Ohio, first thanking him for yielding me the floor to make this statement. Mr. McHENRY. I shall not renew the motion. 1 want to say on the subject of the Journal that I have been informed by the Clerk that he has the entire copy of the Journal which can be printed and put in book form if desired. The House refused on two occasions to have the Journal printed, and I suppose that ends it. Mr. PEI‘TIT. I want to say in be- half of the Committee that they have no authority under these rules. As has just been stated by the gentleman from ‘Lin- .coln, we are utterly powerless to suggest anything._ Our only duty is to report, as we have done, the facts bearing on the questions that have been referred to us. We have examined this question minutely. We have investigated every man con- nectcd in any way, and have talked to ' them in regard to this matter, and we have simply made this report giving to the Convention the facts of the case, and leave the Convention to act as in their judgment may seem best. We have no personal feeling about the matter at all. On the contrary, is kindly to every one we have touched in this report; and we ‘simply submit it, and hope that it will not be re- committed to us, as has been suggested by the gentleman from Ohio. to go on with the report if need be, or if some gentleman prefers to read it more minutely, and get the points we have made We are willing ' there more distinctly before them. We have no objection that it may go over until to-morrow.‘ We simply want to discharge our duty to the Convention and let them act as in their judgment may seem best. Mr. MILLER. I simply rise for the purpose or making a motion that this re- port of the Committee on Printing and Accounts be referred to the Committee on Rules, with directions to make a speedy report thereof, giving direction in regard to the printing of the proceedings, or else enlarging the powers of the Committee on Printing and Accounts. If the Delegate desires to make a statement I yield ‘to him. Mr. KNOI‘T. I. was simply going to remark that if this matter is to go over, or whether it is to be concluded now, com- mon justice to a most excellent gentleman demands at our hands that Col. Johnson shall be heard here in regard to the matter himself. I presume he knows more about the difficulties that lie in the way than the distinguished Committee on Printing and Accounts; and I am equally as confident that he has not delayed this printing un- necessarily. I imagine he will give to the Convention very good reasons why he has not been able to lay these reports on your table every morning. For one,I say this Con- vention will find that an utterly impracti- cable task, absolutely impracticable. You may crowd every room in the printing oflice with compositors, and you cannot do it. We have a corps of reporters, but let one of the reporters take a speech of one hour's length, and it will take him six hours to extend that with credit to himself and justice to the gentleman who delivered the speech. It is but justice to the gentle- man who delivered the speech that he should have an opportunity to revise and correct it. That will take several hours more, and, supposing there is no Committee work to do at all, and he has nothing to do but to look over his remarks, we are away into the small hours of the night before the mattergoes to the Printer. Then it has to 8 . PRINTING. Wednesday,_| be set up, the proof is to be read, it has to be revised, and then common courtesy would indicate, if a gentleman wishes to revise the proof for himself, he ought to do it, and it is nearly day-light. Your forms have to be made up, your press work has to be done, folding, trimming and stitch- ing by 10 o’clock in the morning—9 o’clock as we are meeting now—and I say it is an utterly impracticable thing. Where they have more than five times the reportorial corps that we have here, I mean in the House of Representatives at Washington, it is a rare thing that the record ever comes in complete the next day. It is very rare. Mr. PETTIT. It is always brought in that day. Mr. KN OT'I‘. It is always there, but I have seen it sundown before it got there. There is a Congressional record laid on the table in nine cases out of ten that is not complete, and frequently you find speeches inserted three weeks after they are deliv- ered. Mr. PETTIT. In the appendix? Mr. KNOTT. They are printed in the current issue of the Congressional report. If they had such a rule as that, even in Con- gress, it would be utterly impossible with all the force they have at hand.‘ I say if you undertake to make a rule of this kind, you will find that your maledictions will have to rest on somebody else’s head than the printer's or reporter’s. But to return to the original thought. I say, whether we will consider this now or to-morrow, let Col. Johnson be heard in his own de- fense. The PRESIDENT. Does the Dele- gate from Lincoln renew his motion to refer it. Mr, CLARDY. I second the motion that Col. Johnson be heard in his own de- fense. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I quite agree with the Delegate from Marion that it is entirely impracticable to have the steno-' PETTIT—KNOTT—MILLER. [October 15, graphic report of the proceedings laid on our tables every day in the form in which- it is now demanded. There is no direction given here to the Public Printer in regard to printing the report of these proceedings. It has been suggested by the Delegate from Marion that Congress has made a pro- vision for printing remarks in the appendix» But I made that suggestion a day or two ago in an amendment to the report ofthe Com- mittee on Printing and Accounts, and that is the reason that it is imperatively de- manded that this report should be referred to the same Committee to arrange that matter. No arrangement to that effect has been made at all, Unless something of that kind is done, we never can have the printed report of the proceedings ‘with any thing like promptness and regularity. Now in the Congressional Record you fre- quently see a memorandum to this eflect, that Mr. So-and-so made his remarks upon this:question, which are withheld for revi- sion, and will appear in the appendix. That is done all through the Congress- sional record; and unless we have some such arrangement, no gentleman can have» an °opportunity of revising his remarks made in the Convention. It is just and right for him to have that opportunity, and that is the reason that I made the mo- tion I did, and I now renew it, that it be referred to the Committee on Rules with direction to report it to-morrow. Mr. BRONSTON. It occurs to me, in- stead of relieving ourselves of difliculty, we are opening an avenue for further con- fusion and trouble. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman can only proceed by unanimous consent. Mr. PETTIT. Leave. Mr. BRONSTON. There is no Dele-- gate on the floor who would derive more pleasure from hearing the distinguished printer than myself, but if we are to have discussion of these matters, criticisms passed, ~objections answered, each time a Committee reports on a subject, I am sat» PRINTING. Wednesday,] BRONSTON—TVVYMAN—JACOBS . [October 15 . isfied that it will cause hard feelings and unjust criticism, and instead of healing trouble, will place us in a much deeper confusion. Now I, .‘or one, am not dis- posed to abuse everybody else except our- selves. I think we have been getting along pretty well. It is true we would like to look over the proceedings each morning, but I agree with the Delegate from Marion, that it will be impossible or impracticable to get those matters before the Convention each morning, and I do not believe the Delegates are in a great hurry about seeing the printed report of the proceedings the next day. We are getting along very well, and the only fault I find is the disposition being manifested to quarrel with everybody else except our- selves. If we would devote just alittle more attention to the subject before us, and do a little more work, and have our Committees meet a little more promptly, and report a little more readily, and not ' find so much fault with others, I think we could get along very well. There is no- body making complaint against the Public Printer. I do not believe there is any re- flection on the Public Printer. This Com- mittee has reported simply what they be- lieve to be the trouble. If the Committee is in error, let us carefully consider the re- port, and before we allow the Printer to as- sume some one has made an attack upon him, let us examine the report, and if he is censured by it, then allow him to be heard. The reporter might want to be heard also. There is no reflection to be made onthe re- porter. I beg the Convention to stop right here; stop this criticism, and let us turn our eyes inwardly and see what we are do- ing, and I venture the whole trouble will be solved. I therefore move to refer the . whole matter to the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. That has been done. The question being put on the motion, it was declared carried and the report so re- ferred. The PRESIDENT. Motions and reso- lutions are still in order. Mr. TWYMAN. I have a resolution to offer. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the Legislature, when- ever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall prepare amendment to this Constitution; but before such amend- ment shall become a part of this Constitu- tion, the same shall be twice submitted to the qualified voters of this Commonwealth, at the next two succeeding regular elections occurring thereafter, and not until the same shall have been thus twice ratified by a majority of the voters voting thereon. Providedfwrther, That not more than two- amendments shall be submitted at any one time. . Mr. JACOBS. I have a resolution- which I desire to be read and acted upon. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the Superintendent of Public Instruction is requested to report to this Convention the amount accumulated from the proportion of the increase of the common school fund not called for by any of the counties for common school pur- poses. The question being taken on the adop- tion of the resolution, it was declared to have been adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will call the Special Order for this hour. Is the Delegate from the Fourth Louisville Dis- trict in the House? If not, the Delegate from Ohio will take the Chair. Mr. McHENRY here took the Chair. The CHAIRMAN. The Convention is now in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, and the Delegate from Clinton is entitled to the floor. Mr. BRENTS. Mr. Chairman, in the presence of scholars and statesmen, and in the hall which has reverberated with the eloquence of the statesmen of the past generation, I rise with fear and trembling to address this Committee. When I con- sider the people whom I represent on this 10 ' BILL OF RIGHTS. . Wednesday,] Bnnn'rs. a [October 15 . floor, who are jealous of their rights and liberties, and further consider some resolu- tions which have been offered here and some remarks which have been made on this floor, which I consider antagonistic to the rights and liberties of the people, I take courage to proceed to express my views in my humble way. I am one of those who believe in self-government. In the language of a good and a great man, government is of the people, by the people and for the people. Government com- mences with the people, they carry it on, and for the people—the whole people. I will not stop to ask the question whether the people are capable of self~government or not. Whether they are capable or not capable, they are entitled to the right to govern themselves.’ If you deprive the people of the right to govern themselves, the faculties that are given to them by their Creator become inactive and dormant, .and they lose their energies; but give them selflgovernment, and although they are not prepared for self-government, they will learn how. If there is a motive that :prompts, and a responsibility that demands action. the exercise of these faculties will soon teach them to govern themselves, I do not then stop to ask the question whether they are capable or not of governing them- selves. On last Saturday I was pleased and charmed by the remarks made by the gen- tleman from Lexington. I can say that I heartily indorse many of the statements uttered by him; but there is one thing that he did say which I consider inimical to true republicanism, and presented a theory ‘of government that does not express the true American‘ idea, but is the English idea. In speaking of the natural liberty of man, he spoke of it as the liberty of the savage; that to obtain, civil liberty, he made a sacrifice; aud to obtain political rights he made another sacrifice. He stated “that he (man) has made a sacrifice —-a sacrifice of 1118 natural and civil rights, in order to better secure their enjoyment.” I deny it. It is true that Sir William Blackstone and other learned Judges and eminent statesmen have said that men, in entering government, must necessarily sur- render a portion of their natural rights in order to secure protection for 'the other rights retained by them. I know, further, that that has always been the plea of kings and tyrants. What rights do men sacri- fice. and to whom do they sacrifice them? If they sacrifice their rights to a few, it is a monarchy. If they sacrifice them to the people, it is to themselves; and, therefore, they retain their rights, and do not lose a single one of them. I will present my idea of the rights of man. The Creator created men, and impressed upon them fixed, unchangeable and immutable laws, ' among which are growth, development and progress. Life is the immediate gift of God, and cannot be sold, bartered or given away. God gave men liberty and commanded them to go forth and subdue the earth and . make it a habitation and a home, to cut down forests, cultivate plains, build towns, cities, etc. Life without liberty would be a burden and not a blessing; life wlth lib- erty to go forth and secure food, raiment and a home is a sweet blessing, if accom- panied by another right, the right to pos- sess, enjoy and use the fruits of their labor as their exclusive property.- These are rights given to man by God, and are in- herent, and existed before Government had an existence. They are linked together and are inseparable. They are the absolute or individual rights of men. Men are subject to another law of nature. They are de- pendent and social beings. A man cannot live alone for himself, but he must help and be helped. Man cannot produce all that is necessary to support life and make it comfortable, but by concentrating his en- ergies andindustries in one direction, he can produce a surplus in that pursuit, and hence results the various pursuits and ex- change of products and the transaction of BILL or RIGHTS. 11 Wednesday,] BRENTS. [October 15 . business. The well-being of society sug- gests that some rule to regulate the associa— tion of men, the exchange of products, the transaction of business, and to restrain the strong and unjust from oppressing the weak, should be agreed upon. This is gov- -ernment,and is the outgrowth of man’s exist- ence; and in agreeing to enter into government, man retains all of his rights, and he does not lose asingle one of them. As the people increase in numbers, and new industries come into existence, new rules are required to meet the changed ‘condition, so government is progres- sive as well as the human race. ‘There have been many remarks made ‘upon this floor in regard to the Bill of Rights, its origin, and about the jewels and gems. I wish to go back into the past, not for the purpose of traveling over the same ground that the other gentlemen traveled, but to invite your attention to the sign-boards that have been erected to‘' ‘mark the progress of civilization and lib- erty. I will go back to Runnymede, . where the Barons wrested from an unwill- ing king certain great rights and privi- leges. I will not call attention to the beau- ties that have been pointed to by the Chair- man of the Committee on Bill of Rights and others but will call attention to some things that the American people object to and repudiate, omitting those mentioned by the gentleman from Pike on yesterday. I will read the preamble of that great Magna Charta. “ Know ye, that we, unto the Honor of Almighty God, and for the salvation of souls, our progenitors and suc- cessors, Kings of England,'to the amend- ment of the Holy Church and the amend- ment of our realm, of our mere and free will, have given and granted to all Arch- 'bish0ps, Bishops, Priors, Earls, Barons, and to all freemen of this, our realm, these liberties.” These men acknowledged them- selves as subjects to a sovereign, who claimed to exercise all power. says: “Of our mere and free will-have The King ‘ given and granted ;” that was on the sign- board erected in the year 1214. I wishlto invite your attention to the great struggle for religious liberty, or the liberty of con- science. Readers remember how the Hu- guenots of France fled before torch and sword, and settled in the Carolinas. They ‘remember how the Baptists and others set- tled in Virginia, and erected the tree of religious liberty. How the Catholics set- tled in Maryland, and there erected the tree of religious liberty; and how the Quakers set- tled in Pennsylvania, and there erected the tree of religious liberty; but I wish to call special attention to the Puritans, who, for the liberty of conscience and the right to wor- ship God according to the dictates of their own consciences, left their native land and kindred near and dear to them, and em- barked upon frail vessels and crossed the boisterous ocean,and landed upon an inhos- pitable shore and faced savage Indians. for the sake of religious freedom. But before they landed they drafted and signed a Constitution, and I wish to read that upon this occasion : In the name of God, amen. We whose names are underwritten. the loyal subjects of our ,(l'l'erul sovereigne, Lord King James by ye Grace of Goal of Great B'rita'lne, France and Ireland, Deienderof the Faith, etc. Haveing undertaken for ye glorie of God and advancement of ye Christian faith, and honour of our king and coun- trie, a voyage to plant ye first colonie in yo northern parts ot Virginia, doe by these presents, solemnly and mutually in ye presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into 'a civile body, for our better ordering and pre=erva- tion and furtherance of ye ends aforesaid; and by eertue hereof to enact, constitute and frame such just and equall lawes, or dinances, acts, constitutions and ofliees from time to time, as shall be thought most meete and convenient for ye generate good of yecolonie, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. It witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cap Codd, ye 11 of November, in ye year or ye raigne of our sovereign Lord King James of Eng- gland, France and Ireland ye eighteenth, 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. ' erected in Massachusetts. Wednesday,] BRENTS. [October 15, and of Scotland ye fiftie fourth, Ano Dom, 1620. There is the sign board that those people There are some beautiful things upon. that. sign-board. There are some that do not shine very brightly to us at this time. menced “In the name of God, Amen.” Great veneration and reverence to God, but the next thing, they acknowledged themselves loyal subjects to a great sov- ereign, who claimed to rule by divine right and to possess all sovereign power, and the people acknowledged themselves as loyal subjects to that sovereign. But here is something upon that sign-board that is brighter and more agreeable to read. " That is, they “solemnly and mutually,” yes “mutually”-one man didn’t lord it over the others, one man was not the dic- tator, one man did not usurp and claim more authority there on board of the old May Flower than another—but it was “mutual” “to enact, constitute and frame just and equal laws.” That is, laws for all; laws binding upon all, and laws protecting all. There was a Republlcan government in embryo, and I sometimes imagine that those people upon the May Flower, when they were drafting and signing thatinstru- ment, had a faint glimpse, through the dark clouds that surrounded the earth, of the Declaration of Independence, that was pub- lished on July 4th, 1776. There is the sign- board that marked the progress of civiliza- tion and liberty to that time. I will not consume your time in undertaking to de- tail the struggles from that day down to 1776. It is suflicient for me to say that lib- erty and the rights of men in no period of the world’s history ever made such progress as they did from 1620 to 1776. In 1776 a bright luminary burst through the clouds, and some of the rays of that luminary fell upon the hearts of some great and noble souls in Europe, and they came to aid the Americans in their struggle, and some of them watered the tree of American liberty They corrl- . with their blood. The Declaration of Inde- pendence is a sign-board that marks the progress of civilization and liberty. There- are no obscure words upon that sign-board. There are no words on that sign-board that- American citizens would wish to reject. Why, every word upon it is a pure dia-- . mond, which shines with a brilliant light. The light of those pure diamonds will in time light the whole world. Permit me to read, “All men are created equal ;” not, as some gentlemen have stated, “free and equal,” but all men are created equal. “That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these"—not all the unalienable rights'but “ among these are the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of harpi- iness.” That to secure these rights not to destroy, surrender or sacrifice, but “to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving theirjust powers from the consent of the governed,” deriving their powers not from a sover- eign, not as subjects, but deriving the powers from the people—the whole people. I will not consume your time by undertak- ing to give any detailed account of the- struggle from 1776 until the close of the Revolutionary War when the indepen- dence of the colonies was acknowledged, but I wish to invite your attention to an- other sign-board that was erected. Those’ great and patriotic men met in Conven- tion, drafted and adopted a Constitution- the best Constitution that was ever drafted by men, and secured better the rights ofthe people than any Constitution that ever be- fore had been drafted. Those people were so zealous of their rights, that they were- not willing to accept that Constitution without a Bill of Rights which is contained in the first amendments to that Constitu- tion. Permit me to read: The freedom of religion; the freedom of speech and of the press, and the right to assemble and petition government; the right to bear arms; the right to be free in their houses BILL OF RIGHTS. I ' 13 spectivel y or to the people.” Wednesday] from soldiers in time of peace, and the right ‘to be secure in their persons, houses. property, and effects from unreasonable search and seizure; the right to be free from prosecution except on presentment or 'ihdictment by a grand jury; the right to be free in life or limb from a second trial; to -be free from testifying against one- self; the rights of life liberty and property not to be taken with- out due process of law; the right to have property, unless taken by giving just com- :pensation; the right to a speedy and pub- lic trial by an impartial jury of the State or district where the crime shall have been committed; to be informed of the cause and nature of the accusation; to be con- i-fronted by the witnesses and to have coun- _sel; to have the right of trial by jury in common law actions; the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. Not satisfied with these delarations, the ninth amendment declares that the enumeration of these rlghts is not to be construed as denying or dlsbarring other rights retained by the people; and still not satisfied, being so jealous of their rights and liberties, that they added another amendment, the tenth In that they say, “the powers not dele- gated herein are reserved to the States re- Look at the gems; there are the diamonds. Take the :gems of July 4th, 1776, and the gems in the Bill of Rights attached to the Constitu- tion of the United States, and we might say that the casket was filled. We have in it nearly all that the people want. They "were satisfied with them. But in 1849 the statesmen of Kentucky saw proper to add another gem, another jewel, which is contained in section two of the Bill of Rights, “that absolute arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen (exists nowhere in a Republic, not even in the largets majority?” The Chairman of "the Committee on Bill of Rights declared upon this floor that that was unnecessary, 'and the Committee had stricken it out, and BRENTS. [October 15 . that it ought to remain stricken ought. I think differently, I believe it to be a pure gem, that we ought to retain in the casket. The Chairman of the Committee says that it is useless, as we are beyond the reach of monarchy. The Bill of Rights, which is set forth in the ‘Declaration of Independ- ence, and the amendments to the Constitu- tion of the United States, were hurled against kings and monarchies, but this sec- tion in the Kentucky Bill of Rights was hurled. not against kings and monarchies, but against majorities.v It was intended to put a check upon majorities. I don’t think there is any longer any danger from monarehies, but there is danger from ma- jorities, and I say here in this presence that by majorities in the North, in the South, in the East and West, by both political parties, arbitrary power has been ex- ercised in the apportionment of represen- tation in the State Legislature and in Con- gress; majorities have exercised arbitrary power to deprive minorities of just, reason- able and fair representation, and the efiect went further, and not only disfranchised a portion of the people and deprived them of their elective franchise, upon which is founded a Republican government, but they have disabled and prevented men of their own party (or excluded men of their own party from ofiice) in order that other men in the same party in their efforts to obtain ofiic'e might do so. I say it was wrong. I do not care who exercised it; it is unjust and is arbitrary, and this section meets it. I want this Convention to say to the people of Kentucky that majorities can- not and ought not to exercise arbitrary power over the minority. I say that sec- tion is a gem that ought to be retained, The Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights have taken some of these old gems found in the Bill of Rights of the past and have attempted to improve them. Here is the great gem that protects religious free- dom, the liberty of conscience. In the Constitution of the United States it is clear 14 ' BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] BRENTS. [October 15. and concise, and under that the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that Mormonism, or a plurality of wives, cannot be claimed under the Constitution. The Bill of Rights in the Constitution of the United States, the decision of the Supreme Court, and the Bill of Rights as contained in our present Constitution, are ample and sufficient to secure religious liberty; but the Committee on Bill of Rights, as I have stated, have attempted to make an improve- ment. They have attempted to enter a qualification, thus: “ But the liberty. of conscience hereby secured shall not be con- strued to dispense with oaths or affirma- tions, or excuse acts of licentiousness or jus- tify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State.” I sub- mit whether or not the Legislature would have power to make rules to regulate relig- ious worship in the manner that they deemed necessary “ to maintain the good or- der and peace or safety‘of the State.” That is not all. They went farther, and said, “ or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” How fartit gives the Legislature authority to enact laws to regulate the manner of worshiping God I cannot say, but I wish to call your attention to it. The amend- ment isJnot an improvement, but is paste upon a pure diamond, which obscures its light, and this Convention ought to take it off and let that old gem stand and remain as it was handed to us by our fathers. Here is another section of the Bill of Rights which the Committee has attempted to improve. The old Bill of Rights said in libel prosecutions'af'or suits for libel it was a, suflicient defense for the defendant to prove that he spoke the truth. Was not that suflicient? If a man is being prose- cuted for a libel and he comes into Court and proves that he spoke the truthfiought not the truth sustain him? Is he not en- titled to an acquittal‘iif he proves that he told the truth ‘.P But the Committee was not satisfied with it. They say, “ and with good intent,” Who is to be the judge of that in- tent? The witnesses who testify in Court ?' The judge upon the bench, or the jury that is empaneled to try the case‘? It does- seem to me that it would be very uncertain as to the verdict in: any given case if the court had to inquire and decide upon the intent of the person who spoke the words.' The addition is paste stuck on a pure dia- mond, and this Convention ought to take- it off. But, I have nothing more to say on the report of the Committee, except as to one ' section, which I will refer to further along. The distinguished gentleman from Marion county has presented a substitute for the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights, and it seems to me that he has presented: one section that clears up an obscurity and‘ takes from a gem some paste that the gen- tleman from Boyd said was put upon it by the Court ofllAppeals. That is, as to being twice put in jeopardy of life or limb. It. seems to me that the section drafted by the gentleman from Marion, or the amend- ment offered by Zthe gentleman from Boyd, will be satisfactory. But the gentleman- from Marion, in the first gsection he pre- sents, says, “thatQall mengare endowed :by their Creator with equal rights to life, lib- erty, property andithe'pursuit of happiness; that in the social compact they engage to hold and enjoy those rights, subject to just. and impartial laws.” Ido not like it. I do not like those words “ to hold ” from the Government. Those in authority hold their powers from thezpeople. The people are the’sovereigns, an’1 all power com- mences with the people, and all who hold power in this government hold it from the people; and I am notgwilling to adopt a Bill of Rights which declares that the people hold their rights from so me other source. I wish to call your attention to subsection two of the substitute, “that no privilege, immunity, exoneration or ex- emption shall ever be granted to any man or set of men, that shall not be as freely and fully exercised and enjoyed by al. ‘BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Wednesday,] BRENTS. [October 15. others under similar circumstances and on like conditions.” That is to meet the dilemma that we have in regard to these exclusive privileges and emoluments for public services. I think the proper way to meet thatodilemma is to strike that sec- tion entirely out. It appears lrom what the gentleman from Marion and other gentlemenphave stated upon this floor that that section one, of the present Bill of Rights, is not a pure gem. It does not by any means protect the people in the en- joyment of their rights and liberties, but under the exercise of authority under that 1 section the rights of the people have been encroached upon, and the remedy then is to strike it out, or at least the last clau=e. Without expressing an opinion upon sub- section two of the substitute, I wish to call attention to the language “that no privilege, immunity,','exoneration or ex- emption shalltever be granted to any man or set of men, which shall not be as freely and fully exercised and en- joyed by all others under 'similar cir- cumstances and‘on like conditions.” I will ask this question: If license is granted to one man to retail spirituous liquors, are not all other men under similar circumstances and like conditions entitled to a license to retail ardent spirits anywhere in the State of Kentucky‘? The Committee on Bill of Rights have reported‘one section which I think ought to be inserted in. our Bill of Rights. They propose to insert one gem, or at least they propose to erect a sign-board that marks the progress of civilization and lib- erty, and I think it ought to goin. I allude to the section that refers to the ins'itution of slavery. You all remember and know the great struggle from 1861 to 1865, and you know that at the close of that. struggle the shackles were éstricken from the hands of four millions of slaves, and they were told to walk this earth as freemen, and it was published to the world that no slave walked the soil of this Republic. >The National Government erected a sign-board, many of the States have erected sign-boards, and I think it is well for Kentucky to rec- ognize that greatfhistorical event and erect their sign-board to mark the time and the place when there was a great advance made in the rights of men, and liberty declared for all men. I think that is worthy of insertion. I do not think Kentucky ought to remain silent and not notice that great event. Slavery is dead in Kentucky, and Kentuckians are glad of it. Let us erect our sign-board and say so. The Delegate from Shelby said in his remarks that some ofhis friends said to him that we were too near the great struggle 0t 1861 to draft a good Constitution. He said that he did not entertain their fears. do I. His remarks reminded me of a story of the Revolutionary war that I heard. There were two neighbors who difi‘ered. One remained loyal to his gov- ernment and the other declared for inde- pendence. They took up arms on opposite sides; and both became oflicers and fought bravely and gallantly for their respective flags under which they marched; at the close of the war they returned home and were cool and sullen, and considered each other as enemies. One had a boy who grew up to manhood, and the other hadagirl who grow up to womanhood. The young people met, loved and married. These men finally met to consult about-the young people, and they agreed that they had but one government and one flag, and it would be useless for them to be enemies any longer; and that they ought to join hands'and go together, doing all the good they could under the government in which they lived. Those men obtained a house far the young people and took their old swords and crossed them over the door of that house as a token of good will and of everlasting peace. The Delegates to this Convention come from different parts of the State. Some wore the blue and some wore the grey. Some are ot one political Neither _ 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] PETRIE. & [October 15. party and some entertain different political views; but since I have been a member of this Convention, I have scarcely heard a whisper of the past or a mention of politics. The Delegates to this Conven- tion have left the past to bury the past, and have lifted their feet out of the mire of politics and come here as the representa- tives of two millions of people. They crossed their swords over the door of this capitol as a token of good will, brotherly-love and everlasting peace, and I feel assured that every Delegate upon this floor stands here ready to give his mind, his energy and all that he can to make a Constitution that will fully protect the people in the enjoy- ment of their rights and liberties. (Ap- plause.) The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Hart has the floor. Mr. BUCKNER. I yield my place to the Delegate from Todd, who desires to speak, if it be agreeable to the Committee. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from ' Todd is recognized. Mr. PETRIE. I am greatly indebted to the honorable Delegate from Hart for the kindness in allowing me to occupy his place in this discussion. He did it because he knew that, having labored for some days under an indisposition, and that I might have to leave at any moment, I appreciate his kindness, because I know from this time the Delegate will be down among the P’s and Q’s. I can say for the gratification of this pa- tient and tired Committee, as well as for the interest of Delegates who may propose to address the Convention, that I hope to occupy but a short time in what I may have to say. I make no pledges or prom- ises lest I might violate them; but that is my purpose at present. I do not expect to enter into an extensive discussion of all the reports which are before this Committee. I have heard it said repeatedly upon this floor, as a reason for the protracted and earnest debate which has been provoked by the measures now before this Committee, that the questions before the Convention now are of greater importance and more difficulty than any that will, probably, en- gage the attention of the Convention dur- ing our efforts and work of revising the Constitution. I cannot concur in that opinion. However important may be the questions now before us, I do not and can- not regard them by any .means the most difficult. It seems to mesthat the construc- tionvof a Bill of Rights is the simplest; that it is the easiest part of our work, and does not compare with the. great and difii- cult work of arranging the framework of the Constitution and adjusting it so that the powers of the government may be properly exercised and not trench one upon the other. Why, examine the Constitutions of the different States of the Union, and you will find a declaration of principles in, or that all or nearly all have in, or appended to them, a Bill of Rights, or something that corresponds to our Bill of Rights, which are almost precisely the same in all the Constitutions, and necessarily so. The great fundamental principles which have been established and retained in the Constitutions of our State and in the Con- stitution of the United States may also be found in nearly every one of the Constitu- tions of the different States. I think we might safely reach out the hand and take the Bill of Rights from the Constitution of almost any State in the Union, and have a Bill of Rights that will satisfy almost every one. . Not so with the other parts of the Constitution; not so with the frame—work of the Constitution. There are differences, and must necessarily be, and there will be the trouble, so that it has not at any time oc- curred 'to me that there should be any very great difliculty in arranging a satisfactory declaration of principles to be annexed to our Constitution. I hope to be practical in the remarks I shall make. I am com- pelled to be plain. I could not be other- wise. And this not of choice, for I, too BILL OF RIGHTS. 17 Wednesd ay,] would ‘like to have the eloquent tongue, ‘the gifts, the descriptive powers which would enable me to go with this Conven- tion back through the ages to the meeting "in the meadows, so often referred to by Delegates, and there, as has been done, re- ‘View those important transactions; the struggle between the advocates of human 1liberty and the tyrant who claimed all right and an incapacity to do wrong, and _to trace those principles as they were gath- ered up and preserved in written Con- stitutions, and in their ways as they have come on down to the present. I say it would be exceedingly gratifying to me if I had the capacity to go with this Com- mittee ‘and review all those great principles, those principles so dear to every American citizen, which have been to our ancestors _:and are to us as the shadow of a great rock in a desert land—those we intend to have in our Constitution as safeguards and sentinels of liberty. But I shall be content with plain, practical expressions, expressions of my views in reference to the ‘questions before the Committee. It would be a pleasure to me, if it were necessary and I had the time and ability, to talk about the theories of government. I know that this intelligent and enlightened Committee need no treatise ofthat sort from me. This is not a trial, as I understand it, of free .government. No one proposes to surrender any of the great principles of free govern- ment which we now enjoy; I think it will require no argument to show that we should hold on to all those principles, and no one ‘is contending that we shall yield any of them, and therefore I come to some practi- cal observations about the matter before the Convention. What have we before us? If -it were our duty to look back‘to the ages and trace the history of the government 'from its inception to the present time, that has been done. We are not to decide, as I understand, questions of this sort. We .have something practical before us as a Committee and as a Convention to decide. PETRIE. i l i l i l l 1 [October 15 . There is a contention. There is some dis- pute. We have in some senses an is- sue, and I never could talk with any satisfaction to myself or any one else about any disputed question till I could know what was in issue. And what is it in this case‘? If I understand it, the Com- mittee appointed by this Convention to re- port a Preamble and Bill of Rights have made their report to the Convention, and right here I may be pardoned if I ‘say that I think that Committee deserves the thanks of this Convention, not only for the promptness with which they performed their work and presented it to the Conven- tion, but for the matter and manner of it as well. I regard it as an admirable re- port. It is one that I can most cordially adopt and sustain except as to a few of the clauses, a few of the sections. Then the Delegate from Oldham, if I am correct, offered as a substitute to that report the old Bill of Rights, as I shall call it for con- venience, which is found in our Constitu- tion at present. The distinguished Dele- gate from Marion ofl'ered what he has con- structed, covering the whole ground, as a substitute for the report of the Committee. Various amendments have been offered to the different parts of that report, which amendments, of course, will be considered hereafter, and at the proper time. Some of them doubtless will be accepted by the Convention, but as I understand it, the question now before this Committee is which of these measures we shall adopt. Nothing else is presented. We are called upon to sustain the one or the other, with such amendments as may be oflered and accepted by the Convention or Committee. Then it be- comes necessary to compare the merits of the report of the Committee and its rivals before the Convention. The Delegate from Oldham, in support of his substitute, made a forcible and an eloquent appeal grounded upon the fact that what he proposes as a substitute is old and tried and known to 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. 'Wednesday,] Bill. the people, and would be satisfactory. In his admiration for old, tried principles, I concur. I, too, love the old paths. I love those things which have been tried and found worthy and good. The ship which has carried us safely through the storms and landed us safely in port is to be pre- ferred to any thing like experiment, and with him, I deprecate any thing like experi- mental legislation in the Convention. But did the Delegate, when he made such an earnest appeal in behalf of his substitute, ~in behalf of the old Declaration of Prin- ciples, did he not know that every one of them, every single one of them, every prin- ciple of any importance, every one that he would accept, is embraced in the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights? 1 was surprised when I came to look closely into it, when I came to compare them and examine them, to find that not a solitary principle contained in the old Declaration of Rights, or the one in our present Consti- tution, is omitted by the Committee. I was greatly gratified when I found how closely and with what fidelity they adhered to these old “principles. The very reading of them fills us with a sense of personal security. We venerate and admire them because we know they have been tested, and have carried the ship of State safely through forty, nay an hundred years of sunshine and storm; and so I say no man, even the able Delegate from Oldham, will be enabled to find any thing in that old Bill of Rights that he would have engrafted in the new Constitution that not in this And what is still more surpris- ing is, that it is here literally. The Com- mittee, although changing the arrangement somewhat, have ‘taken the old Bill, section .by section, and copied many of them ver- batim. I believe there are twenty-eight- sections in one and thirty in the other. Out of the thirty sections in the old .Bill of Rights, twenty-eight of ‘ them are to be found in the new, and in substantially the same language, an absolute, literal transfer PETRIE. [October 15- of these principles to the new Constitution- I was gratified to find it, and I have no doubt that the gentleman, when he comes to look at it, if he has not already done so, will find that all of those old, familiar, con- crete, solemn Declarations of Rights, as well as the positive injunctions and prohibitions which are retained in that old instrument, are every one in this. Why should we then prefer the old to the new, unless it is simply for the sake of the old one because it is old I’ This is as old as that. They are the same- age as to that, except the Committee, that: industrious and capable Committee, after examining it and looking all through it, have added a few things, and to some sections of the old instrument they have additions which it does that every gentleman when he comes to consider them will say are correct, and they have added only such provisions as experience teaches us. These principles are old. They have lasted through ages. They will endure for ages- to come. They cannot wear out. They are fundamental. They are like a good book, and that never wears out. I presume that Shakspcare’s plays will be appreciated hundreds of years from now, as they are- now. How many thousands of books have been printed and seen the light. and gone away from the earth no one knows where‘? But such a book as that, because of its in- trinsic merits, because it is a good thing, stands through ages and ages, and so with these principles of the Bill of Rights. There can be no necessity for supplanting them. They never will be till our form of government is abolished, and we trust that day will never come. - mad 0 some seem to me In my preference, if I may be said to- have a preference for the Preamble and Bill of Rights reported by the Committee... I may have been influenced to some extent by the fact that it has been considered and. reported by a Committee. 1 have made- some investigation of this question. I did, not intend to vote or base my decision ex? BILL OF RIGHTS.‘ '19 Wednesday,] Pn'rmn. [October 1 5 . elusively upon the fact that the Committee had reported it; but I knew that that question was submitted to that Committee, and that they were able, capable, industrious and intelligent gentlemen, all of them. The honored Chairman, whom I have had the pleasure of knowing intimately for thirty years, who has been a cherished friend of mine from my boyhood; I knew his capacity, his fidelity, his industry and his earnestness, and I knew the same of the other gentlemen upon that Committee, though I did not know them as intimately; and I knew they had this question before them, and had occupied days and weeks in its earnest and honest investigation. They had before them all of these declarations of rights, which have been established in the Constitutions of the various States of this Union to cull and to pick from. They had our own declaration of rights as well. All of these were studied -by them, and they wrote out and presented to this Committee what they regarded as the best, and with what little investigation I have been able to give ‘the question, I _have not been able to see that they could have done better. I am satisfied that I could not, and I believe that there are other gentlemen on this floor, who have made some exceptions to this report, who would not, if you were to give them the same length of time, be able to improve upon the report of the Com- mittee. I was almost pursuaded by the earnest and eloquent appeal of my friend from Oldham, when he presented the old Bill of Rights, and spoke so earnestly and so pathetically in its behalf, and when he il- lustrated it by that centenary picture that he presented to the Convention, I felt like if a vandal band should be held out to ‘- change the character of that picture, that I would be the first one to thrust it aside and let the picture remain. But I think, with all his zeal and his reverence for things old as our Bill of Rights, that he might allow that picture, that had been hanging as he said in the galleries and halls of his office, to be improved a little. He might have the cobwebs and the dust brushed off, and, if you please, the fly specks removed from the frame and a little varnish on the frame. No, he shakes his head, he would not allow any varnish. (Laughter) W'ell, on a great occasion like this—forty years have passed since we had any opportunity to make any change in these constitutional provisions—I thought on a great and ex- traordinary occasion like this we might dress up that old picture a little—that that much would be allowable. Things as sacred as that might be changed and not shock my sensibilities. The wife that has traveled with us along the voyage of life, sharing its joys, its sorrows with us in seasons and hours of adversity and bereavement, a comfort and a benediction to our lives, and a necessity to its very existence—we see that wife hab- itually, almost daily, in about the same garb, She has been robed in a neatly-fitting gown of very plain material, a white apron about her waist and a snowy white handkerchief about her throat, 'her hair brushed neatly back from her benevolent and motherly face; and that picture has gone with us through fifty years. The day of the golden wedding comes-_that day that comes only to a few, and but once to any—that impor- tant day comes. Might we not, without any shock to our loving reverence for this 0 d familiar form and face as we have seen them daily- all through these fifty years, might we not be allowed a little change in her rai- ment on that important and rare occasion? (Applause) Let us draw her silver-grey hair a little more to the front, and give it a few puffs and curls, and put a gown upon her of somewhat modern style, made of a little finer fabric, with puffs at the shoul-- ders (laughter), place a plain gold ring upon her old wrinkled fingers for that occasion Could we not stand that‘? Would that lit- tle change in the costume of the good old wife shock our feelings or our sensibilities, especially when we know that she is to travel with us through the‘ remainder of life, side 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesd ay,] Pn'rnrn. [October 15. by side, the same affectionate, helpful, faith- . ful old wife that she has always been? I say I should like to see, and could enjoy the change. (Laughter and ap- plause.) And I think a change in our Bill of Rights to that limited extent might be made without doing any injus- tice to the Bill itself, or to ourselves or to posterity. Sacrilege‘? No, sir; I do not regard it as a sacrilege. That is what we are here for, and if we can improve it let us do so. I have great reverence and partiality for it; but I cannot go as far in my admira- tion of things that are old as my distin- guished friend from Oldham; but when he was paying tribute to the old Declaration of Rights, those solemn prohibitions and in- junctions, he was paying the same tribute to the report of the Committee which is pre- sented to this Convention. As I have said before, because it is all here, every section in the old Bill is incorporated, and may be found somewhere in Bill presented by the Committee, except the second and third. What are they‘? _ The third section reads as follows: “ The right of property is. before and higher than any Constitutional sanc- tion, and the right of the owner of a slave to such slave and its increase is the same, and as inviolable as the right of the owner of any property whatever.” Who would have this section inserted in our new Declaration of Right? No one— not even the Delegate from Oldham, with all his veneration for the antique. Passing on, for I made some kind of promise that I would not detain the Com- mittee very long, there are some imperfec- tions in the report made by that distin- guished Committee, and Ibelieve the Com- mittee will be prepared themselves to sup- port some of the amendments which have been offered. I know it has been criticised by a large number of gentlemen. Some of the criticisms seem to me to be just, some are amusing, and some decidedly funny, but that is the way to arrive at the truth. That is what we are here for; to investigate these measures in order to know which one we should adopt. ther, say, and it is no credit to myself that I say, that I have not stud- ied the Bill prepared and offered as a substitute by the distinguished Delegate from Marion. There is in this paper which I hold what- purports to be an amendment by him, but my recollection is that this amendment was withdrawn, and another offered as a substitute by him. I know I heard it read and heard the able speech made upon it, but I have not had an opportunity to examine it carefully, and am not as familiar. I must be permitted to say, with the provisions of that Bill as offered by the Delegate from Marion as I am with the other. I remember, however, from hearing it read and the speech of the dis- tinguished gentleman, that I was attracted by at least some of the features in the Bill which he offered to the Convention as a substitute. But having been won over by my friend from Oldham through his won- derful partiality and his persuasive appeal for the old, I did "not study so carefully that Bill as I might have done and should, except for the fact that I had become wed- ded like he to things old and tried. But before I pass fur- I must be permitted to must There arejsome sections in this Bill which I think are objectionable. I have offered an amendment to one myself. I heard, with great interest, the eloquent and earnest appeal made by the Delegate from Boyd in respect to that proviso about twice in jeopardy. He satisfied me that there ought to be some change, and I do not believe the Committee who reported this Bill will object to such change as will put that question beyond dispute. The State has no interest and‘ no desire to try any citizen after he has had a fair trial and been ac- quitted; but if the language of that section is such as to be suscep- tible of various interpretations, and that men guilty of crime can go out unpunished because that section is BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Wednesday,] PE I‘RIE. [October 15. not well understood by the courts, because it has received variousinterpretations, then it strikes me as being eminently proper that such an amendment as I believe the gentle- man from Boyd has proposed should be adopted, and I believe it will be. As to the second section of the Bill re- ported by the Committee, when I heard the argument made to the effect that al- though there had been contention about that, and that courts had differed in its con- struction, and had given different and con- flicting opinions about it, yet it was said’ to my mind with force, that now the courts would agree; now there is no trouble; we have all agreed as to what should ‘be the proper construction of that: “Except in compensation for public services ;” that in- asmuch as that is the case, it would be bet- ter to let the law stand just as it is, because all the lawyers and all the people know just exactly what the courts will do and what they aredoing. They are interpret- ing that clause now in perfect harmony with the general sentiment of the people on that subject; but in thinking about it, it occurred to me that these judges who are giving this satisfactory interpretation of that clause of the Constitution will in a few years pass away from the honored seats they now occupy, and those seats will be filled by other judges. It will be, as it was said by the Delegate from Pendleton, the same court but different judges. Who knows how they may view that section? They may conclude that the interpretation of the present Judges is wrong. They may be unable to concur. They may say that the construction given that clause by some of the other Judges away back yonder was the correct one; and then we would have the trouble over again; so that it seems to me if human language can be so arranged as to express really the thought intended to be conveyed by that second section. that it ought to be done. And I have been unable to see, if I re- member and understand it, why that report of the Delegate from Marion does not ap— ply. I know it was suggested there might be difierences of opinion in the construction of the language employed by the Delegate from Marion in describing what should be considered public services. There may be; but surely some Delegate, surely some one, when they know exactly what is intended, and the thought and the idea to be con- veyed, can use language which will convey it, so that there can be no dispute and no two constructions. -1 pass to one other clause in the report of that Committee. As much as I admire the report, as highly as I esteem the Chairman and all the members of that Committee, I must be-permitted to say that they have made one mistake. I have therefore offered an amendment, asking that the twenty- fourth section of that report be stricken out entirely. It will not alter the sym- metry of the report, nor mar it in any respect. It makes it one section shorter, and I reckon the shorter the better. What is that? It has been mentioned a number of times, and reasons have been given ‘for and against that section. It is a solemn declaration put in the Constitution of this State, or what is to be the Constitution of this State, that slavery and involuntary servitude shall not exist in this State or shall not be restored. It inay be regarded as an idle whim or mere sentiment upon my part, but I have desired earnestly--I am not jesting about it—-I do now wish that when this Constitution is completed and sent out to the people, that the word “slavery” _ shall not be found in it. I see no necessity for it in the world. I think I can see rea- sons why it should not be there. I believe I addressed the question to the honorable Chairman of that Committee, “Why did you insert that solemn prohibition against slavery in our Constitution?” and the reply, if I remember it right, was: “It does no harm.” That, sir, is not a valid or a satisfactory answer. “It does no harm.” Nothing, in my judgment, should go in 2-2 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wedne=day.] PETRIE. [October 15. the fundamental law of this State that does not do good, that has not an object and a purpose, somethingthat can be accom- plished by it, and not merely put in because it does no harm. Why, it seems to me we might as well make a declaration in that Bill of Rights against witchcraft, or sol- emnly declare that trials by wager of law and by wager of battle should not be tolerated or adopted in this State. That would do harm; but who would think it was the right thing? It strikes me that that is the proper thing. the right - thing, and the best thing, to leave that ques- tion of slavery entirely out, although you have done nothing but to say it shall never exist in the State again. Under the benef_ icent provisions of our State the children and the grandchildren of the ex-slaves are being taught to read the Constitution, and they have it now as a book in their schools. Why, then, when they come to read the Con- stitution which is now being framed by this Honorable Convention, why remind them of the degradation of their fathers and grandfathers by placing in the Consti~ tution what does so remind them‘? If any of that class should be prying and curious, and desire to know more about the relation of slay'ery to the people of Kentucky, com- pel them to travel back forty years to the Convention of 1849, where they will find literature upon that subject to their heart’s content. But it was said, and I believe that was the argument made in the earnest address of the Chair- man of that Committee (and if he was right there is son'iething in it), that if that was not inserted in the Constitution, that twenty-five thousand votes would be cast against this new Constitution which would otherwise be for it. Oh, let us not bait our hooks with artificial flies to catch votes for the new Constitution. (Applause) Let it go out to the people upon its merits. Let there be no disguise in the whole thing. Let them understand it in all of its provis- ions just as we understand it. Make every provision plain. Let nothing be obscure, and then let the people adopt it or reject it as their judgments may dictate. Does not that provision in the Constitutioni imply, to some extent at least, that it is possible if not probable that slavery may at some time, by some means, in some way, be re? established, or that the attempt may be made for that purpose in the State of Ken- tucky? If such an inference can be drawn from that proposed provision in this Con- stitution of Kentucky, I maintain that it does injustice to the intelligence of this Convention. Sir, no person who knows the temper of the people of this State. who knows the sad history of slavery in connection with the people of this State, and with the country, who is acquainted with the provisions of the Constitution of the United States, no such person can have the slightest apprehensions on the face of the earth that any man or set of men will make an attempt to re-establish slavery in the State of Kentucky. If there is no dan- ger, let us not have it there. And whence is to come the gentleman’s twenty—five thou- sand adverse votes‘? Not, of course, from the white voters. And if the gentleman thinks the colored portion of the voters of Kentucky will oppose the new Constitution because it does not commit the farce of solemnly forbidding the re-establishing of slavery in this State, he is, in my judgment, very much mistaken. I know many of the colored voters. I represent as many of them, in proportion to the whole number, as any Delegate on this floor. All they have asked, and all they desire, is that all the provisions of the present Constitution, which was intended to regulate slavery, and to punish free negroes for coming into the State, be entirely omitted from the new Constitution. This much they do ask and expect. It has been said, and truly said, too, on this floor, that slavery is dead and buried. I concur in that sentiment; that it is dead, buried and can never be resurrected, no matter how or when it perished. I am BILL OF RIGHTS. 23 ‘place. Wednesday,] PETRIE. [October 15. not of that class who ascribe glory to any man or set of men for the overthrow and destruction of slavery. I believe, as sin- cerely as I believe any thing on earth, that He who reigns in the Heavens above, and among the Nations of the earth, decreed its destruction, and it went at His divine will., No power less potent than that which decreed its over- throw can ever restore it; and I -.don’t believe that that power has ever been or ever will be invoked in the estab- lishment or the restoration of human slavery. It has had its day and its doom, Let it go and be forgotten. Let it have no place in this Constitution. It does not dis- turb any rights. ‘We all know its sad his- ;tory; so knowing it as we do, having no "use for it in this Constitution, I have felt andbelieved that it was best just to ignore it, just say nothing at all about it; and when it comes to that clause, for one’ whether there is any other Delegate on this :floor or not to vote for it, I shall support my amendment, which is to strike out the twenty-fourth section of this Bill. I say I shall vote for it, if I have no company .among all these intelligent Delegates; but “I am inclined to believe that that will be ‘the sense of the Convention. One other objection allow me to revert to for just a moment,‘,because I heard it named by two or three Delegates who have dis- cussed this question—and in a spirit of ridicule, if you please, too—that this Com- mittee had absolutely in this Declaration of Rights inserted a clause to the effect that the Legislature should never authorize lot- teries; and I remember one of the Delegates said: '“I think that is a good thing I think lotteries are evil and only evil, .-and I don’t think the Legislature ought to be allowed to authorize them for any purpose; but that this is the wrong place to put it.” It seems to me that this is just the right It stands right alongside that other prohibition: “ The Legislature shall not _pass an era postfacto law, or a law impairing the obligation of contracts,” an many simi- lar prohibitions. It is prohibitory; it is in that class; it is in the right place; let it stand among those clauses which prohibit the Legislature from doing that which is wrong in the estimation of the people. It is almost the universal sense of the people that these lotteries are demoralizing, de— structive to human interests; they have no advocates among the better class of people, and that has been the sense of the people long enough to authorize its insertion in the Constitution, so that the Legislature shall not be tempted by any sort of induce- ment brought before them to grant a privi- lege of that sort to any man or class of men (Applause) ' Mr. BURNAM. Mr. Chairman, it was, if I remember aright. an emanation of the mind of Mr. Burke that “all government is like dress, the badge of lost innocence.” Into the mouth of one of his heroes Sir Walter Scott puts the description of a so- ciety in which there is no government, or rather, where “there is no subjection save that of the good to the best, and of all to the most beautiful.” This dream of the novelist has no realization on the globe. The lost innocence still maintains. The badge is still and everywhere worn. Gov- ernments instituted to protect the _good, to restrain and punish the evil, still survive. Despotisms like that of Turkey,‘ military democracies like France, representative monarchies like England, and free repub- lies like Switzerland and the United States, subject to constant changes, mark the diver- sities of the times, but all illustrate in their varied forms the truth of Mr. Burke’s ' maxim. We here in Convention assembled are met to deliberate upon the great matter of government; to amend our organic law' _that law first framed in 1792 by those sturdy backwoodsmen, who had wrested this fair land from the savage, and were asking admission into the Federal ‘Union. I have looked into that Constitution, and 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] BURNAM. those of 1799 and of 1849, and what is known in each as the Bill of Rights, is es- sentially one. Very singularly, ‘this article of the Con- stitution in each of these instruments is the last but one, followed only by the sched- ule. Now, sir, when the Committee on Rules, appointed by this body, met and took counsel of each other as to the names and number ‘of the Committees of this body which. should be formed, and the order in which they should report, it was suggested by the honorable Delegate from Marion, and his suggestion was promptly approved, that the Bill of Rights lshould, in the proposed new Constitution, follow the Pre- amblc. It was believed by all. to be a mat- ter of the greatest concern, more import— ant, if possible, to the people than any part of the Constitution, and was entitled to the post of honor and dignity in the very fore- front. Remembering this, the Delegate from Warren promptly convened his able Com- mittee, agreed with them as to what should be reported, and has laid before the Con- vention the result of their labors, and what- ever may be the final action of this body as to the acceptance or rejection of his report, all must accept his faithful work, and ac- knowledge his vindication of it in the hearing ‘of this body, to have been able, scholarly and exhaustive. Sir, I heard his address, feeling that ' he hon- ored the county of Madison, where he was born, and the county of Warren which sent him here, and found myself recalling the words of Junius in regard to Lord Chatham, “recorded honors shall gather "round his monument, and thicken over 7, him. Mr. Chairman, having, in common with the Delegates from Oldham and Shelby, and many others who have spoken, great veneration for the work of the fathers, I should have been satisfied to see the Bill of Rights contained in the older Constitutions @adopted, after discarding from them those provisions made .obsolete by time, and overt thrown by the later amendments of the- Constitution of the United States; but, on the whole, I have determined to cast my vote for the adoption of the report of the- Committee, subject to such special modifica-- tions as to certain clauses as will arise on’ the final passage, and as may seem to me- then appropriate—and the reasons for so doing I propose succinctly to state. And, first—There is in the new Preamble, what did not appear in the Qld one. a recog- ' nition of that Divine Power which con— trols the destinies of nations and men. I am no bigot. I would curtail the privileges or right of opinion of no man or set of men. The agnostic, the infidel, the atheist,- if he obeys the laws and deports himself as a good citizen, has his untrammeled right. to his belief; but it belongs to neither to say, that. the common faith held by the great masses of the people shall be- brushed away to accommodate them. If ' such there be, and they so think, let them. vote against and work against the adoption of the new Constitution. It is a great mis-~ take to say that the State, as an organism, has and shall have no religion. While every- individual man shall be free from ecclesiast-- ical domination. I agree with Professor Taylor Lewis, that the State has a religion, a part of its unwritten common law, as- enunciated by Daniel Webster in his great oration against Girardfs will. And our re-- ligion is not Buddhism, or the religion of Zoroaster, or Mohammed, or Diderot, or~ Paine, or Johann Most, but that of' Mr. the great Jewish law-giver, supplementedv by the Divine teachings of Him to whom all the prophets bear witness. Second—I think that while main- taining the real spirit, and in great part the exact language, iof the older Consti- tutions, the arrangement of the various parts of the Committee’s bill, is an improve- ment, and is not subject to the animadver-- sions, that it will require new and varied adjudications by the courts to construe i [October 15 .. BILL OF RIGHTS. 25 Wednesday,] BURNAM. [October 15 . meaning and interpret its speech. But I am not sure, in spite of its graceful and charming periods, the same could be truly said of the substitute of the Delegate from Marion in more than one of its clauses. Third—The report of the Committee has adopted the amendment to the National Constitution extirpating sla- very throughout all the boundaries of the Republic, except in punishment of crime. N ow, sir, if all allusion to slavery had been withheld, and the force of the National Constitution had been al- lowed in its silent but irresistable sway to operate, then the criticisms of my friends from Oldham and Shelby would have been not without force and justice. This has not been done. The Committee, in their report, and the honorable Delegate from Marion in his substitute, have arrived at the same result, and I cannot but think there would be grave criticism by large numbers of our people, and still more from people else- where, should this Convention say they acted unwisely, and against the approval of this body. Nor should it be forgotten that in the Constitutions of Georgia, of Florida, of Louisiana, indeed of nearly all the once slave-holding States, the exact language of this provision is used, and that, too, not only long after the close of the civil war, but after the reconstruction period, when it might have been urged that their Conventions were under real or imaginary duress. Sir, no grander utter- ance ever did or could go ringing down the ages than that inscription on the old Phila- delphia bell, “proclaim liberty throughout all the land, and unto the inhabitants thereof.” Fourth—The report of the Committee has a clause forbidding lotteries, and this clause is objected to as unnecessary by Delegates who allege there is no more propriety in de- nouncing this evil than any other, whether malum prohibitum or malum per $6. This objection cannot be vindicated by authority or reason. The fact was alluded to by the Delegate from Scott that in England and the earlier times of the Republic these franchises were granted to foster and de- velop charitable and praiseworthy objects, schools, libraries, picture galleries, churches, asylums. Nor can this be gainsaid. But againstthem, the verdict of all past exper1-- ence and present observation is pronounced and Their evil influences far transcend their good, if, in fact, any good to society has ever resulted from them, and they have met the general denunciation of the age as a species of gam- bling worse than the hells of Baden, Mon- aco and New Orleans. is almost unanimous. By authority of the National Govern- ment, use of its mails is denied to them for all purposes, and why shall they now fail of ' denunciation in our supreme law. I pre- dict that man who goes before the country as their defender, apologist, or even indiffer- ent spectator, will find win this State that, the alliteration quoted by our Senator in Congress on a like matter will follow his- aspirations and will learn that “he who dallies is a dastard, and he who doubts is- damned.” Fifth—I applaud the work of the 061T- mittee in adding to section four of their re- port emphatic utterance to the fact that, under no claim of liberty of conscience, shall _licentiousness be excused, or prac- tices inconsistent with good order and the- public peace be justified, or the solemnities- of oaths or afiirmations be dispensed with on occasions when such tests of truth may be properly called into requisition. Nor are- these words fairly subject to the denuncia- tion heaped upon them by the eloquent- gentleman from Lexington, whose ora- tion here recalled to me so many of those- scathing philippics I have been accustomed to hear from him in the Madison court- house. Let these words stand. To strike- them out now would be a monument of shame and reproach. We may safely trust. our Legislature for the passage of laws- grading the punishments required by this 26 _ BILL OF RIGHTS. Wedn esday,] BURNAM. [October 15 . section to all such offenses as it will cover ——whether new or old, great or small, na- tive or of foreign growth. Sixth—I shall not vote to strike out that section which prohibits separate public emoluments or privileges, except when based on public services. Let the section re- main. It has been in the preceding Con- stitutions, and has been so clearly ex- pounded that no future rape from the State of a great river, or from a coun- ty by mortgages of its‘ wealth and resources by chartered steamboat or railroad companies need be feared; nor do I think it probable that the lawyers for not overburdening the prisons with the con- victs; nor the farmers for raising bullocks and beeves, and tobacco and cereals to feed the people, nor distilleries to mash the grain and extract the cordial therefrom, will be incorporated by future Legislatures for their inestimable gifts, and granted privileges, as the worthy gentleman from Hopkins seemed yesterday to be alarmed about; but I do say, that if any man or set of men in the long hereafter, by some splendid service done the Commonwealth in arts or arms, or learning, or law, or philosophy, or in scientific research, shall, like Eli Whitney by his cotton gin, enrich the people with uncounted millions; if some future Peabody, or Johns Hopkins. or Judah Touro, shall, by his magnificent benefac- tions, provide for the education of the children of the poor, or the blind, or the destitute, God forbid that the legislative authorities of the State shall deny to him special recognition, or be unwilling that his name shall be treasured in the public archives, and his memory be transmitted to far-distant and long succeeding genera- tions Seventh—Mr. Chairman, nothing is more common in these days of ours than to hear from every hall and hustings learneddis- quisitions, from statesmen, of high and low degree, about the grasping avarice and op- pression of corporations. That the rich and poor are natural enemies; that labor and capital move on independent lines, and even the exaltation of the red flag of An- archy in the cities has been followed by the shouts of men and women both. To me nothing is more abhorrent, and it is with unspeakable pain that I hear these appeals. I do not believe that such antagonism necessarily exists, or that the people regard the rapid means of convenient locomotion for themselves and the products of their labor by railways, and the transmission of intelligence by lightning, as the children of the evil one. I know that by most un- wise influences many of our counties have been brought to the verge of ruin by tak- ing stock in these chartered companies be- yond the wants of the people and their ability to pay. I know that the greatest injustice is done to many by the exactions of those who control the vast railway lines that are spread like net-work all over the country, and which can be, and should be, corrrected by legislation, These institutions must learn that while they have rights the people have rights also, which are above and beyond theirs. But I do not admit that these wrongs are beyond and without remedies, nor do I be- lieve that no inducement to other and greatly needed agencies for the develop- ment of the wealth of this great Common- wealth should be denied by Constitutional veto. From the errors of the past lessons of experience and wisdom are to be learned for the future. And, while the railroad companies are to‘ be kept within the limits of the bond, flesh and blood both, if there be those who are willing and anx- ious to invite from abroad capital and labor both, and for progress and develop- ment, during limited terms of years, con- sent that privileges shall be offered to induce their introduction and outlay it, would be a monstrous wrong to say you shall not come. Strike out this clause of the Constitution and you will find that the State will be avoided by foreign capital, BILL OF RIGHTS. 2'7 Wednesday,] - BURNAM. [October 15 _ the millions of which in other localities have made barren mountains to smile in the glad sunlight, and cities to rise up as under the wand of an enchanter in valleys heretofore waste places in the .State. This capital will avoid Kentucky forever, and those portions of the State now without aid that demand these im- provements, will curse the- day when this Convention met, feeling that for their ad- vancement in wealth and power and im- \ _provement there is no hope, that for them “the unfinished window in Aladdin’s vtower unfinished must remain.” Mr. President, I listened to the eloquent remarks of my esteemed friend from Boyd county with admiration for his great abil- ities, but with strong feelings of dissent. He wishes to have struck out the first lines ‘of the twelfth section, which say that “no person shall, for the same ofi’ense, be twice put into jeopardy of life or limb.” Now, what would it matter if that provision were stricken out‘? The same language is em- ployed in the Constitution of the United States, the supreme law, and has had the same interpretation put upon it. What if there should be put on our Legislature an inhibition different in terms from those of the United States Constitution, would not the latter still prevail, and the courts of this State be bound so to declare? But in his indignant hatred of wrong and crime, he mistakes the philosophy of the law, and undervalues those charities which the law throws around one charged with crime. There can be no doubt that the fearful de- moralization consequent upon the late civil war, the pernicious practice of wearing eon- ~cealed arms, the widespread evil of intox- icating drink, and ‘the superadded laxity and loose rulings of the courts, have swollen to fearful dimensions, the extent and enor— mity of that class of crimes affecting human life in all parts of the State. Mr. Wendell Phillips, in a labored harangue before a New England audience, spoke of Kentucky as a den of assas- But are these strictures just? The gentleman complains that twelve out of sixteen grand jurors must con- cur to find an accusation, a true bill. Sir, that number at least ought to concur. The proceedings in a grand jury room are ea: parte. They hear only witnesses against the accused. The attorney for the State is their only legal adviser, and if such evidence so unfolded is not strong enough to convince three-fourths of the grand jury, the indict- ment falls, and ought to fall. The accused should have more challenges than the State. All the people are the parties on one side, and some ignorant, ob— scure, penniless wretch may be the party on the other side. The legal pre— sumption of innocence, and the ,benefit of every rational doubt, follow all men. Now, if the gentleman wants to connect his hon- ored name with a needed change in crimi- nal jurisprudence, let him formulate a res- olution requiring the passage of a statute restoring the old common law doctrine of implied malice, and making it en- forceable by our courts. This has been done in Illinois, and should be the law here; but he and all other Delegates should, remember that not alone in the darker days of ancient and medieval history; not alone with twelve butchers for a jury and a J ef- freys for a judge, have innocent victims been dragged to prison and ‘the scaffold, but even in this Commonwealth the same result has been reached. And if a man has been once tried and escaped the clutches of the law, do not again keep him in despair. sins. “What. Ben, my old hero, is this your renown? Is this the new go, kick a. man when he’s down? When 21? foe has knocked under, to tread on him, t en? By the fist of my father, I blush for you, Ben.” Eighth—But I pass on. One Delegate wishes stricken out the fifth section, which provides that all elections shall be free and equal. It is claimed that this section is unnecessary, and may be used to have con- demned by the courts those statutes that provide for the registration of voters in the - 28 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] BURNAM. ‘ [October 15 . larger cities, when similar laws are not op- erative 011 smaller towns and in other locali- ties. To me this seems a mistake. By this section elections are intended to be free—free from violence, intimidation and fraud on the part of election oflicers, bullies or military force, or those acting with them--elections are to be equal—equal in the sense that votes are to be counted and not weighed—that all honest electors shall have equal opportunities to cast their ballots and have them counted, and it is hardly probable that the trouble appre- hended with regard to registration will be realized in this generation. Certainly, Mr. Chairman, I am the last man who would fail to do any thing to secure hereafter, not only free and equal, but pure elections, by every agency that the best experience and talent of this body can inaugurate. Cor- ruption, bribery, the degradation of this franchise, is one of the alarming symptoms of incurable disease invading the life of the Commonwealth. It the gentleman from Newport, who leads that Election Commit- tee, shall find a remedy for this loathsome cancer on the body-politic, he will add other and imperishable laurels to that im- mortal name which came down to him from his ancestors. Mr. Chairman, I. shall not transcend the limits of time which belong to me by the discussion of those sections relating to the law of libel and jury trial, or undertake to follow the different gentlemen who have discussed them, nor is this necessary after the terse. logical ‘and spirited reply made by the Delegate from Pendleton on yester- dayto the wit of the Delegate from Scott, and the declamatory criticism of others. I believe that the language used by the Committee in their report as _to them has been fully vindicated by sound logic and {true Lhistoric interpretation, and that they will stand the test of the severest scrutiny. I wish, therefore, to close these rapid, desultory and incomplete sugges- tions, with the hope that all our work here may be for the good of all our people. That by our labors the State may be made to prosper and grow; that her glory and ad- vancement may, while we live, be the pride of our eyes, and in death may our last memories be of this beloved land. With gaze earnest as that of the Greek, who, as Virgil says— I C'oelum qua adspicit 1 Et cl-ulces mow-tens re'nn-m'scitm' Argos. Mr. CLARDY. It would seem particu- larly unfortunate for me to speak entirely from a difi‘erent stand-point from most of the gentlemen who have already addressed this Committee, to be compelled to follow the able gentlemen who have preceded me- to-day; but I trust that since a great amount of the discussion which has pre- ceded me has come from gentlemen from a difi'erent profession and occupation, I shall have, for the few remarks which I shall submit, the patient attention of the Committee. While I may not be able to‘ entertain you as others have, I hope to‘ speak from the stand-point of a. practical business man, sent to this Convention to represent a practical business people. I shall not attempt to follow the gentlemen who have preceded me, but mark out a course- for myself, without especially antagonizing anybody else, or undertaking to discuss all the questions or amendments that have been presented to this bill. Looking from my stand—point as a prac- tical man, I cannot see but what every nat- ural or inherent right which exists now among men has always existed; and that a great deal of the eloquence which has been dis- played before this body in telling us where these rights came from, where they were wrested from, and where they once resided, it seems to me wasa work largely of super- erogation. I say that every natural, in- herent right that any man possesses to-day, has always been possessed. What was the difficulty? The only difficulty was that men were so environed'by circum- stances, and so controlled by others, either BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 29 .stantially the same Bill of Rights. -of those who may study it hereafter. Wednesday,] CLARDY. [October 15. by law or by the action of the communities in which they lived, that they were unable _to enjoy these privileges and these rights. What is our duty to-day as a practical peo- ple ? sufficiently established and made known, It is not that these rights are not but it is that we may enact such'laws in our own Commonwealth and in this coun- try that every citizen shall be permitted, untrammeled and uninfiuenced, by law or ‘ otherwise, to enjoy all these inherent rights and these privileges by the protection which proper law shall give him as a citizen of this great State. I have no special rever- ence for things simply because they are old. If they are old and good, that is all right; but if there is any thing in this old Consti- tution or in the Bill of Rights, or anywhere else in it, that is wrong, we ought not to hesitate to drop it out because it has been there for a long time, but, like the surgeon when he examines the tumor of his patient, and sees that his life depends upon its extri- cation by the roots, he ought not to hesitate, but'with a sharp knife he ought to go to the very bottom of it and take it all out, al- though in doing so he goes dangerously near some vital part of the human body. No feeling of sentimentalism should interfere in this matter ; but my observation in reference to this Bill of Rights teaches me this. In the examination of this matter I have gone over a large number of Constitutions, and I will say here that substantially in all these Con- stitutions we find all these rights, or nearly all of them, though differently arranged; and if we are to take any one of them from any of these Constitutions we would have sub- So that I am not exactly in accord with these ' gen- tlemen that talk so much about not touch- ing this Bill of Rights, not marring it in any respect, not even changing its arrange- ment, even if we can do so to the advantage I say I am not entirely in sympathy with that view. I believe it is a good Bill of Rights; while _I believe its mutilation is unnecessap ry to any great extent, still I believe in some respects the report of the Committee and the arrangement they have made, while they have retained every substantial privilege in this Bill of Rights, it is better in some respects. But I say if we should adopt either the report of the Committee or the old Bill of Rights, we will not go far wrong. And, another thing, I am not in accord with the general opinion which has been expressed here, that this Bill of Rights is more important than other matters which will come before us in the discussions which shall follow in this Convention. I believe there are many questions which are to come up before this Convention far more important than whether we shall adopt the report of the Committee or the old Bill of Rights. Because hsay if we adopt either, we will have a good Bill of Rights; that the rights are substantially the same, and it does not make any differ- ence, specially, which one we adopt. Now, I believe in the Preamble which has been reported by the Committee. I think it is better in some respects, and especially is it better in the fact that it recognizes a Divine Ruler of this universe- In looking over the Constitutions of the country, I find that this has been adopted in almost all the Preambles to the Consti- tutions. Some reference has been made to a Divinity. You will all recollect in the old Constitution of Pennsylvania in 1776, I believe, they required before a man could take a seat in the General Assembly or hold an office in that State, he not only had to acknowledge a Divine Being, but he had to acknowledge that he belived in a God, in future rewards and punishments, and that he actually believed in the Old and New Testaments as a Divine revela-p tion. I do not‘ go that far, nor do I believe that it should be made a test for any office or emolument or any position that a citi- zen should occupy in the State; but I say it is respectful to our Divine Master and 30 ' BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesdays] CLARDY. [October 15. the Ruler of the universe to acknowledge this in our Preamble. He is the one from Whom “every good and every perfect gift must come; ” and it cannot stultify any- body or be wrong in any respect to express this in a Preamble, especially where it emanates from a great and Christian peo- ple. There is a clause in our old Constitution which says that no restriction shall be put upon any citizen on account of his re- ligious views, or whether he has any re- ligious views, and still in that same Consti- tution the ministers who teach these religions are prohibited from holding oflice or being members of the General Assembly. ‘It appears to me that this is directly in opposition, the one clause with the other. I believe that ought to be stricken out of our Constituti n. Those of our fellow-citizens who teacléeligion are teaching what they believe; and to restrict them in reference to the duties and privileges of citizens is to put a restriction upon them on account of their religion; and I believe it is wrong, and that it ought to be stricken out; but I do not wish to discuss that matter now until it shall come up, when I may have something else to say about it. About this matter of being good because it is old, and ought not to be changed, We will take one or two plain illustratsons, and I will take them from that profession from which I am glad to say that I belong -—that is a practical farmer. When I was a boy I was taught to do every thing on a farm that anybody could do, and at that day, when I was a plowboy, we had- a plow that they called the “ Cary "' plow. It was a great improvement on any thing we had previous to that time. It had a wooden mould-board. When we got that Cary plow we thought we had reached the acme _ of mechanical perfection so far as plows were concerned. It was a good plow, but now would any gentleman at this day say we ought to stick to the old Cary plow be- cause it was a good plow in its time‘? I think not. Nobody would'think that old plow could be compared to an Oliver chilled. plow now—that it would be any plow at all; and if you were to see a man plowing in a field with the old Cary plow you would set him down at once as far behind the times, and as a- regular old fogy. So it is in traveling. When I first came- through this county, in 1845, to go to school in a neighboring county, we- had to go all the way from where I lived in an old stage coach. There were no railroads then, and that was regarded a very excellent way of traveling. It was regarded as a great improvement on the modes of trav-- eling which had exisied many years before- that; but now what would you think of a man to start from the city of Hopkins-- ville to come up into this country in astage coach '? I think just as little of a man that goes back fifty or one hundred years, and picking up some old sentiment or idea and says it ought to be incorporated, and we should stand by it simply because it is one hundred years old. When a man can start from there now in a palace car and go all the way through in a few hours, it would be great folly to defend the old stage coach as a good mode of traveling. This does not militate against any thing in this Constitution which is found to be good and useful. I have learned a good many things from the discussions of this question from these gentlemen of the legal profession here. I have been profoundly interested in these discussions. But I have learned some things that I am sorry I had to learn, because I have always had a very high esteem and a very exalted opinion of the legal profession. I thought what they didn’t know about law and language was scarcely worth looking after; but I have learned since I came here, from these gen- tlemen themselves, that there is not an English sentence that cannot be interpreted in two or three different ways. And I have found another thing. I have found that these distinguished gentlemen do not. BILL OF RIGHTS. 31 Wednesday,] CLARDY. [October 15. agree any better about what the law is and about the interpretation of these sentences than any of the plain people we meet with as we travel along the road of life. I have found another thing; that these gentlemen have not any very profound respect for the decisions which have been made by one set of lawyers. They say that another decision may be made at some time _by another set, and, consequently, we must stick to that which has been already inter— preted; but as a gentleman said this morn- ing, very aptly, I thought, after awhile the same laws may be under determination, and another set of lawyers will be upon, the Supreme Bench, and then we may have another decision; and so it is not so great an advantage to have these old things which have been adjudicated upon. But, as I have said, it was not my pur- pose to discuss this matter except in a gen- eral way. I want to say a few things upon some amendments which I had the honor to introduce, upon some of which nothing at all has been said. So we will go upon new ground. The first amendment pre- sented was simplya verbal one, and nobody, .I suppose, would have any special objection to it. That was to amend section 12, line 2, by striking out the word “limb” and insert- ing the word “liberty.” All these remarks about old things being kept in, simply be- cause they are old, applies to this very well. “Limb” once had a meaning in law, that is what I understand from these legal gentle- men, and it was then distinctly understood; but I say, to a plain, common-sense reader, now it has no meaning at all; because, in the punishment of crime, we do not put people in stocks, nor cut ofi" their ears, now, as they did two hundred years ago, for cer- tain offenses; but we do restrain them, so far as their liberty is concerned. Therefore, I would like to see this word "limb” left out and “liberty” inserted in its place. But the most important amendment, and I think it is a very important one, is this: Amend section 26, line 3, by adding, after the word allowed, the following: “Nor shall any ‘trust’ or ‘combine,’ detrimental to the interest of the State, nor gambling in agri- cultural products, known as ‘dealing in futures,’ be allowed.” This comes in the clause relating. to lot- teries, and follows that prohibition. I was very glad to have the distinguished gentle- man who spoke this morning to accord with me in the view that it was not im- proper that this subject should be put in the Bill of Rights, because it is clause which most emphatically protects the rights of the people and the rights of that class of the people who need the protection. It is not necessary for me to say any thing about the subject of lotteries. That has already been discussed, and you all understand that that that is bad, and only bad; that it is evil, and evil continually. ’ N ow let us look at these other matters; ‘ and right here I wish to say this—that one of the greatest duties that this Convention owes the people of this State, to the cit- izens, is to see that their rights are pro- teeted in reference to the organization of trusts, combines, or any other class of or- ganization that shall be detrimental to“ their interests. I say the rights are all well enough established; but the people need protection to enable them to enjoy these rights, and to prevent others from infring- ing upon them. That is the reason we ought to have this law. But, it willbe asked, what is a trust or a combine‘? How are you to reach them‘? I do not propose to do any thing, but simply to say in this Con- stitution that trusts and combines detri- mental to the interests of the people shall not be allowed. Everybody knows what is understood by that. An aggregation of capital, a combination of wealth, to do something. There may be good com- bines. There may be good trusts, so far as we know,but we simply wish to put this in, that where these trusts or combines are det- rimental to the State, they shall not be allowed. How are you going to determine 32 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] CLARDY. [October 1-5. when they are detrimental to the State? In the courts—just like we determine other things—by the decisions of the courts, by the juries of the country. If exception is made to any trust, or any organization which'is-supposed to be a trust, and which is supposed to be committing some wrong against the interests of the people, bring it before the courts, and let them decide whether it is injurious or not. If it is not injurious, let them go ahead with their bus- iness. If it is injurious, then, by this Con- stitutional provision, it would be prohibited and could not be allowed. But what about this -‘ dealing in futures?” I believe that has done vastly more harm in Kentucky, and in other places, than all the lottery business we have had. While that is bad enough, I believe in my own county thousafids and thousands of dollars have been lost in gambling in these products, and it is injurious to the interests of the farmers who make these products. Long before we have our wheat ready to sell, the market has already been fixed for it by this species of gambling, and selling a product they never owned, or never will own, and selling more of it than anybody owns. '1 say it is vicious in practice; it is demoralizing to the people, and especially to the young; er and rising generations of the country, and we should prohibit it so far as we can. Of course we cannot reach any further than the State; but if we prohibit it in this State. other States will probably follow our good example and prohibit it, and as there has already been a bill introduced into the United States Congress having for its ob- ject its prohibition, it will be prohibited everywhere and stopped. It was said some time since by the largest grain dealer and the largest mill owner in the United States that this practice in Chicago in dealing in futures had lessened the price of wheat ten or fifteen cents below its real value for years past; and this comes directly out of the pockets of the farmer who makes this wheat. They are the losers in thevend. While they are producing wheat and sell- ing it at very little above the cost of pro- duction, they need this protection, and we ought to give it to them outside of its - influence morally, outside of its demoral- izing influence upon the people and the losses which are sustained thereby. Those who manipulate these things on the inside. reap the benefi,t while the "' lambs,” as they call them, are sacrificed all the time to the greed of these gamblers. There has been a great deal said about the first section in this Constitution, and also section 2 in the report of the Commit- tee, that “all freemen when they form a social compact are equal.” If they had just stopped there and had said nothing more I would have had no objection to that at all; but it was said by the distinguished gentleman from Marion that this clause in the Constitution had been the fruitful source of a great many evils, and while some gentlemen here have contended that it should remain in, I have heard but one excuse, I believe, given for it, and that was the reason the distinguished gentleman from Madison gave this morn- ing, that distinguished services might be rewarded under this section. I think dis- tin guished services could be rewarded with- out any section at all, if they were needed. There is nothing in the world in any other section, or in any part of the Constitution, so far as I know, to prevent persons from being rewarded for distinguished services; but I have introduced an amendment here, at least a new section, which I think if you will leave that out and put this in, the same evils could not arise ‘under it. The section reads as follovs: "The Legislature shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens privileges for immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally ap- ply to all citizens.” That is just a simple declaration of the fact that there shall be “equal rights to all and exclusive privileges to none.” If one class of citizens or one citizen wants BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 33 Wednesday,] CLARDY. ~~~ ‘ ~ :6 [October 15. to establish a bank, he does it under a gen- eral provision for that purpose, and every other citizen of the State, anybody else that wants to establish a bank and has the means to do so, can go and establish one upon the same conditions. If a man wants to build a railroad, or to do any other thing under the general provision for that purpose, be can go and build the rail- road, or do any other thing which a corpo- ration may do; but he has to do it under the same circumstances under which every other citizen may do the same thing. I do not see any evil that could arise from the adoption of this section. It might be said that the Legislature might be able under this to make great exemptions for certain classes, but they will not be able to do that when we adopt, as we probably will in this Constitution, a clause which shall say what they shall exempt, and what shall not be exempted; then there will be no provision exempting any thing at all which is not ex- empted by this Constitution. It is a fact, and it has been a source of great corruption and wrong in this State, that every combi- nation of citizens, who wanted to get any special privilege to do a thing, have come before the Legislature, and by reason of every influence that they could bring to bear upon the Legislature, they have striven not to get common and usual privileges, but to get some privileges which nobody else had been able to secure—to get some privilege to do something which other peo- ple, who were in the same business, did not have, and could not have, unless they could get a different charter from the one they already bad. This section, in my judg- ment, should be adopted, and all this spe- cial legislation prevented. It has been the source of much harm, and, so far as I know, no good. There is nothing which could be done by any class of citizens which should not be provided for by some general law. Then every citizen under this pro- ‘ vision would have the same opportunity to do the same thing under the same circum- stances. I do not care to discuss these mat- ters specially, but I want to mention these things that they may be considered.’ It was not my purpose to make any elab- orate speech on this question. In, fact, for some time I thought I would say nothing, but lest it be thought I had not considered the subject, I proposed to make these few remarks. I want to say something about the clause I relating to slavery. While I value highly the opinion ‘of my esteemed friend from Todd, I do not exactly accord with him on that subject, and it may be from my par- ticular association with a class of people largely interested in this matter, which makes me in favor of keeping that clause in the Constitution. I know in my county there are three thousand voters who are in- terested in this matter, and while they did not have any thing very important to do with my election, I feel that they are my constituents, and that it is my business to represent their interests here as well as it is to represent the interests of all others, and the interests of all the State, so far as I can; but I say there is a large class of this people, many of them ignorant and easily deceived; their minds are easily con- fused upon these subjects, and it was made a point in my canvass in the county that the people of Kentucky—of course they did not know any better—had refused to strike out this clause about slavery pur- posely, and were keeping it in the Consti- tution simply from the fact that they expect- ed some day to enslave these people again. That was made a point, and they were told that during this past canvass this summer, and a great many of them believed it. I say, when they see this Constitution and find that nothing has been said about this subject, that it is left, as they might suppose, for the fi'iture action of the people of Ken- tucky whether we shall ever have slavery or not, it will have a bad influence upon them, and for their benefit, even if that was the only reason, I believe we ought to let 34 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesdayj _ CLARDY. [October 15. it stay as it is. That is one thing it might do, and I am in favor of the report of the Committee in reference to that matter. The people are now becoming educated and able to read the Constitution. They will expect to see this in the Constitution. They will expect to see that clause in there pro- hibiting slavery in this State. and it will set their minds at rest on that subject. I believe it can do no harm, and while this is a meagre good it can do, it might be left in on this account, and I hope it will not be stricken out. I have said about what I desired to say on this question, but there are, as I said be- fore, subjects that this Convention will be called upon to consider, in my judgment of a vast deal more importance than this Bill of Rights, and I hope, therefore, while we have heard so much and so many good things said, and so well said and eloquently said, that we will, as far as possible, restrict discussion on the subject; make our speeches short and to the point, and get through with it as quickly as possible , that we may get to something else that I believe will be far more important. (Applause) Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I move that the Committee rise and report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The motion being seconded, was put upon its adoption and declared carried. The President resumed the Chair. Mr. MCHENRY. The Committee of the Whole have under consideration the re- _ port of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Com- mittee. The question being put upon the adoption of the said report, the same was declared adopted. Mr. MACKOY. I move that we adjourn to meet to-morrow morning at 9 o’clock. The motion being seconded, was put to- the House and carried. The Convention thereupon adjourned. ionvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1.] FRANKFORT, OCTOBER 16, 1890. [Na 31 Thursday,] J AMES—AYRES—WOOD. [October 16. The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Ne- "ville. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order is petitions. Mr. JAMES. I have a petition from my county signed by a number of the tax- payers. and also a statement of our railroad indebtedness, which I desire to have re- ferred to the Committee on General Pro- visions. The PRESIDENT. The reference will .be made. Mr. AYRES. I hold in my hand a re- port of the bonded indebtedness of my county, and ask that it be referred to the .Special Committe, The PRESIDENT. The reference will be made. Mr. WOOD. I have a like petition from my county, which I desire to have referred to the Special Committee. Mr. COX. I hold in my hand a petition 'which I desire to have referred to the Com- mittee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. PETRIE. I have a communication from the Clerk of the Todd County Court, and ask to have it referred to the appro- priate Committee. The PRESIDENT. It will be referred to the Special Committee, of which the Del- egate from Anderson is Chairman. If there are no more petitions, then reports from Standing Committees. If none, then reports from Special Committees. Motions .and resolutions are now in order. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. Ihave a resolu- tion which I desire to offer and have imme- diate action upon. Resolution read, as follows : Resolved, That the use of this hall to- night is tendered the Hon. W. C. P. Breckinridge, of Lexington, Kentucky, for the purpose of discussing the political is- sues of the day, and the Sergeant-at-Arms is hereby directed to inform the distin- guished Speaker of the action of this body. Mr. BRONSTON. My information is that Col. Breckinridge will not speak here until Friday night. The question being taken on the adop- tion of the resolution, it was declared to have been adopted. Mr. GLENN. I offer a resolution. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That from and after Thursday, 16th instant, all speeches upon the report of Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights shall be limited to twenty minutes, and if not concluded in that time, same may be printed. Mr. GLENN. I am advised that it will have to lay over one day, but I give notice that on to-morrow I shall insist on it. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Campbell county. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the leave is granted. Mr. MAY. I desire to ask leave oi ab- sence for the Delegate from Pendleton. The PRESIDENT. There being no 0b- jection, such leave is granted. Mr. BIRKHEAD. The Committee on ‘revision have had under consideration Reso- lution 99, and have instructed me to refer it back to this body with the request that it be referred to the Committee on Executive and 2 ' MEMORIAL TO JUSTICE MILLER. Thursday,] PUGH—BURNAM. [October 16 . Ministerial Officers for Counties and Dis- tricts. ‘The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the request? The Chair hears none, and such reference is made. Mr. PUGH. After a conference with the Chairman of the Committee on Rules and several Delegates on this floor, as well as the Public Printer, I have a resolution which I desire to offer and have read and re- ferred to the Committee on Rules, with the request that they report at the earliest pos- sible convenince. Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That a Committee of six be ap- pointed by the Chair, which shall be styled the “ Committee on Supervision of Record ,” whose duty it shall be to have and exercise editorial supervision and control of all mat- ter relative to the proceedings of this Con~ vention, and of which the printed volume is to be composed. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to such resolution being referred‘? The Chair hears no objection, and the reference is ordered. Mr. BURNAM. I offer a report from a Special Committee, which I desire to have read. The PRESIDENT. Read the report’ Mr. Secretary. ' Report read, as follows: The members of the Constitutional Convention of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, having heard of the death, in the City of Washington, of the Hon- orable Samuel F. Miller, Associate J us- tice of the Supreme Court of the United States, deploring that sad event in common with the people of theUnited States general- ly, desire toput permanently on record their appreciation of his exalted character as a citizen, a patriot and a jurist. They recall the fact that he was born on the soil of Kentucky; reared to manhood * among our people; that he ever cherished with fond afi'ection the home of his youth; that his ancestors repose on the soil of the State, and that many of his kin- dred still survive among our most respected citizens. They have watched with admiration his- course on the bench of the highest court in the Republic; the learning, ability and clearness of his published opinions on the- gravest and most profound questions of Constitutional and Statutory law, and have- felt that Kentucky has at no time made a greater contribution to the Judiciary De-- partment of the Government than by the like labors and career of this eminent jur- ist, not forgetting in the distant past that Todd and Trimble were among his illustri- ous predecessors. That in the walks of private life as a citi- zen and a man he was distinguished by the simplicity, the cordial manners and‘. generous kindliness that are the prompting- of a noble nature, and which are unfailing,~ proofs of a true heart and a generous spirit ;. therefore, be it Resolved, That‘ we have heard with pro- found regret the loss which has befallen the country in the death of this eminent jurist,~ true patriot and Christian gentleman, and that we especially tender to his bereaved. family assurances of our sympathy and condolence. That a copy of this memorial and resolu-- tion be transmitted to them, signed by the President for and in behalf of this body, and that the same be entered at length upon our Journal, and another to the Chief J us-~ tice of the United States with the request that it may be laid before the Court of which the deceased was so long a shining ornament, and entered at large upon its records. C. F. BURNAM, S. B. BUCKNER,. J. C. BECKHAM. Mr. BURNAM. I thought, when I [heard of the death of Judge Miller, that it would not be regarded as inappropriate by this body to go out of the ordinary rou- tine of its business and notice appropriately his death. And I thought, moreover, that it was not inappropriate that I should bring the notice of this great loss to the consideration of this House, as that emi~ nent man was by birth a citizen ofthe, MEMORIAL TO JUSTICE MILLER. 3 c Thursday,] BURNAM—KNOTT. [October 16 . town where I live and have ever lived. He was, although older than I am, one of my school-mates, and later in life he and I have often talked “ about the school-boy spot we ne’er forget, though there we are forgot.” I have a conviction that there is not a statement made in any one of those resolu- tions that is not true. Judge Miller was an eminent example of what Republican insti- tutions will do for a country like this. He was born poor, but fought his way from ob- scurity to fame, and justly maintained it to ' the last hour of his death. I am sure the county of Madison, whose history has been enriched by many noble men and illustri- ous names, has in the aggregate of its wealth no name greater or prouder than his. And with all my admiration for the memory of Todd and Trimble who occu- pied places on that bench before him, I have the conviction, as stated there, that Ken- tucky has never made any contribution to the Judicial history of this country greater than when Judge Miller was elevated to the bench by President Lincoln. I do not wish to detain the House by any protracted discourse. I trust that those who knew him on this floor, the excellent gentleman from the county of Marion, and my friend from Lexington, who are also familiar with his history, will, if necessary, add to these incoherent remarks I have made. I know it can be supplemented by them as well as my colleagues on the Committee. Mr. KNOTT. My distinguished friend from Madison has alluded to me. I am glad to avail myself of the opportunity thus afforded to add a single leaf to the wreath that a great people are preparing for the tomb of a great jurist. It was my good fortune to know Judge Miller in_ timately in the social circles and upon the bench. In common with my profession I have read his utterances as one of the Su- _ preme Justices of the highest tribunal known to our country. As a jurist _he was endowed by nature with some of the high- est faculties. He was pre-eminently an ‘ honest man. convictions. ‘He was always loyal to what he considered to be right, whether questions of great public moment were involved or controversies of a mere private character between man and man. While not agree- ing with many of his opinions on the bench, I always admired his sterling in- tegrity, and the courage with which he maintained his position. In the social circle the genial, lovable qualities of the man shone out most con- splcuously. There he always appeared to me to be the typical Kentuckian without ostentation, genial, kind and considerate to all. I cannot recall in the entire range of eminent men, a man who, in the private circles, threw off all consciousness of official dignity, all apparent recollection of su perior position, as did Judge Miller. He- was proud of being a Kentuckian. Often at his own hospitable board, when meeting‘ with friends in the social circle, among his brethren and others, I have heard him dwell with delight on his life in Kentucky and congratulate himself that he was a son of this glorious Commonwealth; and, like all Kentuckians, he had partiality for the clan. He always had a generous palm and warm spot in his heart for one of his brethren from Kentucky. whether high or low, provided always he was honorable. I regret his decease, both on account of the great loss the public has sustained, and be- cause I feel that I have lost a personal friend. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoptiom of the resolution just read. The question being taken on the adoption of the resolution, it was declared adopted. Mr. JONSON. Is it now in order to offer a petition‘? The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent it can be offered. Mr. JONSON. I hold in my hand a petition from Mrs. James Bennett, which she asks the Convention to refer to the Committee on Elections. The object of the He was an earnest man in his 4 RULES. Thursday,] BoLEs—BULLI'r'r—PETTIT. [October 16. petition is to have such amendment made in the Constitution of Kentucky as will strike out from that document the qualify- ing adjective “male.” The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the petition will be referred to the Commit- tee on Elections. Mr. BOLES. I offered on yesterday an amendment to the rules, which was required to lay over one day. I desire to call it up now, and I would like to have it re- ported The amendment was reported. Mr. BOLES. I do not desire to say much on that amendment; but it occurs to me that the time has come when we should try to economize time. The debates in this Convention in the last three weeks have given ample evidence of the capacity and ability of Kentuckians to speak, and it looks like now we should get down to work and do something. It occurs to me that twenty minutes is ample time. There may arise an extreme case; a Delegate might want more time, and I would accept an amendment that, by unanimous consent, it could be extended. Mr. BULLITT. I hope the amendment will not pass. I know from experience that, being limited, gentlemen cannot say what they want to say, and perhaps they might get through in less time than if they are limited. In addition to that, there may be gentlemen upon the floor who have in- formation that the Convention ought to have; and I am opposed, after having given liberty to those who have preceded in the debate, to cutting off the other gen- men. I hope the amendment will not prevail. ' Mr. PETTIT. I want to call the at- tention of the gentleman who has pre- sented this resolution to the fact that in one respect he cuts off debate, but in another he simply enlarges it. Under the rules that govern the Committee of the ‘Whole we have this: “When general de- bate is closed by order of the Convention, any Delegate shall be allowed five minutes debate on any amendment he may offer, after which the member first obtaining the floor shall be allowed to speak five minutes in opposition.” Under this amendment I believe this time is extended, and he is en- titled to fifteen minutes. I think the gen- tleman will not accomplish his object, and that it may have a more satisfactory solu- tion and meet the will of the Convention, I move that it be referred to the Committee on Rules. The question being put on the motion to_ refer, it was declared carried. Mr. KENNEDY. I have an amend- ment to the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Amendment read, as follows : Amendment by way of a substitute for section 2 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, being section 1 of the present Bill of Rights. “That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and that no man or set of men is entitled to exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services rendered in a governmental capacity, and a local public service shall not be consid- ered governmental.” The PRESDENT. The Chair has sev- eral times called the special order when other business has been exhausted, but under the order of the Convention the Chair holds that that properly does not come up until 11 o’clock; therefore the Chair would make the suggestion that some one move to take up the special order. Mr. MONTGOMERY.- I have a reso- lution which I desire to have referred to the Joint Committee on Executive Affairs. I do not care to have it read. Mr. MCHENRY. I move that we go in Committee of the Whole and take up the special order, which is the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. BRONSTON. I ask the gentleman to withhold his motion until I make a mo- tion and statement. BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Thursday,] McHENRY—BRoNs'roN—CoX. [October 16 , The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate from Ohio withdraw his motion‘? Mr. MCHENRY. I do. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to move, that when this Convention adjourns, it ad- journ at a quarter before 12, and meet to- morrow at 9 o’clock. The Delegate from Fayette, with the assistance of the Delegate from the Fourth Louisville District, has arranged to have a special train to take the Delegates to Lexington this evening. We do not desire to interfere in any way with the business of the Convention. As we have met at 9 o’clock, by adjourning at a quarter before 12 I do not presume any business of the Convention will be seriously interfered with. The motion was put, and declared carried. Mr. MCHENRY. I now renew the mo— tion to take up the special order. The question being put on the motion to adjourn, it was carried. The PRESIDENT. The Chair names the Delegate from the Fourth Louisville District as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. YOUNG. The Committee of the Whole is now in session, and has under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, and the Clerk will call the roll. Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, perhaps I owe to this Committee an apology for con- suming any part of its time. But I ask the indulgence of gentlemen while I call their attention to the third section of the report of the Committee, which appears to be a copy of the fourth section of the Bill of Rights in the present Constitution of Ken- tucky, which is in these words‘: “All power is inherent in the people, and all free gov- ernments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, happi- ness, security and the protection of prop- erty,” 8:0. It may he remembered that I offered an amendment to that section a few days since, which was to add the words “life, liberty and,” after the word “of” in that section. If that change were made, the section would read, “All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness, security, and the protection of life, liberty, and prop- erty.” The motives that prompted me to offer that amendment were that we might declare to coming generations that we held that life and liberty were of greater impor- tance to men than property. To declare that we were not so sordid as to elevate the right to property higher and above life and liberty. But the distinguished gentleman from Warren, who is Chairman of that Committee, sharply criticised that amend- ment, and declared that the use of those two words was tautology. I must confess that I was somewhat impressed at hearing so profound a scholar as the able Chairman of that Committee make that charge. Surely that learned gentleman will not tell this Convention that the word “life” has the same meaning that is given to the word “property,” or that the word “liberty’ conveys the same idea that the word “ prop- erty ” does. Webster defines the word “tautology ” thus: “Repetition of the same sense or idea in the same words.” But perhaps it will be said that section 4 in the present Constitution has come down to us from our fathers in those words. Admit it? So has many other sections come to us from the same source. But why are we here; for what purpose did‘ the people elect us? I answer those questions by referring to the language of the act of the General Assembly approved May 3d, 1890, under which the Delegates to this Convention were elected, and under which they con- vened. That act recites, “that a (‘on- vention be, and the same is hereby, called for the purpose of re-adopting, amending or changing the Constitution of this State.” That language declares the purposes for which this Convention was called in plain and definite language to adopt, amend or change the Constitution of this State. 6 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] Then changing the language in section 4 of the Bill of Rights is in accord with that act, and that change certainly should not be objected to when by it we declare that free governments are founded on the authority of the people and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness, security and the protection of their lives, liberty and prop- erty. But if any gentleman on this floor believes that it is more important to pro- tect property than life and liberty, he ought to vote against that amendment; but if he places a higher estimate on life and liberty than he does on property, he should vote for it, notwithstanding the eloquent appeal of the distingqished gentleman from War- ren to vote the amendment down. But, Mr. Chairman, I will crave the in- dulgence of the Committee a few moments longer, in which I propose to invite atten- tion to another change in the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. There is a proviso near the close of the fifth section, which is in these words: “ The General Assembly may provide by law for a change of venue in favor of the defend- ant in such prosecutions.” Why limit the right to a change of venue to the de- fendant '? Surely the people should be pro- tected against those who violate the law. I am not one of those whose sympathies are aroused and go out to those who are in- dicted for crime alone. But rather do my warmest sympathies go to those who are the sufi'erers from crime. What can arouse our sympathies higher than to see a poor and uninfluential family weeping over the remains of a dead son or brother, who has been cut down in his youth, and that, too, by a son of a rich and influential neighbor‘? But suppose such a crime is committed, and the red-handed murderer is in- dicted and arrainged before the court,and all the influence of a great family is brought to bear to secure his acquittal. The sherifl’ catches the contagion, and in selecting a jury is careful to select and summon only those who are most under that influence, Cox. [October 16 _ then the result of that trial will be an ac- quittal. If the Commonwealth have the same right to a change of venue, and the murderer of that poor boy was removed from trial beyond their influence, where he could be tried according to the forms of law, then the result would be that he would have meted out to him the punishment due to that awful crime. This picture is not overdrawn. Similar cases have occurred in Kentucky and will continue to occur, unless this Convention confers upon the General Assembly the power to give to the Com- monwealth the same right to a change of venue that is secured to the defendant in such prosecutions. When the distinguished gentleman from Boyd presented to us this week, in such a clear and forcible manner, the shields thrown by law around the per— petrators of crime, I thought I saw the day dawning upon the humble poor. The light, bursting into the minds of statesmen, which would grow brighter and brighter till all would see the necessity of protecting the lives, liberty and property of all classes, the very thing for which free governments were founded among men. But, Mr. Chairman, I ask a further in— dulgence from the Committee that I may say that I was pleased, yea delighted.'that harmony prevails to a very great extent among the members of this Convention at least upon one subject, and that is the omis- sion of section 3 in our present Bill of Rights. 1 want the whole of that section omitted in the Bill of Rights, which we may give to the people of Kentucky. It is declared in the first simple sentence that “the right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction.” I have for many years doubted the wisdom of that declaration. I have believed that the right to property was regulated by organic and statutory law, and that it was not higher and above that which secured the right to its enjoyment to man. The remaining part of that section relates to the right of property in slaves. We have been told re- BILL OF RIGHTS. 7 Thursday,] Cox, [October 16 . peatedly on this floor that the institution of slavery was dead, with which I concur, and will say that it was killed by Lincoln’s proclamation and buried at Appomattox. There let it sleep—the sleep that . knows no waking. The able manner in which this subject was treated by the gentlemen from Oldham and Shelby last week must have elevated those two distinguished gentlemen in the minds and affections of all who lis- tened to their unanswerable arguments before this Committee. But a little more indulgence, gentlemen, and I will close. It will be remembered that in the early days of this Convention an address, delivered by the Rev. J. M. Foster, was laid on our tables. The author of that address attempted to show that the United States Government, and the State Governments in all the States in this Union, were guilty of political infidelity. He charged that the sacred name of Jesus Christ should not appear in any Constitu— tion in this country, and that it had been omitted in all the proclamations of the President and Governors in setting aside a day of thanksgiving. Upon these facts, and many others, he bases that charge. But, to save us from that fearful charge, he ‘took it upon himself to send us his address. To that charge we plead guilty, so far as the people of Kentucky, and the now de- departed statesmen who framed the three ‘Constitutions of Kentucky, are concerned. If he had turned to section 5 of the present Bill of Rights he would have found these words: “ That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God.” It was copied from the two other Constitutions of 1792 and 1799. Before he made that charge against American states- men, both living and dead, he should have 'studied more closely that book of books, the Bible, from which he would have learned that all the great and wonderful names applied to the great Jehovah were embraced in the name “God Almighty.” ‘The ancient prophet of Israel said: “Unto us a child is born; unto us a son is given; the Government shall be upon his shoulder; his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, the Almighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.” Then, truly, the true import of all the names applied to him in the sacred vol- ume is embodied in the words God Almighty. Then the members of this Convention need not be alarmed by the charge of infidelity which Mr. Foster may, perhaps, hereafter prefer against us, although we may omit that sacred name of the lowly babe of Beth- leham in the Constitution which we expect to give to the people of Kentucky. But sir, much has been said in this discus- sion about the style, the language in which the ‘present Bill of Rights was handed down to us, which declare the almost sacred prin- ciples of civil and religious liberty. While I desire to see section 2 greatly changed, and section 3 omitted from the Bill of Rights which we will adopt, and some. other changes made in other sections, yet I do not desire to see the language in which that Bill of Rights was handed down to us changed, only where changes are absolutely neces- sary. I am now convinced that the old Bill of Rights will be adopted with but few changes, such as the opinions of courts and experience has made necessary. We have a right to believe that much of the Consti- tution of 1792 emanated and came from the pen and great mind of that true patriot and true statesman, the Honorable George Nich- olas, than whom Kentucky never had a superior, although the language may ap- pear a little quaint to some of our modern scholars who might prefer the later style of novelists. But let us do honor to the memo- ries of those true patriots by whose valor we now enjoy the priceless boon of civil and re- ligious liberty, and by whose statesmanship the foundation was laid in the dark and bloody ground on which has been built our fair fabric of State government; I say let us do honor to their memories by giving to the latest generations who may people s ‘ BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] Gox—DURBIN—FoRREsTER. [October 16 ,, this fair land of ours that Bill of Rights in as near the same language as is possible. But the many touching references that have been made during this discussion to the ef- forts and sacrifices of true patriots in all ages of the world to secure their civil and religious rights, and the many defeats they have met on fields incrimsoned with human gore, all to secure the rights of man, have aroused in our bosom emotions almost akin to devo- tion to their departing memories, and make us to say, in the language of Burns, “ man’s inhumanity to man makes countless thou- sands mourn ;” yes, and calls up in our memories the language of the illustrious ? Burton,who, when speaking of the overthrow of Poland in the American Senate, said: “ I feel like a youthful Volney setting upon the ruins of Palmyra weeping over the downfall of kingdoms, empires and repub- lies.” The eloquent references made in this hall to those great struggles for the rights of man will be read by coming generations, and fill them with the purest patriotism and love for liberty. and inspire them to deeds of daring in defense of the rights of man. Then the work that you gentlemen have been doing will yield a rich harvest in ages yet to come. Mr. DURBIN. When I consider that there is less complaint about the Bill] of Rights than any other part of the Constitu- tion, and that we have been in session nearly six weeks, and have now spent ten days discussing the Bill of Rights, and each day’s session costs the tax-payers of the State about seven hundred and fifty dollars all ‘told, and that we only have two or three speeches each day, making a cost of two or three hundred dollars for each speech, it makes me conclude that these aerial flights of oratory had better be saved for some other time, when they will be less expensive and not so wearisome to our con- stituents. When they try to find some necessary change we have made in this matter, and find nothing but spread-eagle and high-soaring oratory, I am inclined to believe they will be somewhat disappointed. It will seem that we have no desire except for the world to know that there are still a few orators in the grand old State of Ken-- tucky. I think if we would speak less and. work more, it would be more to the interest of those who sent us. The present Bill of Rights will do me very well by making a. few additions to and a little substraction from it. I hope that the speeches will now‘ be cut short, so that we may have the Billi of Rights completed by Christmas, anyhow.. Mr. FORRESTER. I acknowledge my indebtedness to those on both (and I may say all) sides of this question for the valu- able information that Iihave received from the various discussions; but I have become bewildered on one question, and that question is the main question. I am at a loss to know whether we are discussing whether we shall re-adopt the present Bill of Rights, the amendments, the report of the Commit- tee, or the substitute offered by the gentle- ‘man from Marion, or whether we are go- ing to adopt the Magna Charta or Fox’s Libel Act. Without any reference to the nations across the ocean as to their great- ness or their fall, I join in mourning their loss; but whilst we are weeping over the fall of Rome, why not draw our imagi-- nations from across the ocean and laugh and rejoice over the birth of Middlesbo- rough? I say this because we are not liv- ing for Rome, or for Greece, or for Great Britain. They are not paying our taxes“ They are not educating our children. They are not developing our comfort. The question that is before us is for us to adopt a Bill of Rights that will prove sufficient for the enjoyment of ourselves and our children and future gen- erations. the Committee, and whilst I am willing to concede to them all the approbation to which they are entitled (and that’ is much. for the report, I believe, as a whole, meets the demand and needs of the people of this I have examined the report of‘ BILL OF RIGHTS. 9 Thursday,] FORRESTER. [October 16. age, and will throw the proper security around our children and our children’s children) but, it seems to me, that there is one clause in that‘ able and valuable report that could be bettered by striking’ it out, and that is the only clause to which I shall now direct my attention, that is the nine- tcenth section of the report of the Com- mittee. It reads thus: “No person shall be attainted ‘of treason or felony by the General Assembly, and no attainder shall work corruption of blood, nor, except dur- ing the life of the offender, forfeiture of estate to the Commonwealth.” I have no- ticed the ingenuity of gentlemen that have read that, how easy it is for them to slide over that forfeiting claifse. It agreed that the Legislature is restrained from passing acts of attainder to any individual in this Commonwealth, but does the language or the spirit of that section prohibit them from passing general laws of attainder, or does it inhibit the Courts from rendering a judg- ment upon a verdict against a person who might be indicted and found guilty of crime in this Commonwealth‘? From the very language used, it would be reasonable to infer that for- feiture shall take place under certain cir- cumstances, and the old prohibition is that the Legislature shall not pass acts of at— tainder. Now then, suppose that the Courts may hereafter hold that when a verdict has been given and judgment rendered to con- fine a man in the penitentiary for twenty- one years or for life, what is to prevent the Court, unless there be a proper law prohib- iting him, from making part of the judg- ment forfeiture of estate to the Common- wealth during vhis life? Would not this be a hardship upon those that he leaves behind‘ him? Now, that we may see this in the proper light, let us forget that we are law- makers; let us rather imagine that we are executors of the law. We will go into the court-house in some portion of the State (say in the county of Franklin). A man is brought in under arrest, it may be, for kill- ing his neighbor and friend; justice de- mands a fair trial, and that the punishment of the law be inflicted upon him if guilty. It may be a case of great aggravation; it may be a case in which the jury has doubts as to whether he is guilty or not; but, un- der the law, may not be able to say that he was justified or excusable in the act. They then render a verdict to send him to the penitentiary for twenty—one years or for life, and he may have a little home in some part of the county, a little cottage, which will secure his family from the winter’s blast; but is it right, when most of his for- < tune had been spent in defending himself, to send the ministerial ofiicer there and drive out the wife and children from the house _and forfeit the property to the Commonwealth‘? How should we visit the widows and orphans in the Common- wealth of Kentucky‘? Shall we visit them as the great teacher of Israel told us to visit them, or shall we visit them in the language expressed in this Bill of Rights? It seems that we forget the spirit of our charitable institutions when we drive out the widow and orphan, when we should visit and comfort and shield them from the cold night winds which nothing answers but their cries. I wish now to examine the report of the Committee as to the rights of an accused in criminal cases, and compare it with the substitute offered by the gentleman from Marion. After recognizing the num- ber of rights, among which are to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to meet the witnesses face to face, and so on, they say that he is entitled to a fair trial by an impartial jury of the county. I am in favor of that clause. I am in favor of giving the accused that right. It then goes on and makes the proposition that if a jury cannot be found they can send to another county for a jury or a county sufiiciently near where such jury can be had. The substitute offered by the gentleman from Marion gives about the same in substance that the report of the 10 ’ BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] FORRESTER—HAN KS. [October 16 . Committee does, save that it says that he shall have a fair and impartial trial accord- of the land. It since ing to the law has been a grave the dispute arose between Coke and Eldon in reference to imprisoning their question officers, as to what has been and is now the law of the land. Our present Bill of Rights provide that a man is entitled to a fair trial by an impartial jury of the vicinage. In the face of that our Legisla— ture saw cause at the last session to pass an act giving the Commonwealth the right to remove an accused to whatever county the Court saw fit to remove him. If I mis- take not, it was one of the grievances set out in the Declaration of Independence that the King was taking advantage of his subjects by taking them tc other places to be tried. Why was this Commonwealth divided into counties if it was not for easily and conveniently enforcing the law? To some extent the people of every county are held responsible for an infringement of the law; but when we deprive them of that right, when we disfranchise the people of a county to sit upon the jury to try men who committed on outrage against the county as well as against the Common wealth, you say to them that they are not honest enough to try the man who commits crime in their county, and still you say they are responsible for not enforcing the law. I believe that justice would be better ad- ministered and that the people of a county have the right to sit upon juries and try men who violate the law in that county. I believe this, because some circumstances may arise that it would be necessary for the jury to see the topography of the country, the surroundings where the tragedy oc- curred; and again, it is not every man who is able to pay witnesses to go two or three hundred miles to testify. He does not know every time what the charges allowed by the Commonwealth will be, and he may have true witnesses to meet the evidence brought against him by the Com- monwealth; but it would be impossible for him to pay the expenses. I am unwilling to say that there is a county in the proud Commonwealth of Kentucky that has not a suflicient number of men who are honest enough to sit upon a jury and enforce the laws. I have more confidence in them. Then this removing of causes from one county to another is likely to get up hard feeling between counties. We send a man from one county to be tried and they convict him. It may be that the county we send him to will send a man to our county for trial. The friends of the man sent from our county upon the jury retaliate and convict their man, too. I believe that the report of the Committee presents fairly the law, and protects the rights of the criminal in cases like that. I believe a man is entitled to a trial by a jury of his county, if not'a trial in his county, where the people know his faults and know his good side, if he has one at all, and I was surprised at the gentleman from Lexington when he said that there are counties and districts in this State in which, if you try the accused, that the trial would be a mockery and a farce. I do not know of such a county in this Common,- wealth, but I do not profess to be acquaint- ed with Fayette county. It may be so there; but I am satisfied that in the counties with which I am acquainted it would not be a farce. A man may have a jury that is acquainted with him, they may be pri- vately his friends, but I think that they will not cona'der that when they come to sign the verdict, and will bring in such a one as the case demands. With the exception of the nineteenth section of the report of the Committee, I am prepared and anxious to vote for that report. - Mr. HANKS. It is a gloomy morning, and I ask the Chair and the Convention to pass my name. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the name of the gentleman from BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 Thursday,] . Anderson will be passed. The name of the Delegate from Simpson is next on the list. Mr. HARRIS. I had a‘few words to say on this report, but I have lost my report, or somebody has taken it, thereby violat- ing one of these provisions in depriv- ing me of my property without due process of law; I therefore ask that my name be passed until I can get it. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the name of the Delegate from Simpson will be passed. The name of the Delegate from Owsley is next. Mr. HOGG. I will ask to be passed for the present. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the name of the Delegate from Owsley will be passed. The next on the list is the name of the Delegate from Muh- ‘lenberg. Mr. JAMES. Ipass. (Laughter.) The CHAIRMAN. The Chair does not know what you mean. The next name on "the list is the Delegate from McLean. Mr. JONSON. I am astonished that the Chairman is not prepared to recognize the gentleman’s use of the technical phrase “ I pass.” I had been led to believe that that was a subject upon which every Dele- gate in this body was perfectly familiar. I do not believe that any Delegate owes this body an apology for occupying their time. In the first place, it is an inherent privilege residing in the bosom of every Kentuckian to make a public speech upon .any and all subjects, and, in the second place, it is his imperative duty to vindicate the rights of any person whom he is repre- senting anywhere, in the courts, in the Legislature or in this Convention. Stand- ing here as a representative and Delegate, ~one possessed with the authority to act for awhole county in common with all the people of this great Commonwealth, I .should be ashamed of myself for entertain- ing a thought that I was guilty of an in- trusion if any thing presented itself to me I thought proper to be said in this Conven- HARRIS—HOGG—JONSON. [October 16 . tion. I am glad of the privilege of having heard that splendid oration of the Delegate ‘from Warren in the opening of this discus- sion, and I will say that when it was closed I was ready to have voted upon this sub- ject and to have sustained by my voice the report of that Committee. I believe, how- ever, that argument ought to be heard, and in this case I am glad that I heard it, for hearing ‘ it my mind has under- gone some changes. I was especially under obligations to him for that beautiful array before our mental vision of the grand characters which met on that June morning in 1815, and when the Dele- gate from Shelby rose and said that he had “ an earnest desire to visit that spot and stand in that little meadow, and referred to the fact that if he were there he believed he would have almost the same veneration for it that he would standing before that Tree whereon the Son of Mary and of God died for our sins, I came very near committing a breach of the etiquette of this Convention and clapping my hands as they do at a Methodist Love Feast and shouting “Amen.” I would like to stand in that meadow this morning, or any morning. The inspiration found in that Delegate’s great speech lingers with me now, and this morning I am ready to thank him for that masterly array that he made before us. I am ready to thank him for the view that he gave us of the base of our temple of liberty when he laid bare strata after strata of its inner principles of fact and justice, and I am glad to say that I believe they will abide with me in more permanent form from hearing his oration than they other- wise would. I am glad to say that his ora- tion has implanted in my mind a more earnest desire to see these principles perpetuated and again put into any thing that we may do upon this floor. I would not stand here a self-constituted critic or censor, criticising any Delegate who has spoken or may speak; but according to every Delegate equal privi— 12 ' BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘straightforward, good English. Thursday,] J ONSON. [October 16 .. leges with those enjoyed by myself, I would say to him God speed in any line of progress or argument of discussion that seems to him fit. But I must be allowed to depreciate that idea that seems to be first in the imagination of some of the Delegates upon this floor, that all the practical sense in this body is concen- trated in a half dozen people. I must de' preciate that spirit that accuses a great body of Delegates here with an object foreign to any thing entertained by any one in this House to do other than right for the great body of the people. Who are the people of this grand Commonwealth‘? Are you one of the people? I say, standing in my place upon this floor and representing acounty, that I am as much a part of the people as . any individual or any class of people in. this Commonwealth, and have the same right to protection in my person, property and limb as any of the greatest; or, if you please, the smallest. I regret that this idea has crept into this Constitutional Conven- tion. I regret that it has found expression anywhere, and I hope that we shall have done withit. While Ihave been entertained by the eloquence of the Delegates preceding me, sometimes reminding me of the un- corking of a bottle of effervescent wine. dis— pensing its beautiful aroma through the whole body, and at other times bearing us along by its powerful and rugged force in a channel which we had not before gone; I must be allowed to say that there are some things said by the Committee with which I cannot agree. We have been told by gentlemen eminent in the profes- sion of law that this Convention is not capa— ble of putting in plain common sense Eng- lish any idea in such form as that will not raise discussion. Invoking the examples of the great masters of English who have written a hundred years ago, I say that many of them wrote intelligent, plain, Addison, Steele, Bolingbroke, and a host of others were capable of sending down to us in beautiful, rounded, pleasing style their thoughts that have elevated us all. And in our own country we have Washington Irv- ing, Emerson and Oliver Wendell Holmes, and thousands of others, who have been. capable of expressing themselves intelli- gently before us. We have had great law-a yers like Daniel Webster, and great states— men like Clay, Calhoun and others, who in my humble opinion, can pen a sentence of good English; so I must be allowed to dissent from that opinion. I heard it stated here by Delegates, eminent for ability and learn- ing, who have sustained their 1 rinciples by quotations from the decision of courts of last resort, that the very object and inten- tion actuating the hundred Delegates upon this floor forty years ago, was defeated when they penned the first section of their Bill of Rights, and said that no exclusive privileges should be granted to any man or set of men except in consideration of pub- lic services. That under that provision the Legislature has granted away the rights of the people, and imposed burdens upon them which but for that provision would have been impossible to have been done. Can this be true‘? Can what is evidently an inhi- bition of the exercise of power by our Leg- islature be invoked as something that has permitted these invasions of the right? I think not. I believe that it cannot be justly said that this is the prolific mother of the brood so graphically arrayed before us as damaging to our rights and liberties. It seems to me that has acted as a hedge, a row drawn around for the protection and preservation of our rights. It may be that some points have been broken through, and that here and there are invasions into the great field of our liberties and rights notwithstanding the hedge. If that is so, is it a reason why we shall tear it down and open the whole field, and leave it passable everywhere and always for these invasions to come? Convince me of the fact that this positton is true, and that this section has been the prolific mother of abuse, and then I will say with you, take BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 , .general liberties. ' I could do it otherwise. ‘Thursday,] J ONSON, [October 16 . away this hedgerow; but when you do, I will demand that you furnish a triple w al ‘of steel to inclose the vineyard of our I believe that that sec- tion has not been mischievous. I believe ‘that it has prevented mischief. But i1 ‘you leave it out of the Preamble and Bill of Rights, can we supply its place by striking down this class legislation by inserting in this Constitution some- where else a provision inhibiting all class legislation forever? If so, then I would say ‘take it from this place, but let us exer-_ cise the more emphatic, more prohibitory sense in :some other section of the Constitution. I have heard it ably presented by the Dele- gate from Henry that this ought to be left out. If he will insert it in some other 'place I would vote for it. I do not think We have heard gentlemen advocating the retention upon power in a more distinct, ‘our walls of this old picture and heir- loom, with its grouping untouched, with all -of the wrinkles of time left upon it; and while the Delegate from Oldham was so 1beautifully picturing his preference in the _matter I was ready to say, like Oliver v~Cromwell when the painter asked him if he should paint the wrinkles in his cheeks, answered to paint them, and that we ought to let it stay there untouched. But when I heard the Delegate from Todd on yester- day draw that beautiful- picture of his bet- ter half, and in such chaste and eloquent language refer to the fact that he was willing when the golden wedding came that the old lady should be a little more adorned, I extended the right hand of fel- lowship and said Amen. Then other gen- 'tlemen have said that the old picture ought to be allowed to hang upon the wall as it is; that it ought to be retouched; that it ought to have more vivid coloring, that you ought to paint into it the action of the present. If that can be done I I do not object. We have heard gentlemen upon this floor say that they would not' advocate the the mountains in covered wagons as their an- cestors did in coming into this State, but passing over would pass through the granite ramparts perforated by the machinery of present progress, sleeping in a palace car. We have heard gentlemen say that they would not discard the magnificent machines we have for harvesting. I have heard gentle- men say that they would not want to re- turn to the old stage-coach which ran from Christian county to Danville. Neither would I do that. I am glad of the privi- leges we have. I am glad that we can go to our neighboring cities of Louisville and " Lexington and mount an electric car and be transported without torturing the beasts of burden. I am glad for the privilege of get- ting in a palace car and resting at ease while going rapidly in any direction. I am willing to accept that. I am willing to accept all that has been shown to be good; but if the gentlemen who are building the air-ship which they expect to traverse the blue ether above with the rapidity -of three or four hundred miles an hour, ask me to step in as one of the trialitrip passengers, I shall ask to be excused. Before I am will- ing to leave this terrafirma and launch out into the great unknown above us, I want to know that the steering apparatus is all right; and then I want to know that when I come down I will not, like the Irishman, be damaged in lighting. I want to be safe before I take a step. Convince me ' that I am safe, and then I will take it. We know what our present Bill means. The courts have told us. Why change un- less gentlemen bring us something better. Have they proposed to do it‘? I think not; and I say when they ask us to make a change, the burden lies upon the person proposing the change to show it is advisa- ble, and not upon us to show that it is not. We are not to show that the old is equal to or better than the new, but it lies with the gentlemen making the propo- sition to show that the new is better than _14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] J ONSON. [October 16 the old before they can ask us to accept that. Now have they done it‘? There is one proposition that I do not readily assent to. I believe, though, that it is in the sub- stitute. It is to the effect that criminals in- dicted are to be tried by a jury after being confronted with the witnesses, after having due compulsory process for the at- tendance of his own witnesses. I was afraid that it might be possible under that provision for a man to be removed from the county; but, looking at the bottom, I find that it says he shall be entitled to a trial by a jury in accordance with the law of the land. I come to investigate that subject, and I find in this Constitution of the United States that “all laws and treaties enacted by Congress shall be the supreme law of the land.” I find in that grand document, I believe in about the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to it, that ‘, every citizen indicted shall be entitled to a speedy trial; that he shall be tried in the district where the offense was committed, and that that district shall have been prescribed by law before the penalty accrues.” Then Ibe- lieve, with that qualification, there is no ob- jection to the proposition. Then I hear gentlemen advocating the idea of sustaining our recent legislative action authorizing a change of venue from one county to another in these cases. That proposition in my mind is clearly in contra- vention of the Constitution of the United States. I cannot agree with my friend, the Delegate from Boyd. The proposition ad- vocated by him to define more clearly what “being put in jeopardy” means, it seems so me, is governed by the Constitu- tion of the United States. That is in the Constitution of the United States, that no citizen shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. The Courts have con- strued what that means. They have con- strued it under that section of the Constitu- tion of .the United States, State Courts, United States Courts, all; and I contend that the construction of the Courts explains to us what that means; and if we do some- thing here, or attempt to do something herein this Constitution, or in any other- way, in the State of Kentucky, contraven- ing any of those constructions by a Court of last resort having authority to say what it means, our action will be nugatory. I canfiot concur with him and other gen- tlemen upon this floor that there are too many safeguards thrown around the people, of whom I am one, for their pro-- tection in this Commonwealth when charged with crime. It has been my fortune many a time to stand upon the- fioor of a court room between the life and liberty of an individual charged with crime, and twelve peers as his‘ jury. I have felt the mighty power of the strong arm of the Commonwealth bearing down upon an humble citizen. I have seen the advantages, the great overmastering advantages, possessed by the Common- wealth and the Commonwealth’s Attorney, selected for his eminent ability, and I am not willing to see a single solitary wrapping taken away from the shield that preserves- him and his family. I cannot concur with my friend to my left, who this morning: made such an earnest appeal in behalf of the same idea. It may be that occasionally some rich man’s son has been shielded from justice under this provision of the law; but. I would not take away what would shield the poor. I can easily picture to my mind a poor man standing indicted without- friends, without money, without sympathy’ save it may be in his own little obscure home. I would not strike from him one single pro- tection that is enjoyed by him now. I‘ There is a provision in the present Con- stitution of this State, I believe the nine- teenth section of our Bill of Rights, which is copied into the report of the I ‘ommittee under the seventeenth section, which pro- vides that the person of a debtor shall not be confined in prison for debt except in case of fraud. I have introduced an amendment proposing to strike that section out of the BILL or RIGHTS. 15 Thursday,] J ONSON. [October 1 6 . Committee’s report. I believe that it ought to be done. I have taken the trouble to investigate this subject, so far as I have had the power to do so, to ascertain whether this same provision is in the Constitutions of other States in this Union, and I find that North Carolina, in 1776, provided that a person imprisoned for debt shall not be con- tinued in prison, after delivery of all of his estate, where there is not strong probabilities of fraud. We see there, that notwithstand- ing a man may have been imprisoned and surrendered all his goods, yet if, in the mind of the court, or some other ofiicer, there is strong probability of fraud, he may still be kept in prison. That provision is substan- tially continued down in that State in the Constitutions framed from that time up to 1876, and it is still in that Constitution, that in cases of fraud he shall yet be kept in prison. That provision is ‘in Ohio, enacted as a law as late as 1851. It is in Pennsyl- vania, enacted in 1776, in 1790, in 1838, and in 1873. It isin South‘Carolina as late as 1868. It is in Vermont; but not except where the contract under which he is im- prisoned is tinctured with fraud. I am glad to say that in Texas, as far back as 1845, no imprisonment for debt was allowed. They, in 1860, made a new Constitution- and incorporated this same provision in it. In 1868 they made another Constitution,and incorporated the same provision in it. In 1876 they made a new Constitution, and incorporated the same proviston in it. So in this great State, an Empire With- in itself, formed out of territory cap, tured, you may say, from a sister repub- lic, we find the entering wedge to a more enlightened system as far back as 1845. In their first appearance in this con— stellation of States they said that imprison_ ment for debt shall be abolished. It ha been tried there and worked well. You, gentlemen, will easily remember many in- stances of where opprobrium has been cast upon Texas for being an asylum for rene- gades, malefactors, for murderers, for swin- p dlers. In some sense it maybe true that bad men have fled to that State, and I be- lieve that many of them have done so be- cause of her great extent and vast expanse she offers as an asylum by solitude from ar- rest; but, ' notwithstanding all that, and notwithstanding that she has a population perhaps mixed up more from foreign places than any other State in the United States, they have made the experiment, and found that it worked well through all these years. Georgia enacted in 1868 that no impris- onment for debt shall be had. Mississippi has come to the front, and has enacted such a clause, and Maryland has done likewise. In none _of these States has it been found to work evil. What has been the workings of it in Kentucky? Under this provision in our State, what is the result? In our Gen- eral Statutes it is provided that for a tres- pass ml at armis against the person or prop- erty for slander, and for false prosecution, a writ may issue authorizing the im- prisonment of a citizen for debt on a judgment rendered in any of these ac- tions. What is the result of it? In any other State that man may go to jail and stay there ten days, having given notice that he would file a schedule of his proper- ty and surrender it, saving to himself that exempted by law, and then he goes out a free man. What is the operation of it? Is it not a discrimination against the poor man who is guilty of an offense against his neighbor by slander? Is it not a dis- crimination against a poor man for a tres- pass v-i et a/rmis against the person or prop- erty‘? Is it not a discrimination against a poor man for a false or criminal prosecu- tion? I say it is. The rich man, having been guilty of these same offenses, may go into his pocket, when a jury has found him guilty and mulcted him in a fine, and relieve him- self of the opprobrium of going to jail by coming down with the ready cash; but if his neighbor upon the other side of the street, less fortunate in the things of ma~ 16 _ BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] J ONsON—KENNEDY-MACKOY. [October 16. terial wealth, shall unfortunately in the heat of passion have been guilty of this same invasion of the rights by a trespass oi et tenants, or actuated, it maybe, by some indis- cretion, have published something that is untrue of his neighbor and damaged him in his good fame; or, it may be, believing that he had the right to cause this man’s arrest, and it turned out he had no cause, and a jury finds him guilty and imposes the punishment of a fine upon him, under the verdict of the jury he must go and stay in the jail ten days. I, standing here an advocate for equal rights to all and exclu- sive privileges to none, say-it ought to be now and forever stricken from the Consti- tution of the United States. A few evenings since I had the honor of strolling up to our State cemetery, just east of this city,'in company with the Chairman of the Committee who made this report. In viewing there the beautiful monument, that grand record to the memory of our slain dead, standing upon the beautiful em- inence in that burial ground, I came across, lying to the south of that magnificent struc- ture, another, erected specially by the State of Kentucky to the memory of an eminent citizen who was at one time Vice-President of the United States, a citizen who was eminent in his services to the State, both in the field, the Forum, and the Legislative halls, and I found inscribed upon the base, around on the west side of that great monu- I ment, a proud boast of his, that one of the proudest acts of his life was the fact that he was author of the law striking down imprisonment for debt in the State of Ken- tucky and in the United States. He is to be congratulated in that he did what he did; but we have this relic of the old bar— barous system left to us to-day. I want it out. I want his act to be made complete. I want the citizens of Kentucky, henceforth and forever, to be lifted above all such im- prisonment. I would ask gentlemen, if they have not done it, to go and read that splendid pro- duction of the English novelist, “Little Dorrit.” I would ask them to go through the pathetic scenes that he portrays, and look at that old father, in his maudlin mad- ness, look at the devotion of that loving daughter, and then say whether or not he was right; whether this satire should not have struck it down from the whole face of the civilized globe? I believe if they will do so, they will come here asserting their man- hoogd and intelligence, and strike it out now and forever; and if I can be the humble, instrument in effecting that, I shall have accomplished as much as I expected before this Convention. (Applause) The CHAIRMAN. The next speaker is the Delegate from Nicholas. Mr. KENNEDY. I simply desire to re- serve the right to speak, if I should see proper to do so, after the other gentlemen have spoken; but’ the ground has already been covered, in my opinion, and I have nothing to say now. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the Delegate’s name will be passed. The next speaker upon the list is the. Dele- gate from Covington. Mr. 'MACKOY. Edward Everett Hale, in one of his charming tales, tells the story of an overworked clergyman, who. because of his round of social and public duties, did not find the time he desired for the more congenial pursuits of his study. By good fortune, he found, in a county infirmary, a person who was his exact likeness, and the happy idea seized him that he would take him home with him, array him in his best suit of clothes, and send him out, when the occasion required, to do his duties in public; and, in order to fit him for occasions of that kind, he taught him a certain number of set phrases, and one of them, which was specially to be used on public occasions, was: “There has been so much said, and, upon the whole, so well said, that I feel I can add nothing more.” The popularity of the clergyman was greatly increased, and the people who had formerly wearied of hi BILL OF RIGHTS. 17 Thursday,] MACKOY. [October 16 . long discourses were delighted that he had become so brief. I shall not, in its full ex- tent, imitate the example of the clergy- man’s double, although the distinguished Delegate from Christian, at the conclusion of his speech of an hour and a half yester- day, indicated his desire that, now that the debate was pretty well over, he hoped the other Delegates would make short speeches, that we might get to more im- portant portions of the Constitution in a short time. (Laughten) I desire, however, to call the attention of the Convention to two or three sections. The entire report of the Committee has been so thoroughly considered that I do not de- sire to consume the time of the Convention in going over sections that have been dis- cussed by other gentlemen but there is one section here to which I especially wish to call the attention of the Convention. It has ‘been alluded to by two or three gentlemen who have spoken ; but as I am familiar with the circumstances which probably gave rise to it, I feel that it is proper that I should call the attention of the Convention to that clause. It occurs in section 12 of the report of the Committee. That entire section reads, as follows: “No person shall, for the same offense, be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of himself or his representatives. and without just compensation being pre- viously made to him in money, or paid into court subject to the order of the owner thereof. And no special tax against the owner of such property shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the property so taken; nor shall any person be deprived of his property without due pro- cess of law.” The clause of which I shall speak reads, as follows: “And no special tax against the owner of such property shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the:property so taken.” A5 one or two Delegates have remarked, that clause had its origin in a litigation in the city of Covington. The city of Cov- ington is very irregularly laid out; in fact, I have been told by a surveyor of a Fire Insurance Company, charged with the duty of making plats for the use of his company, which does business all over the United States, that there are only two cities more irregularly laid out than the city of Cov- ington, namely, the cities of Boston and Galveston. The original city, which was first laid out, was regular; but before the outlying portions were taken into the city, each person owning _a tract of property in the suburbs made a subdivision to suit him- self, and made the streets and alleys to run as he thought proper and of the width that he thought proper, and the result has been that when you get outside of the old city of Covington you get into a portion that is in every respect irregular. There are in many cases closed streets which run one or two squares and then stop. There are a number of instances in which there is a street for half a square or square, and then it is continued as an alley. In the year 1876 the members of the Council then in charge of municipal affairs in the city of Covington, desirous of rectifying as far as possible that irregularity, procured an amendment to the charter of the city of Covington, which was substantially taken from the law in force then and now in the State of Ohio. It is provid- ed in’ the charter of Covington by that amendment, enacted, I think, about the year 1876, and still in force, that when- ever the Council of the city may deem it necessary to condemn or purchase ground to open a new street, if the ground taken for that purpose be one square in length, or 400 feet, then the Council may, if it so de- sire, condemn or purchase the property at the expense of the abutting land-owners. That provision of the city charter was never exercised until recently, and within the last two years, when the Council deemed it ad- advisable to exercise it in one particular 18 BILL or RIGHTS. Thursday,] MACKOY. [October 16 . case, and only one. There is a long square running from Madison to Russell, about 800 feet, between Third and Fourth streets. In that square, between Third and Fourth streets, there is a street running parallel with them about half-way the square and then stopping, so that the property running back from Fourth street had no outlet in its rear. If a person wanted a stable upon the rear of his lot he could not get access to it by an alley or street. The lots were about 200 feet deep, and if he wanted to improve‘ the rear portion of his lot in any way by putting cottages upon it, or in any manner to make it profitable, it was impossible to do so. There was another consideration that ap- pealed to the Council. The grade of the ground from Fourth street back to where this street or alley should have been de- scended, so that the surface water flowed from Fourth street backward. There was no alley to carry it off, no space where a sewer could be built, nor could there be any surface draining, and there was danger that the water would accumulate in that vicinity and make a nuisance. At the same time, the Council felt (and I am the responsible person; I was the mover in the whole con- cern, because I happened to own a strip of property fronting on Fourth street, and running back to where this alley should have been), and I felt, it would be beneficial to my property and the abutting property to have a street there. I felt it would be pg- culiarly beneficial to the property-own- ers rather than to the general public. I did not believe that the ‘general public would be benefited particularly by the opening of that street, but I did feel that the abutting property-owners would be, and I went before the Council and asked that it might be opened at the expense of the abuttihg "property-owners, and assured them that, under the provisions of the city charter, the city could not be made to pay the expense of the purchase of that ground out of the general fund of the city devoted to other purposes. The property was con- demned, the street was opened; the property- owners were paid the value of their prop- erty, and afterwards, as another and distinct‘ proceeding, there was an assessment made upon the abutting property to pay for the property taken for the opening of that street, and in several instances the amount the property-owners had to pay was more than the property came to, be- cause it was the tail end of the property, which, without this street, was worth noth- ing at all. In my case, I know I paid $20 more than the value of the property as as- sessed by the jury; but I would gladly have paid several times the $20 in order to have the outlet. The case came to the Court of Appeals. Some of the property-owners, three or four of them, resisted it when they found they were going to be assessed. The Court of Appeals held it was right and proper under that provision of the city_ charter; that the tax or assessment was not a taking of property for public use, but that, under the charter of the City of Covington, it could be enforced against every person having property situated under similar cir~ cumstances, wherever there was a street to be condemned in the City of Covington. In other words, persons owning abutting property on streets that might be opened by condemnation, could be compelled to pay in like manner as the persons owning ground on this particular street, and, there- fore, as the law was uniform in its opera- tions upon all persons similarly situated, it was constitutional, and the Court of Ap~ peals sustained it. Now, it seems to me that there was some hardship in that particular case, but I ask this Convention if it was a case of that character in which a Convention, sitting for the purpose of making a new Constitution, should be required to put a Constitutional provision inhibiting matters of that kind in the future? If that amendment to the charter of the city of Covington worked harshly, the remedy was BILL OF RIGHTS. 19 Thursday,] MACKOY. [October 16 . to go to he Legislature, and not come to this Convention; and you cannot apply this ‘rule, as the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights seem to think, justly or with any uniformity. In the particular case which gave rise to this amendment, it so happened that the persons whose property was condemned were the persons who were afterwards assessed ; and if that case should arise again, then this Constitutional pro- vision would inhibit an assessment for the purpose of paying for ground condemned for street purposes; but it would not apply to a case where the person owning property condemned was not the owner of property against which the assessment was made. Under that provision of the charter of Cov- ington, notwithstanding this Constitutional provision recommended by the Committee, if A owned a strip of ground situated be- tween the property of B and C, and it was deemed proper by the Council of Covington to take the property of A in order that a street might be opened between the property of B ahd C, they could condemn the property of A and assess the cost of it against B and C; but if the property condemned was the property of B and C, the persons owning abutting property on each side, you could not assess the cost of the property so condemned against B and C because they happened to be the owners both of the abutting prop- erty and of the intervening property con- demned. It is that kind of class legisla- tion which would result if the clause re- ported by the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights should be adopted as a part of the section I have read. The remedy, as I have said, is purely legislative. The rights of property-owners are sufliciently guarded when you say that their property shall not be taken for public use without payment. Then when you come to the question of assessment, that is another and a different matter. It has no relation at all to the question of the condemnation of property for the public use; but it stands, upon a different footing, and it is a question that appeals purely to the Legislature as a question of taxation, or the amount or rate of taxation. If the rule is a harsh one, it is competent for the Legislature at any time to modify it. So, take the case cited by the Delegate from Fayette in his argument. It intro- duces two classes. Property in a part of a county may be condemned for railroad pur- poses, or for some other public purpose, and the tax may be assessed against the whole county to pay for it; yet under theprovisions of that clause, if it should become a part of the Constitution of the State of Kentucky, you would immediately have two classes in the community—one which could be taxed to raise the money to pay for this property, and another which could not be taxed be- cause the property so taken by condemna- tion proceedings belonged to them. It is right that the property should be paid for when condemned; but when you come to consider the question as to who must pay the tax, you must look and see who are the persons benefited by it. Taxation proceeds upon the idea that there is a benefit to the community from the tax. If there is no benefit whatever, the tax would be unjust, and the more nearly you can impose the tax upon the person who is benefited, rather than the person who is not benefited, the more nearly do you approach a correct method of taxation. It is impossible always to graduate a tax so that only those benefited by it may pay the tax; but, wherever it is possible to arrive at a rule of that kind, as for the first making of a street, where the property is peculiarly benefited and en- hanced in value, as it is an assessment that in time will fall probably upon every per- son owning property in that city, as street after street is made, it is a just and equita- ble mode of taxation. So with reference to the condemnation of property for streets, as was held by the Court of Appeals, the property-owners 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] MACKOY. [October 16. abutting on the property condemned for street purposes will pay that tax to-day. To-morrow some other property owners, similarly situated, will be compelled to bear the burden for opening up a street in their vicinity. If the cost should happen to be so great, or if the use of the street is of such character as that the abutting property would not'_be particularly benefited by it, then it would be for the Legislature to determine how much of that tax should be borne by the abutting property-owner, and how much should be borne by the general public on account of the benefits to accrue to the general public. But under the clause reported by the Committee on Pre— amble and Bill of Rights the Legislature would be completely hampered, and could do nothing whatever to prevent the injus- tice that would arise under that clause. It seems to me, therefore, that the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights did not consider that question maturely in endeav- oring to lay down the rule that they have inadvertently inserted, a rule that in its ac- tual operation‘ would work a great hard— ship. Leaving that, however, I come to another section. It is section 18: “No ea: postfacto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, nor alaw making any irrevoca- cable grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities, shall be passed by the Gen- eral Assembly.” If I understand that last clause, which is the new one, “that no law shall be passed making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities by the General Assembly,” it would give the Legislature at any time the right to repeal any charter that had been granted by it without reference to vested rights or vested privileges of any kind. A, B and C might associate together, obtain a charter, invest their money upon the faith of the charter obtained under the law of the State of Kentucky, and make a public im- provement which would be of great value to the community and to the State, an ipn- provement that would enhance the value of the land and the taxable value of all the property in the vicinity, and yet it would be perfectly practicable, after they had accomplished all of that, after they had benefited the community for a rival, or for the community itself, I don’t care which, to go to a succeeding Legislature after this capital had been invested and ask that the Legislature absolutely repeal that franchise or that charter. It might do it by a general law, if we adopt the system of legislating by general law, as I trust we shall; and there would be men—if men hereafter will be fools enough to invest money in corporate enter- prises in the State of Kentucky—~who would lose altogether the capital which they had put in enterprises of that kind. There is no one in this Convention who will support more warmly the proposition that neither the State, nor a county, nor a city, nor any taxing district, shall lend its credit, or make contributions of any kind whatever, to any railroad or corporation of that character. I believe that private en‘ terprise should be left as free as possible, whether it is the enterprise of an individ- ual, or whether it is the enterprise of an aggregation of individuals acting together as a body-corporate. When A, B and C have associated themselves together as a corporation, they should be regulated as the individual is regulated; they should be pro- hibited from doing those things which would be injurious and hurtful to the com- munity; yet, when they have actually in- vested their money, no greater restrictions should be thrown upon them than is thrown upon the individual; and if you attempt to do that in the State of Kentucky, you will find that corporate enterprises will not seek the State of Kentucky. Regulate cor- porations, provide all restrictions that will prevent them from in any way abusing the privileges which may be conferred upon them by legislation, but do not say that when a [ man has invested his money in an enterprise BILL or ‘RIGHTS. ‘ 21 ' Thursday,] MACKOY. [October 16. beneficial to the community, that some one else, stirred by a spirit of envy or by malice, may come to the Legislature of Kentucky and ask the Legislature of Kentucky to re- voke those privileges upon the faith of which capital hasbeen invested in the State of Kentucky. It holds out an inducement to the Legislature of Kentucky, if it is composed of corrupt men, to inaugurate a system of blackmail the like of which has never been seen. Let your Legislative body, or a majority of it, I say, be com- posed of corrupt men, and they can threaten to pass laws of that kind attacking corpo- rate institutions in the State of Kentucky, and there would be a lobby, and an im- mense accumulation of money here in the Capital of Kentucky, for the purpose of preventing legislation of that kind. I take it that it is one of the chief objects for‘ which this Convention has been assembled, ' not only to keep our legislative bodies pure, but to prevent temptations from even assailing them, if possible. We desire to remove from the Legislature the power of special and local legislation, to provide that all charters shall be obtained by general law, which is wise and good, because no men should come here and get corporate privileges, and then stand in the way of other persons who are seeking to obtain the same; but when they have got privileges that are fair and prudently guarded, obtained under a general law applying alike to all per- sons seeking the same privileges, I say it is wrong and unjust, and that it will work in- jury to the State of Kentucky beyond that which we can measure, if you permit the Legislature, afterwards, to go to work deliberately and repeal, or even threaten to repeal, year after year, privileges of this kind. Do not mistake my position. I want corporations regulated. I want the State to exercise a visitatorial power over them, but I do not want it to do any thing to corporations that it would not do to the individual, because there is no reason in it; here is no reason why, because a few men have associated themselves, have put their money together and have thereby been en- abled to accomplish more for the State and for the community, and its development and improvement than the individual could alone, that, therefore, you should visit them with unjust discrimination. I come again to another section, which is section 27. “No perpetuities of estate shall be allowed except for charitable pur- poses, and the General Assembly shall pass all proper laws in regard to the same.” In Kentucky, at the present time, as I under- stand it, there are no perpetuities allowed. An estate may be limited under the statute ‘for a life or lives in being and twenty—one ‘years and ten months thereafter, the longest period of gestation; but under this sec- tion it is possible to build up perpetui- ties. They are not prohibited, if they be for charitable purposes, and who is to determine what is a charitable purpose or foundation? Every lawyer in this body knows the evils that grew up in ‘England, owing to the alienation of prop- erty in mortmain. We know how the ecclesiastical bodies there absorbed a large proportion of landed property in the coun- try. We know that property was with- drawn from service to the State; that the persons holding it no longer rendered the feudal services which they were required to render; that not only the immediate lord, the paramount lord, but the king himself, suffered by the alienation of so much into dead hands, and we know the legislation that was enacted year after year, reign after reign, in order to defeat this alienation in mortmain, and we know as a part of the history of those times the ingenuity of the ecclesiastics in evading the operation of those laws. We know' how, when they could no longer alienate absolutely, leases were made and recoverie’s were‘ obtained afterwards, and the leases defeated, and the property absolutely recovered. We know the doctrine of Uses and Trusts was originated by the ecclesiastics for the 22 . BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] MACKOY. [October 16 . purpose of preserving this property in mortmain, and it took two or three hun- dred years of legislation in order to break up that system which had fastened its hold upon the English. law. As Lord Coke said, the ecclesiastics had the most~ eminent counsel. They were like the cor- porations of to-day. They had the most eminent lawyers money could employ, ‘ and they used those lawyers to devise all sorts of expedients by which they might defeat the operation of just laws, which were aimed to subject‘ their property to the burden which other property in the king- dom bore; and we know when they could no longer convey money to superstitious uses, they endeavored to put it into charita— ble uses, a thing this Committee would have us do. Might not that be a charitable use which would educate one young man‘? And might not, under that guise, a corporation fasten itself upon the soil of the State of Kentucky, and preserve inalienable a large part of its property; and with its wealth ' and its property, would not influence come to it? And would not other abuses grow out of it? And yet this Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, who, with one hand, would strike down corporations that are seeking to benefit Kentucky, who would prevent any man from investing his money in a Kentucky corporation, the charter of which ‘could be absolutely repealed, even after the work had been commenced and the money ex- pended; this same Committee, in the same report striking down corporations, come in and seek to build up perpetuities upon eh ari- table foundations. The inconsistency, to my mind, is ' wonderful; and I certainly can not vote for the report, or for sections of the report, Which would be fraught with such serious consequences to the State of Kentucky; But there is another defect in the Bill of. Rights to my mind, and it applies to the whole of it: that is the change in arrange- ' ment, not only the change in phraseology, but the change in arrangement. That Committee was composed of eminent law- yers. There is no better lawyer in this Convention than the distinguished Dele gate who is the Chairmarr of that Commit- tee, and there is no one who knows better that fundamental rule of the legal profession, that where there are two courses, either of which would accomplish the same result, to pursue that which has been well settled and well determined, and in regard to which there can be no doubt. The wise counsellor never takes a short cut in advis- ing'his client, or in trying a case, unless he is certain to what point it will lead ; but he will take the longer course if he knows it to be the safe course; and yet this Commit- tee, having before it a Bill of Rights that had been adjudicated and construed for a ' hundred years, deliberately, with a view of improving its language, have changed the phraseology; and not only that, but they have changed the logical connection of parts of sections with other parts of sec- tions. I need not refer to them, because they have been referred to by the Delegate from Fayette; but they have deliberately taken out from their natural and logical connection parts of sections and put them in other connection. They have changed the number of every single one of the sec- tions of the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights has been construed by the Court of Appeals for forty years now with refer- ence to the present numbering of its sections; so that a lawyer, when sec- tion 12 or section 13 or section 15 of the Bill of Rights is spoken of, knows what that means, and knows what section is re- ferred to by its number. And yet it will be impossible now, without taking this new Bill of Rights reported,and then taking up the old one and comparing them, to tell what of the old is preserved in the new; and then there were .three portions that I could not find anywhere at all. I was like the Delegate from Fayette, who asked, Where did the Committee on Preamble and BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 23 Thursday,] MACKOY. [October 16 . Bill of Rights get these: “the right of en- joying and defending their rights and lib- erties ;” “ the right of seeking and pursuing their safety and happiness;” “the right of acquiring and protecting property?” The sentiment and substance is in the old Bill of Rights, but the language is not there. I looked all through the Bill of Rights, as the Delegate from‘ Fayette did, in the vain hope that I could find somewhere that lan- guage, or something analogous to it; but, like him, I gave up the pursuit as a fruit- less one, when, by accident, I borrowed from the gentleman sitting in front of me a copy of the Constitution of California for the purpose of examination, and I turned to ' the Bill of Rights of California, and found the same clauses in it somewhat better ex- pressed. They are taken from the Consti- tution of California. It was necessary then for this Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights to cross the Rocky Mountains and go to the State of California in order to prepare a Bill of Rights for the State of Kentucky. Surely, are we so dead to the true principles of liberty—are we so ignorant of that for which our forefathers fought, that it was necessary that a Committee of this body should go to the State oi California to find something to insert in the Preamble and Bill of Rights‘? Go there, if you please, for any thing else; go there for any other section or portion of the Constitution, but when you come to these fundamental principles, which underlie government, I say go to the old Bill of Rights, and stay by that old Bill of Rights, and do not change it even to the dotting of an “i” or the, crossing of a “t.” I believe some gentle- man, I do not know who it was, because I was not here when the speech was made-— but I am told some one criticised the lan- guage and the grammar of the Bill of Rights. It reminds me of what Artemus Ward said of Chaucer. He said: “Chaucer might be a very good poet, but he was an wful poor speller.” There was a Convention not long ago within the memory of most of those here, which sat in the State of Ohio, for the pur- pose of making a new Constitution for that State. It was inthe year 1873 that it met, in the month of May, and it sat for a year and a day. It was composed of some of the most eminent men and distinguished law- yers in the State of Ohio. The President of that Convention was called from the high duty he was performing to the Bench of the Supreme Court of the United States, and there were other lawyers in that body who were equally distinguished in the legal profession. The crying evil in Ohio at that time was its system of courts, and ‘its mode of trying cases. There was so much delay that it amounted to a denial of justice, and there were high hopes in the State of Ohio as to what would be the result of the delib- erations of that Convention. What did that Convention do? They perpetrated the same folly that the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights have undertaken to do in this case, after they made the changes they deemed necessary. They at- tempted to revise the phraseology and set— ting of the instrument. At once an outcry arose in the State of Ohio. It was urged not only that it would be more expensive to the State, but that the individual himself would suffer; that every individual Whose right might be put in jeopardy, who might be compelled to invoke the aid of Courts to protect his rights, would be compelled to have construed anew the sections in the Constitution which had been clad in their new dress; and what was the result? That Convention—the beautiful Constitu- tion which they had made, with its finely wrought phrases, made by eminent lawyers, who had deemed that they would live for ages in the memory of the people of Ohio as the makers of the fundamental law of that State—all went down before the good, hard, common sense of the yeomanry of the State; and so will be the fate of the Constitution made by this Convention if, 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] without changing the meaning of the sub- stance of any part of this Constitution, it attempts to change the phraseology. The Delegate from McCracken the other day very pertinently remarked that, to his mind, the Bill of Rights was the glossary of the remainder of the Constitution, de- fining its terms. To my mind it is more than that. It is the old boundary line set long'ago, circumscribing and defining the limitations of the power of Government and its three great departments. The cor- nor-stones and monuments were placed. They are still in good position; and yet, without good reason, it is now deliberately designed to take up those old monuments and put them in new positions; and if this: Convention and that Committee will not heed the example of this Ohio Convention, which has passed into the nebulous mist, I ask them to remember, and the distinguished Chairman of the Committee will doubtless remember, the words or injunction of the Hebrew law-giver: “Thou shall not re- move thy neighbors’ land-mark, which they of old have set in their inheritance,” an in" junction that was repeated by the wise son of King David: “ Remove not the ancient land-mark which thy forefathers have set,” an injunction, too, that is accompanied with MACKOY. [October I6, i l, a curse—a curse that is unique: “Accursed l he he that removeth his neighbor’s land- mark, and all the people shall say amen.” (Applause) Mr. BUCKNER. I move that the Com- mittee rise and report progress, and ask leave to sit'again. The motion being seconded, was carried. The President, Mr. Clay, resumed the Chair. Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, as Chair- man of the Committee of the Whole, I am directed to report that the Committee have had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, together with its amendments. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again to- morrow. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Committee of the Whole. And the same having been put before the Convention, was declared adopted. Mr. MCHENRY. I move that we ad- journ to meet tc-morrow morning at 9 o’clock. The PRESIDENT. Under the order as passed and announced, that motion is not necessary; and the Convention stands ad- journed until to-morrow at 9 o’clock. '‘ Convention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol 1 FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 17. 1890. N0. 32 -_~-_._ Friday,] CLARDY—COX—FARM ER. [October 17. Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Dr. Neville. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. ' The PRESIDENT, The first thing in ‘order will be the reception of petitions. Mr. CLARDY. I have a memorial from certain parties asking that private schools be exempted from taxation, and .ask that it be referred to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. COX. I hold in my hand a peti- ‘tion from the citizens of Carroll county, ‘asking that a change in regard to taxation ‘be made in the Constitution, and ask that it be referred to the Committee on Reve- nue and Taxation. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the communication will be so referred. Mr. FORGY. I have a report of the indebtedness of Edmonson county. The PRESIDENT. The communica- tion will be referred to the Special Com- mittee. Mr. FAR MER. I have a petition from ‘certain citizens of Louisville, and request that it be read. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the petition will be read. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the ‘petition. Mr. FARMER. I ask that it be re- ferred to the Committee on Education. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, said reference will be ordered. Mr. FARMER. I have also a petition ‘from the city of Henderson, and ask that "it be read. It is not very long. Mr. AUXIER. Do I understand all petitions have to go on the Journal. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will authorize the Reporter not to insert any petitions unless the'Convention so orders. Does the Delegate from Henderson ask for the reading of his petition ‘Z Mr. FARMER. I do. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the Secretary will report the peti- tion. The petition was read. a The PRESIDENT. What reference does the Delegate wish? Mr. FARMER. I have marked the references. Those that are not marked I wish re’erred to the Committee on General Provisions. Mr. McCHORD. I have a communica- tion from the Clerk of Washington county, showing the financial condition of that county. - The PRESIDENT. It will be referred to the Special Committee. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move that the Con- vention resolve itself into a Committee " of the Whole. Mr. MCHENRY. Before that motion is put, I would like to ask leave of the Con- vention. The Committee on Rules, to whom was referred the report of the Com- mittee on Printing andv Accounts, were directed to report this morning. The Committee on Rules have not had an op- portunity of holding a meeting. I ask, therefore, that the Convention give us further time to make the report. The PRESIDENT. Further time is granted. If the gentleman from Boyd 2 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] MARTIN—KENNEDY. [October 1 7 .. does not renew his motion, then reports from Standing Committees are in order. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move that the‘, Convention resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole for the consideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The question being put on the motion, it was declared carried. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from the Fourth Louisville District will please take the Chair. M r. YOUNG thereupon took the Chair. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Harrison has the floor. Mr. W. H. MARTIN. After the hos- pitalities of the city of Lexington, I do not feel like making a speech this morning; and as the Delegate from Nicholas was not so favored, I yield my time to him. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the Delegate. from Nicholas will take the place of the Delegate from Har- rison. Mr. KENNEDY. I am grateful to the Delegate from Harrison for yielding the floor, and I promise the Convention that I shall speak but a short time. I have lis- tened with great pleasure for several days past to the distinguished gentlemen who have so ably discussed the repirt of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. I have been profoundly impressed with the unusual and extraordinary ability and learning displayed by the members who have thus far discussed the matter, and am impressed with my own inability to prop- ery discuss the matter in hand. But in accepting the important and respoisible position of Delegate to this Convention, each one of us thereby impliedly agreed that he would endeavor to discharge his duty in the best manner he could, and to protect and guard the interests of all the people in the formation of the fundamen- tal law of the State. It is quite evident tha‘ the “blood 0 the martu-s” has been flowing around rather freely for a few days past, and many eloquent tears have been shed in memory of the departed mar-‘r tyrs to liberty by the distinguished mourn-i ers of this Convention. Nearly every ora- torical kite that has been sent up has been erimsoned with the “blood of the mar- tyrs,” and in many instances studded with the rarest jewels from the “golden cas-- ket.” I have enjoyed these eloquent flights over the lofty altitudes of Constitu- tional Law, and now desire to add my tribute of respect to the old Bill of Rights, after suggesting one or two changes. therein. I desire, in a plain, practii-al way, to discuss the amendment offered by me to section two of the report of the Commit- tee, being section one of the old Bill of' Rights, and to make some remarks on one or two other propositions under discussion- Soon after I began the practice of law Ii had occasion to argue a case before a jury, and after I had made what I then thought was rather a good argument, as I left the court-house I said to an old friend of mine, “ What did you think of my speech to thejury ‘Z ” He said: “ Well, my son,.. it was a very nice speech, but, to tell you the truth, I d-d not think it had much sense in it.” (Laughter.) I desire to avoid a repetition of that criticism. I have the profoundest respect for the ability and learning of the members composing the Committee on the Bill of Rights, and I was highly delighted with the classic speech of the distinguished Chairman, who so ably presented his views in behalf of the report, and enriched his argument with much valuable historical information, I was impressed with the able speeches of' the other members of the Committee, but am unable to agree with them in the con-- elusions reached. Aiter dropping section 3 in the present Bill or Rights (the slavery clause), and amending section 1, I am in favor of the old Bill of Rights as it stands, And why? Because it is doubtful ifwe can better it. The Courts have construed: it, and, with the exception of seclion 1,‘ we BILL OF RIGHTS. 3 Friday,] " KENNEDY. [October 17 . understand what it means. I am not in favor of retaining the old Bill of Rights, or any part of our Constitution, simply because it is old. Wherever experience has demonstrated the fact that our Constitution needs changing, I say change it. I am not one of those who think our Constitu- tion, because of its age, is like the Ark of the Covenant, too sacred to be touched. While I have the profoundest respect for the men who framed it, and for the supe- rior wisdom that directed them, yet forty years’ experience has shown that we do need some changes, and the people think so, and have sent us here for that purpose. Constitutions and laws must keep pace with human events and with the progress of the human mind. In this age each year seems to mark a mile-stone of prog- ress, and that which seems impossible to-day is the realization of tomorrow. The old ox-cart of our fathers has given away to the motor of progress, and steam and electricity have unlocked the forces of nature. Great changes have taken place since our present Constitution was formed, and just as a healthy, vigorous boy out- grows his clothes, so we have, in some re- spects, outgrown our fundamental law; and it is our privilege, living under a Re- publican form of Government, to so change and alter it as that it shall conform to our present requirements as well as to our pos- sible future necessities. But we have not outgrown that part of it contained in our present Bill of Rights. Whoever heard of anybody being dis- saiisfied with our present Bill of Rights until we came down to Frankfort? Show me a single instance, with the exception of the first section, where it has not afforded us- ample protection and security. Why leave the old, familiar path we have trod so long, when its bearing has been in the right direction all the while? I cannot agree to do it unless I hear a better reason than has been given. The amendment ofiered by me on yes- terday reads: “That all ‘men, when they form asocial compact, are equal; and that no man or set of men is entitled to exclu- sive, separate public emoluments or privi- leges, but in consideration of public services rendered in a governmental ca- Dacity, and a local public service shall not be considered governmental.” The only changes I have made in section 1, as far as it goes, are that I have used.the word “ men” instead of “freemen,” and the word “ is” instead of “are,” and _then added, after “public services,” the words “rendered in a governmental capacity; and a local pub- lic service shall not be considered govern- mental.” It is claimed, and justly so, that a considerable amount of special and exclu~ sive legislation has been passed under this section. We all know that special legisla- tion, without regard to the public welfare, is one of the greatest evils to any State, and may be said to be the foundation upon which all aristocratic and monarchical governments rest. For the past few years our Legislatures seem to have granted many exclusive and special privileges, without regard to ‘individual rights or the public welfare, and some of these privi- leges have been justified under this sec- tion. We' all know there can be good gov- ernment only where there is equality of rights and privileges; and it has been well said “ that special legislation leads to me- nopoly, and monopoly to an aristocracy of wealth, and an aristocracy of wealth favors capital at the expense of la- bor.” That is sound doctrine. If special and exclusive rights detrimental to the public welfare have been granted under this section, and justified by the Courts under it, it is the duty of this Convention to correct that evil. The distinguished gentleman from Marion, in his admirable speech, said: “The emolument seems to be defined as a public emolument, but does the qualification apply to the word ‘ privi- lege’ also; or are separate and exclusive privileges included in the inhibition as i4 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] KENNEDY. " [October 17. well?” Our Courts have decided that the qualification applies to “privileges” also. That was decided in the celebrated case of ‘the Commonwealth vs. Whipps. In con- struing the first part of section 1, in that case, the Court said : “Without discussing the grammatical construction of the lan- guage used in the section, it is plain, we ‘think, that this constitutional inhibition was intended to prev-ent the exercise of some public function, or an exclusive priv- ilege afl'ecting the rights and interests of the public generally, when not in consider- ation of public service.” The adjectives “exclusive, separate, public,” qualify “priv- ileges” as well as “emoluments.” There .seems to be no serious trouble about the first part of the section; but the trouble :grows out of the term “public services.” What is meant by “ public services?” Per- haps we can get at the meaning of that term, and I desire to fortify myself with the decisions of the Courts as we go along. There has been considerable doubt as to what the term “public services” means. In the case of Barbour against the Louis- ville Board of Trade, the Court says, after discussing, in a general way, what exemptions from taxation may be had in consideration of a public service: -“As a general rule, the test of the right -to exempt property is the existence -of the right to levy a tax to foster .-such property.” In the case of the Com- ~monwealth vs. Whipps, the Court defines "what a public duty is, and what is neces- -sary to bring it within the term “public “services,” and lays down this test: “When "the citizen undertakes to discharge a duty *‘to the public th at the State is under ‘an ob- :"ligation to discharge, and in consideration for the undertaking an exclusive privilege of the duty the State was required to per- form.” I think that is sound doctrine, that wherever the State is under an obli- gation to discharge a duty, and any agent orindividual discharges that duty for the State, it is a sufficient consideration ‘for the grant of an exclusive privilege and exemp- tion from taxation. That, as a general rule, is the law; but the trouble comes in the application of it. How has it been ap- plied by our Courts? Some very distin- guished and able lawyers said on this floor the other day that it had been settled, that there was no longer any doubt about what the term “public services” meant, because it had been construed by the Courts. With all due deference to those gentlemen, I beg leave to differ from them. So far as the practical application of that term is concerned, it has never been settled by the Court of Appeals. Last week the Court of Appeals decided the case of Clark, Sheriff, vsQThe Louisville Water Company, in which the question was, whether the State had the right to tax that company ‘I The company claimed an exemption on the ground of public services, based on an act of the Legislature in 1882, as follows: “First, that it shall be the duty of the Louisville Water Company to furnish water to the public fire-cisterns and public fire-plugs or hydrants of the city of Louis- ville, for fire protection, free of charge.” In another clause of that act the company is exempted from all taxation . The Court, in rendering the opinion, says: “ We shall pass by the question whether the rendition of a local public service, as to furnish the city of Louisville with water, is a valid consideration for an exemption from State taxation, thereby imposing an additional burden upon all the balance of the people of the State; or whether it is the govern- mental duty of the State to furnish to a i" is granted, the grant is constitutional, be- 1-cause in consideration of public service. "The exclusive right to keep a ferry, to con- - .tee has a right to have its report perfected, ' I - fected, and then the vote will be between the substitute as perfected and the perfected report of the Committee. In that way you give the Convention the broadest op- portunity to make the very best possible selection under the circumstances; and that is parliamentary usage. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has been endeavoring to decide that all the while, and I was suggesting to the gentleman from Adair that as we now had an amendment to the amendment, we could go no further, and his amendment can be considered later. The gentleman from Lexington offered an amendment, or rather a substitute, for the greater portion of the first section. Now to that the Delegate from Marion has offered a substitute, which is in the nature of an amendment, and the question now is upon the substitute offered by the Delegate from Marion. He is entitled to the floor for five minutes. - Mr. MONTGOMERY. The amendment offered by me is before the amendment of the Delegate from Marion. My amend- ment was printed and laid on the table when Ethe report was originally ofi‘ered, and I think has precedence over the other amendments. The CHAIRMAN. I suppose the gen- tleman is right, if the record shows that he ofl‘ered an amendment at that stage; but we are considering that all those amend- ments, whether printed or not, must again be offered. Mr. YOUNG. I move that the Com- mittee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again to-morrow. , Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to ofi‘er an amendment. It is very apparent that we have a big job before us, and everybody is interested in it. I move that we ask to be allowed to sit again afternoon at 2:30 o’clock. _ Mr. KNOTT. I submit that that motion is out of order. We can not control the adjournment of the House. . Mr. ZACK PHELPS. M motion isy BILL OF RIGHTS. 27 Thursday,] MCHENRY—BOLES—KNOTT . [October 23. that we request of the Convention leave to sit again this afternoon at 2:30 o’clock.\ The CHAIRMAN. That will come up in the Convention. I sustain the point of order made by the Delegate from Marion_ We can not control the sitting of the House in Convention. The question is, whether the Committee shall now rise, and ask leave to sit again. The question being put ‘before the Com- mittee, the motion was declared carried. The Committee, thereupon rose, and the President, Mr. Clay, resumed the Chair. Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. President, the Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They re- port progress, and ask leave to sit again. The question being put upon the adoption of said report, it was declared adopted. Mr. KNOTT. I move that we adjourn. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I move, as an amendment, to sit again this afternoon at 2:30 o’clock. Mr. BOLES. I move, as a substitute, that when we adjourn, we adjourn to meet to-morrow at 9 o’clock. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will put the motion on the longest time of adjourn- ment, as it has precedence; and it is, that when the Convention adjourns, it adjourn to meet to-morrow at 9 o’clock. Mr. FUNK. On thatJI call for the yeas and nays. Mr. McELROY. I second the call. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I will call the at- tention of the gentleman to the fact that the hour for adjournment will arrive be- fore we get through with the roll-call, and the House will stand adjourned until to- morrow at 10 o’clock A. M. Mr. FUNK. I will withdraw the call for the yeas and nays, and take a division. Mr. MCHEN RY. I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. JOHNSTON. I second it. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll, when Mr. Zack Phelps addressed the Chair. The PRESIDENT. This question can- not be debated. Mr. PHELPS. I did not want to de- bate the question, but simply to say, that as the hour of adjournment is about to arrive— Mr. MCHENRY. I call for the regular order of business, and that is that the call- ing of the roll be proceeded with. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please proceed with the roll-call. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll, and had only called a few names when the hour for adjournment arrived, and the Conven- tion adjourned. ionoention Ziecoro. ' colored people as a class. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. ‘Vol. 1.] FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 24, 1890. [No. 38 Friday,] MooRE—MILLER—ENGLIsH. [October 24. The President called the Convention to ‘order, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bagby. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are in order. Mr. L. T. MOCRE. I have a resolution in v"the nature of a petition, addressed to this body from the Centenary Methodist Church. The first resolution is that no money raised for school purposes shall be used for any sectarian school, and the sec- ond that persons elected shall take a cer- tain oath The references are indicated. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, ‘the petition will be so referred. The Chair will present the petition of J. .S. Hathaway, praying that there be no reference to slavery in the Constitution, :and will ask that it be read. The petition was read, as follows: To the President and ZVIembelrs of the Con- stitutional Convention of the State of Ken- tucky .- We, the undersigned colored citizens of Kentucky, beg leave to petition your honor- able body to omit from the Bill of Rights of the proposed Constitution the clause relat- ing to slavery and involuntary servitude; also, to omit any reference whatever to the We doubt not that such a course on your part will meet the general and hearty approbation of the colored citizens of the State. J. S. HATHAWAY, Instructor in Berea College. J. H. JACKSON, Principal State Normal School for Colored Persons. WILLIAM H. STEWARD, .Editor American Baptist, Louisville, Ky. CHARLES S. MoRRIs, Louisville, Ky. S. E. SMITH, Setretary South District Association. PASTOR BAPTIST CHURCH, Elizabethtown, Ky. EUGENE EVANS, Pastor First Baptist Church, Frankfort, Kentucky. C. C. Mormon, Instructor State Normal School, Frankfort, Kentucky. The PRESIDENT. Without objec- tion, the petition will be referred to the Committee of the Whole. Mr. 'W. H. MILLER. I ask for infor- mation. There was something said in re- gard to the publication of such communi- cations in the Stenographer’s report. I do not know whether there is any rule on the subject or not. I ask that that petition be reported in the official report of the de- bates. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion? The Chair hears none, and the order for the printing is made. Reports from Standing Committees are in order. Mr. ENGLISH. The Committee on Militia having had under consideration the following resolution, have requested me to ~ report the same, with the expression of opinion that it be adopted, and ask that it be printed and made the special order for next Wednesday. The report read, as follows: “The militia of the State shall consist of all able-bodied male residents of the State, between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, except such persons as may be ex- empted by the laws of the State or of the United States. “ The General Assembly shall provide for maintaining the organized militia, and 2 THE MILITIA. Friday,] ENoLIsH—MILLirn—MUm. [October 24. may exempt from military service persons having conscientious scruples against bear- ing arms, provided such persons shall pay an equivalent for such exemption. “The organization, equipment and disci- pline of the militia shall conform as nearly as practicable to the regulations for the government of the armies of the United States. The Governor shall appoint all general, field and staff ofiicers, and commission them. “Each company shall elect its own com- missioned ofiicers; but if any company shall fail to elect such officers within the time prescribed by law, they may be ap- pointed by the Governor. “ The General Assembly shall provide for the safe-keeping of the public arms, military records, relies and banners of the State.” The PRESIDENT. It is moved that the report be printed—125 copies—and that it be made the special order for next Wednesday. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move as a sub- stitute that it be printed and permitted to fall in the Orders of the Day, and let it be taken up in its regular order. Mr. ENGLISH. I have no objection to that. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate ac- cepts the amendment, and the motion is that it be printed and fall into the Orders of the Day. The question being taken on the motion, it was carried. Mr. MUIR. Several days ago there was a report from the Superintendent of Pub- lic Instruction as to the census enumeration. I have in my hand that report, which I ask to be printed for the information of the Convention. The question being put on the motion, it was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Motions and reso- lutions are in order. Mr. ELMORE. ‘I have an itemized account from the Clerk of Washington county, in the case of McChord vs. Lewis,r which calls for $31.50. The Committee has had this under consideration, and recommends the payment of $16 of the- same. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest to the Delegate that he had better put the matter he wishes acted upon in. writing. - The report of the Committee was read. The question being taken on the adoption of the report of the Committee, it was- adopted. Mr. ELMORE. Here is a resolution ofi‘ered by the gentleman of the Seventh. District of Louisville, on October 14. The Committee on Printing and Accounts never got hold of the original resolution; but I see-- from the Convention Record it is referred to- the Committee on Printing and Accounts. It reads as follows: WHEREAS, Because of the numerous amendments offered and speeches made, the stenographic record of this Convention is growing so large as to become alarming when the question of printing and paying for same out of the State funds is consid- ered; therefore, be it Resolved, That all speeches made, and to‘ be made, on the question now under consider- ation shall be printed in the Convention Record, but that hereafter no speeches shall be printed at the cost of the State; but the Convention Record shall only contain a summary of each day’s proceedings, with- out giving at length our speeches. Referred to Committee on Printing and Accounts. Mr. ELMORE. The Committee have’ considered this, and recommend that it ought not be adopted by the Convention_ The question being taken on the adop- tion of the resolution, it was decided to have been lost. Mr. BOURLAND. A great deal has been said on this floor in reference to the necessity for an evening session. A num- ber of Delegates seem to think we are not working hard enough and long enough to RESOLUTIONS. 3 Friday,] COX—BOURLAND—AUXIER. [October 24. entitle us to the compensation we are re- ceiving from the State. I want to say I am not one of those— Mr. COX. Will the Delegate from Hop- kins yield long enough to allow a resolu- tion on that subject. Mr. BOURLAND. make a motion on that subject. one of those who believe we are not work- ing earnestly and faithfully. I believe that this Convention is working in good faith and in the interest of the people. Yet I desire that we may have one clear-cut expression of the will of the Convention on that subject and settle it, at least for the present. Consequently, I move when we adjourn, we adjourn to meet this even- ing at three o’clock. Mr. AUXIER. I second the motion. The question being put on the motion, it was lost. Mr. MCCHORD. I offer a resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is in- formed that the Delegate from Carroll has sent up a resolution, and the Clerk will re- port it. The resolution was read, as follows: I am going to Resolved, That the Committee on Rules be requested to inquire into and report upon the propriety of so amending the Rules as to fix the time for the meeting of the morning sessions of the Convention at 9 o’clock A. M., standard time, except on Monday, when the time shall be 11 o’clock A. M., and for holding evening sessions, to begin at 3 o’clock P. M., and adjourn at 5 o’clock P. M. Evening sessions to begin on the day of November, 1890. Reference asked. Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be so referred. Mr. McChord’s resolution was then read’ which is as follows: Resolved, That Rule 50 be amended as follows: “Strike out the word “ten,” in line two, and insert in lieu thereof the word “ nine.’ ” Mr. MCCHORD. Under the rule. I sup- pose that resolution will lie over one day; and I now give notice that I will call up I am not' the resolution to-morrow, and have it put on its passage. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to move that when this Convention adjourns to-day, it adjourn to meet to-morrow at 9 o’clock. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I second that motion. The question being put upon the motion, it was carried. Mr. W. H. MILLER. tion. I offer a resolu- Resolution read, as follows: Resolved, That the several County Clerks of this State are hereby requested to furnish to this Convention, as soon as possible, a statement showing the amounts paid to the J ailers of their respective counties for each of the last two years, and on what ac- count. 2. Resolved, That the Printer be, and he is hereby, directed to print and furnish to the Secretary one hundred and twenty-five copies of the foregoing resolution, ready for mailing, and the Secretary will direct and mail one to each of the County Clerks of this State. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I understand that information can be had from the Audi- tor. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The Auditor’s report does not show any such thing. It shows the amount of fees paid to Sheriffs in certain counties by the State. There was a resolution introduced early in the session requesting this information, but the question propounded to the County Clerk was as to the salaries paid. The law makes no provision for the payment of salaries to jailers. It makes provision for fees, and it is necessary for this Conven- tion to have information on that subject. The question being put on the adoption of Mr. W. H. Miller’s resolution, it was de- clared adopted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I mo've that the Convention go into ('ommittee of the Whole for the purpose of further considera- tion of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The question being put on the motion, it 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘a personal explanation. ‘some Delegates construed the remarks I Friday,] BRENTS—APPLEGATE—MONTGOMERY. [October 24 . was declared carried, and the President designated the Delegate from the Fourth Louisville District as Chairman. Mr. Young thereupon took the Chair. Mr. BRENTS. I rise to a point of or- der. On the 29th of September the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights made a report, and that was made a special order for October 3d. On October 3d the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, and, while in Committee of the Whole, amendments to said report were ofi‘ered and ordered printed, and the further consideration of said report postponed. Now, the question is, whether or not these amendments offered on that day are now before the Convention and the Convention now has control of them, or whether the Delegates who offered them will have to call them up again. It seems to me those amendments are now under control of the Convention. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of the opinion that all amendments are now be- fore the Convention. Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire to rise to I understand that made to be personal, and reflecting on their motives. I wish to say to the Convention that I was innocent of intending to wound any one’s feelings, or impute any improper motives. I merely meant to say that the propositions urged were inimical to the ideas reported by the Committee. The two gentlemen who urged the measure then under consideration seem to consider that I reflected on them. I take this opportunity to say that I know they are decidedly in opposition to all lottery grants. ‘ The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will now state what the House was considering yes- ter-day. The SECRETARY. The first section of article one. The CHAIRMAN. The Committee, when it rose, had under consideration the first section of article one, and the Dele- gate from Lexington had offered as a sub- stitute section one of the present Bill of Rights, and the Delegate from Marion of- fered an amendment to the substitute. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I understand, before any thing can be considered, the Committee’s report must be perfected; and all amendments offered to that report have precedence over the substitute or amendment to the substitute. I have of- fered an amendment to that section, which I now desire to have reported and acted upon. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary in- forms the Chair there are several other amendments pending to that section. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I do not think there are any; but I may be mistaken. I do not think there was any amendment offered to that except the one I offered. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will de- cide that all amendments to that section will be first taken up and passed upon; and after that the amendment to the sub- stitute and the substitute. The Clerk wil report the several amendments to that sec- tion. The CLERK. The first amendment offered to the Committee’s report is the amendment offered by the Delegate from the county of Clinton, on page 4 of the printed amendments, printed on October 3. “Eighth. To secure these rights, gov- ernments are instituted among men, deriv- ing their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Mr. BRENTS. I ask the question, whether the Delegate who proposes an amendment has the close, or shall he speak first? Mr. MCHENRY. The rule is that the gentleman who offers the amendment shall have five minutes in support of his amend- ment; and then any gentleman who gets the floor will have five minutes. The CHAIRMAN. That is the under- standing of the Chair, and the gentleman from Clinton will proceed. BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Friday,] BREXTS—RODES—PHELPS. [October 24. Mr. BRENTS. The Committee, in their report, give the inherent and inalienable right of man, but they have omitted the object of government. That object is not stated anywhere in the Committee’s re- port; and such being the fact, I think it right and proper to state it in this place. It will add strength to the section and round it off. I think it will be much bet- ter. It is very important, I believe, that this Convention declare the object of gov- ernment. My amendment is “to secure these 'rights ”—-that is, those rights given in detail by the Committee—“governments are instituted among men deriving their- just powers from the consent of the gov- erned.” I desire that this Convention shall state clearly and emphatically that gov- ernments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Mr. RODES. We "annot use all the maxims and truths iinldent to a political government in this Constitution. The Preamble says : We, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which we enjoy, in order to secure to our- selves and to succeeding generations the continuation of these blessings, do ordain and establish this Constitution. Then, as introductory to the Bill of Rights, we say: That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recog- nized and established. Then, in section 3 we say: “All power is inherent in the people, and all free govern- ments are founded on their authority and instituted for the peace, safety and happi- ness,” etc. That, taken in connection with the preceding, certainly presents enough pertaining to the origin of governments to satisfy all reasonable men. We do not want to repeat; we think we have enough in. Mr. BRENTS. Section 3does not cover my idea. It does not say “governments derive their just authority from the consent of the governed.” I believe my amend- ment will strengthen the section and round it off. I am sure it will do no harm for this Convention to declare that govern- ments derive their just authority from the consent of the governed. The question being taken on the amend- ment, on a division it was declared to have been rejected by a vote of 20 to 44. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I rise for informa— tion. Is it now in order to send up an amendment ‘? The CHAIRMAN. The House can do as it pleases. If left to the Chair, the Chair will say 110. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I move leave be granted. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the leave will be given. Mr. MCHENRY. I desire to call the attention of the Chair to this rule: It is not among our printed rules, but it has been adopted by the Convention. I will read it: “That each section or paragraph of a report of a Committee which shall contain matter to be inserted in the Con- stitution, and which shall refer to separate or independent subjects, shall be open to amendment, committal or debate, and that all amendments to the report shall be considered in order, and if of the same de- gree and otherwise parliamentary, shall be voted upon in the order of presentation. The above rule shall apply both to proceed- ings of the Convention and Committee of the Whole.” I think it is in order to offer amendments at any time when we are con- sidering any thing to be adopted in the Constitution. The CHAIRMAN. The amendment is allowed to be ofi'ered by unanimous con- sent, and the Secretary will report it.- Substitute for sub-section 7 : “ The right to bear arms, subject to the power of the General Assembly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed arms.” 6 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] 2 BECKNER—MONTGOMERY. [October 24 . The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- port the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Clark, which reads, “ all men are by nature free- Mr. BECKNER. I withdraw the amendment. . The CHAIRMAN. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Montgomery. 1. Strike all of subsection 4 of section 1 of Bill of Rights. 2. Strike from section 8 all that part thereof after the word “ time,” in the eighth line of said section. 3. Strike out all of section 12 after the word “limb,” in the second line of said section, and in lieu of the remainder of said section, and as a separate section, insert the follow- ing, to wit: “ Private property shall not be taken for public uses without due process of law and without just compensation being made to the owner thereof, and no private property shall be condemned and taken for the use ‘of any private corporation without due process of law and without just com- pensation having been first paid to the owner thereof or his representative in money, or paid into court subject to his order.” a 4. Insert the word “four” between the Words “term” and “of,” in third line of section twenty-two. 5. Strike out the word “slavery” in the twenty-fourth section. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I merely wish to state the reasons why I offered this amendment. The Committee have, in their report, undertaken to give, in seven sub- sections, what they call the inherent and inalienable rights of man. I understand that to mean the same thing as the abso- lute rights of man; that is, such rights as a man can enjoy absolutely and freely, without interfering with the rights of any other man—such rights as government does not undertake to interfere with. One of those rights, as laid down here, is the right of defending their lives and liberties. A man, of course, has a right to defend his life and liberty. His right to do it is in- herent and inalienable, and he can enjoy that privilege without interfering with any- body else. “The right of worshiping Al- mighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience.” A man can do that, fully and freely, without interfering with anybody else; but the fourth subsection is: No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry against his consent;_ no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and no preferences shall ever be given by law to any religious societies, denominations or modes of wor- ship. But the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or afiirmations; excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsist- ent with the good order, peace or safety of the State, or opposed to the civil authority thereof. The civil rights, privileges and capacities of any person shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion. A man can entertain his opinions and thoughts, and nobody has any right to in- terfere with that, because he can do that without interfering with the rights of any- body else; but when a man expresses his opinion, he may do somebody a wrong, if his opinion consists of a slander against some one; then he does that person a wrong. If it consists of a libel, it is a wrong; and I do not consider the right to freely communicate our thoughts and opin- ions as an absolute right, but a relative right that the laws govern a man in. I do not find, in any of the Constitutions that I have examined, that that right is allowed unquestioned, unqualified and unrestrained, without being responsible. Our present Bill of Rights contains this same clause, but adds to it a responsibility for the abuse of it. I think the ninth clause of the old Bill of Rights secures all we need or desire on that subject, when it says: 7. Printing presses shall be free to every person who undertakes to examine the pro- ceedings of the General Assembly, or any branch of government, and no law shall ever be made to restrain the right thereof The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the inalienable rights 0 BILL OF RIGHTS. 7 Friday,] - RonEs—PHELPs—MoNTeoMERY. [October 24 . ‘man, and every citizen may freely speak, write and print on any subject, being re- sponsible for the abuse of that liberty. Therefore I would like to have stricken out subsection 4 of section 1 of the Bill of Rights as reported by the Committee. As it is now, I think it will breed confusion. Mr. RODES. I apprehend this body will never agree to strike out the section he proposes. It is one of the inalienable and indefeasible rights, the right of men to freely communicate their thoughts and opinions. It is one of several enumerations under a great statement of the great general and essential principles of free government. Section seven is a full statement of it, rec- ognizing the doctrine as the gentleman pro- poses to have it done. I do not know of any confusion, because one comes in by way ‘of explaining the other. The question being taken on the adoption of the amendment, it was declared to have .been rejected. ‘ The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- port the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is -.the amendment offered by the Delegate ’ from the First District of Louisville. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I ask leave to "withdraw my amendment referring to poll- .tax, for the purpose of referring it to the ‘Committee on Revenue and Taxation. The CHAIRMAN .4 Without objection, _the Delegate will be allowed to withdraw his amendment. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I desire to re- .serve the right to call the yeas and nays on my amendment when it comes before the Convention. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate would have such right without any reservation of .it. The Clerk will report the next amend- ment. The CLERK. The next amendment was offered by the same Delegate: Amend section I by striking out from line 1 the word “men,”and inserting in lieu thereof “persons.” Mr, PHELPS. I have offered that same amendment to section 4. My reason for doing that is, that I believe the word “per- sons” is a better generic word than the word “men.” In the report of the Com- mittee, sections 11, 12, 13, 17, 19 and 20, they say, “no person shall, for an indictable of- fense,” “no person shall, for the same offense, . be twice put in jeopardy,” “all courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done him,” &c., “no person shall be attainted of treason,” &c., “the estates of such per- sons as shall destroy their own lives,” &c. All the way through they use the word “person,” but in the first and fourth sections they use the words “men” and “man.” It may be at times that the word “man” is con- strued to include all persons; but where in the same article, in another section, you use the word “persons” it might be construed, that there was some reason for using the word “man,” and in an effort to give con- struction to the whole, the courts would be bound to hold that in that section it was intended to apply to men alone. It cannot be that the Committee meant section 4 to apply only to the male sex. And I say, while the right of women may be safe at the polls in the hands of men, their rights of conscience, and as to religion, are better if intrusted to themselves. In order to secure uniformity throughout the report of the Committee, I ask that “persons” be in- serted for “men” and “person” for “man” in the two sections referred to. Mr. RODES. I think my friend has forgotten one distinction. The word “per- sons” is applicable to corporations; the word “man” is generic. Of course you could substitute the word “one” or “per- son.” But certainly we know what“ men” means, and in this sense it means every thing. Mr. PHELPS. Why do you use the ' word “person” in all the other sections? Mr. RODES. The word “person” re- fers to corporations sometimes. In some of 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] PHELPS—RODES—QUICKS ALL. [October 24 , these sections the word “person” will be defined to include corporations. The question being taken on the adop- tion of the amendment of the Delegate from the First District of Louisville, it was declared to have been rejected, The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- port the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment was .that offered by the Delegate from Rus- sell: Strike out subsection 7 of section 1 and insert the following, viz: “The right to bear arms, subject to the power of the General Assembly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed arms.” Mr. J. L. PHELPS. It seems to me that the object of this clause, as pre- sented by the Committee, was to procure the right to all men to bear arms, and that the Legislature should have the right to forbid the carrying of concealed arms. If that is the idea, my amendment expresses it. But the Committee have undertaken to say that they can bear arms for cer- tain purposes in defense of themselves, their families and of the State, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally sum- moned, subject to the power of the General Assembly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed arms. Don’t that forbid a man from carrying arms when he goes hunting or deer-driv- ing ? Don’t it forbid the carrying of arms for any except the purposes named? I want to say that a man should have the right in Kentucky to bear arms for any purpose he pleases, so that he does not bear them concealed. Mr. RODES. The gentleman does not make the proper distinction. This is not a grant of power; it is a limitation of power. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. Is not there a grant of power in it? Mr. RODES. No, sir; the right to bear arms is a universal right; and the Legis- lature is forbade to pass any law interfering with that right. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. Does it not give e Legislature power to prevent the carry- ing of arms for any purpose except what. are here enumerated‘? Mr. RODES. It authorizes the Legis- lature to prohibit the carrying of concealed weapons; but that is all. The question being taken on the adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate» from Russell, it was declared to have been ’ rejected. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any fur- ther amendments? The READING CLERK. The next thing is the substitute to section one, of- fered by the Delegate from the county of Morgan. Mr. QUICKSALL. May I correct the Reading Clerk? That is offered to the original Bill of Rights, and not to the Committee’s report. The CHAIRMAN. That is not now under consideration, then ‘? Mr. QUICKSALL. No, sir. The READING CLERK. The next amendment is that offered by the gentle- man from the city of Lexington, as fol- lows: “ That all freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal, and that no‘ man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services.” To which the following amendment has been ofi‘ered by the Dele- gate frdm Marion: Amend by striking out the first section and inserting the fol- lowing: “ That all men are endowed by their creator with equal rights to life, liber- ty, property and the pursuit of happiness; that in the social compact they engage to hold and enjoy those rights, subject to just and impartial laws, securing equal protec- tion and equal privileges to each, and im- posing like duties and responsibilities upon all under like circumstances and condi- tions; that for the purpose of prescribing and enforcing such laws, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, who, in this Commonwealth, possess the- inherent authority to make any alteration BILL OF RIGHTS. 9' Friday,] RoDEs-KNo'r'r—BRoNs'roN. [October 24. therein, not inconsistent with the Consti- tution of the United States, which they may deem proper. It is, therefore, hereby ordained: First. That no person shall ever be de- prived of, or disturbed in, the enjoyment of any of the rights above enumerated with- out due process of law.” Mr. RODES. All I havelto say is, that our report provides for every thing in there. Mr. KNOTT. I have this to offer in vindication of that amendment. It covers every thing that is connected with the Re- publican form of government emanating from the people. The first section has been compared, by my learned and scientific friend from Warren, to the colors of the spectrum, where there are seven colors, re- solving themselves back into pure white light. There are, in fact, but three colors primarily. Combinations of these produce the other four; the whole is ‘resolved back into white light. There are three great rights enumerated—the right of life, lib- erty and property—and they, like the light of the sun, are all embraced in the expres- sion, “the pursuit of happiness,” because that necessarily implies all the balance. I offer it simply from a scientific stand- point. Mr. RODES. I do not propose to dis- cuss scientific subjectszwith the gentleman from Marion, because he would be my superior in that. Mr. BRONSTON. I rise to a point of order. The CHAIRMAN. State the point. Mr. BRONSTON. The gentleman has spoken once. I don’t make any objection, though. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I object Mr. PETTIT. I move that unanimous consent be given to the genleman to pro- ceed. Mr. BRONSTON. I second the mo- tion. The CHAIRMAN. Objection has been made. speak ‘? Mr. RODES. I simply desire to say, in response to the gentleman’s suggestion about colors, I have always been under the impression that the rainbow was made up- of seven colors. They are seen by all; but whether that is so or not, the figure of speech applies not to me. It is of little importance, but that figure of speech was used by my friend from Caldwell. As to the subject-matter, your rights are all preserved, all stated, in the distinct, unmis- takable language used by our fathers. I should hate very much for a different phraseology to go down to posterity, chang- ing that good old Bill we have. Mr. CLAY. I do not know that the Con- vention understands the status of the mat- ter, and would like, for the information of the Convention, to have the substitute of the Delegate from Lexington read. The Reading Clerk read the substitute offered by Mr. Bronston. The CHAIRMAN. The vote is next upon the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Marion as an amendment to the substitute. The Reading Clerk again read the amend- ment offered by Mr. Knott. And the question being taken upon the adoption of said amendment, it was decided n the negative. The CHAIRMAN. The vote now re- curs upon the substitute offered by the Delegate from Lexington. Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. Chairman—— The CHAIRMAN. I thought you de- clined to speak. Mr. BRONSTON. I have not had an opportunity. Mr. BRENTS. I offer an amendment to the substitute. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will' read the amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Brents, which is as follows: “Amend section two by striking out the Is the Delegate very anxious to‘ 10 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] COKE—FARM En—Bnons'ron. [October 24. following, ‘but in consideration of public services.’ ” Mr. COKE. I rise to a point of order. ‘That is an amendment to section two. Mr. BRENTS. I would like to change it. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman .asks leave to so change the amendment as to make it an amendment to the substitute now offered by the Delegate from Lexing- ton. Is there any objection? Mr. FARMER. I offer an amendment to the substitute. The CHAIRMAN. It is not in order. There is already one amendment. Mr. BRONSTON. I ask that the gen- tleman have leave to introduce his amend- ment. The CHAIRMAN. I don't think if he had leave he could do it. Mr. CLAY. I think, under the amended rules, all amendments are in order. They Will be voted upon in order. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair desires to say that his rulings may not be exactly in accordance with parliamentary usage, but if you will be patient we will endeavor to grind this matter out with some degree of diligence. Report the amendment of the Delegate from Henderson. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Farmer, which is as fol- lows: That all men, when they form a social 'compact. are equal, and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive. separate public emoluments or privileges from the commu- nity, but in consideration of public services, and no exclusive privilege or emolument shall be granted except as indicated and pro- vided for in this Constitution.” The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Henderson desire to be heard? Mr. BRENTS. That was my amend- ment. Mr. CLAY. I make the point of order that the Delegate has a right to be heard. The amendment fir'st offered should be the .first to be acted upon. Mr. QUICKSALL. Just one word. I think my amendment that the Reading Clerk started to read awhile ago is pertinent, and I wish to re-offer it. The CHAIRMAN. We will get through with what we have first. Mr. BREN TS. All authority is derived from the people. They are the governors in this country. Certain powers have been delegated to the N ational Government. The people, in the Bill of Rights, reserved to themselves certain rights, and restricted the powers of the government in cer- tain instances where powers have been granted; that is as to the manner of exer- cising them. State governments have jurisdiction of all other matters, and the Legislature may enact laws in the manner prescribed by the Constitution. A Bill of Rights is for the purpose of pro- hibiting the exercise of power, or directing the manner of exercising powers that have been granted, or restricting the exercise of such power. A Bill of Rights should never confer authority upon the Legislature of a State, and there is where all the evils that now exist in the State of Kentucky have been brought about. This section, “No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community.” Now, that is affirm- ative and positive; but here is the qualifica- tion, “ but in consideration of public ser- Vices.” That confers authority. It seems that there was a desire to retain to the Legislature the right to confer some exclu- sive privileges to some people. In doing so they have opened the door, and the vam- pires have entered that door, and they are sucking the life-blood of the people, and they will always do it while the door is open. The way to cut them off is to close the door and lock it. N ow, so far as rail- roads are concerned, so far as water and gas for cities is concerned, or the ex— emption of church property is concerned, these thing can all be regulated under ap- propriate articles in the Constitution, and BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 Friday,] BRONSTON—FARM ER-Ronns. [October 24 . that is the place for them. It has no place in the Bill of Rights; for, instead of forbid- ding power, you are conferring power. Here the gavel fell. Mr. BRONSTON. I move the time be extended. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will not entertain that motion. Mr. FARMER. I withdraw my amendment, reserving the right to intro- duce it some other time. Mr. BRONSTON. The substitute that I have offered is section one of the old Bill -of Rights copied verbatim. The Conven- tion will take notice of the fact that the Committee, in making the report, have taken a portion of that section and incor- porated it in section one of this article, and the residue they have made a separate section of, as section 2; so that it is important for the Convention new to determine the ques- tion as to whether or not they desire to re- adopt section one of the old Bill of Rights in lieu of this section reported by the Com- mittee. In offering this substitute, as well as the remarks I make, it occurs to me that it would not be inappropriate for me to apologize to the distinguished gentlemen of this Committee, who seem to have taken offense at amendments being offered to their report, as if it were a personal fight made against the Committee. If that were the case, my very high personal regard for the members of that Committee would pre- vent me from opening my mouth again, or saying aword upon the floor of the Con— vention; but it is for my constituency at home, who, as. a unit, I might say, have de- manded of me that we hold fast to the old Bill of Rights. For that reason I offer this section as a substitute to the report. Mr. RODES. I assure my friend from Lexington that, so far as I am concerned, no such feeling entered my mind in regard to the matter. In regard to the subject- matter on hand, the substitute he offers is equivalent to the old first section of the present Bill of Rights in the Constitution. We will arrive at that in the next step, after we get through with this. If we vote this substitute down, then that proposition will come up. Mr. BRONSTON. You say it is equiv- alent to section 2. I beg your pardon; it is not equivalent, because you leave out entirely the first part: that all freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal. Mr. RODES. We have omitted that first line, as you can all see; but it is em- braced in the first section of our Bill of Rights. The latter part of the first section of the old Bill of Rights is made the second section of our reported Bill; and, although gentlemen may desire to offer objections to it when we reach that, I suggest that we settle this first. I acknowledge, as you can all see, that it is omitted; but when we get to the second section of the Bill of Rights, we shall offer just as many amendments as we please. The Committee took the pains to say, as my friend from Caldwell said, that it was an open question; that the Com— mittee themselves had not finally deter- mined what amendment ought to be made; we couldn’t formulate any, and, conse- quently, I say now—and hope the Conven- tion will understand—there will be no difficulty until we reach that stage of the game. The question now is, whether we adopt the first section of the Bill of Rights or not. The CHAIRMAN. Further debate is not in order. Mr. QUICKSALL. I wanted to move my amendment to that substitute. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair decides that it is too late now. Mr. QUICKS ALL. I arose early enough, I thought. The CHAIRMAN. We have now voted two amendments down, and we are now on the substitute. If the gentleman wanted to offer a substitute, he ought to have done it before the vote, and before the discussion closed. 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] BRENTS—CLAY—PETTIT. [October 24. Mr. BRENTS. My amendment to the substitute has not been voted on. The CHAIRMAN. We have not voted on it. We are now going to vote on it. And the question being taken upon the adoption of Mr. Brents’ amendment, it was decided in the negative. The CHAIRMAN. The vote is now upon the substitute ofi'ered by the Delegate from Lexington. Mr. CLAY. I make the point of order that-the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Morgan is in order. The CHAIRMAN. Let the amendment be reported. Mr. PETTIT. Is it in order unless the Delegate claims the floor and presents it? Mr. QUICKSALL. I do claim the floor. I offer it as an amendment to the substitute, as I understand it; if I am mis- taken, correct me. The substitute before us is a substitute. It is first section of the present Bill of Rights, offered as a sub- stitute for this Committee’s report. I offered mine as an amendment to the sub- stitute for the first section of the present Bill of Rights. The CHAIRMAN. You offer it as an amendment to the substitute offered by the Delegate from Lexington ? Mr. QUICKSALL. I do. The CHAIRMAN. Report it. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Quicksall’s amendment, which is as follows: That all persons, when they form a social compact, are equal under the law, and that no person or body of persons are entitled to, or shall be granted separate or exclusive privileges from, the community, and none shall be granted public emoluments, except in consideration of public services rendered as may be provided in this Constitution. The CHAIRMAN. Does the Delegate from Morgan desire to be heard ? Mr. QUICKSALL. My object in offer- ing that is to, in some measure, close the door against those abuses which have crept in under the section for which it is a substi- tute in the present Bill of Rights. I believe, after mature study and hearing the Dele- gates upon this floor for two or three weeks discuss particularly this one subject, that we need to have that door closed against abuses in the future. Therefore. after con- siderable study and mature deliberation, I have concluded to ofi'er that substitute for that, believing it will, at least, in a great measure, close the door against such abuses. Mr. RODES. I have the same remark to apply to my friend from Morgan that I have had to others. If you will just wait until we get to the next section, all those amendments can come in appropriately; and if there is a solution of the problem offered, we are for it. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to ask the Chairman in what part of section one is there the expression “that all men, when they form a social compact, are free and equal.” Mr. RODES. “All men are; by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights.” Mr. BRONSTON. Do you consider that a similar expression ‘? Mr. RODES. I do, and better, because the word “freemen” used in the old Bill is applicable to a certain set of persons. Mr. McELROY. I would like, for the in— formation of myself and others, to inquire what we have got under consideration. Is it the old Bill of Rights? The CHAIRMAN. We have under consideration the substitute offered by the Delegate from Lexington, which is the first section of the old Bill of Rights. He has offered it as a substitute for the first section of the report of the Committee. Mr. McELROY. Does he want to con- sider in this report of the Committee the old Bill of Rights? The CHAIRMAN. We are considering the report of the Committee, and the Com- mittee are trying te perfect their report, which they have the right to do. Mr. McELROY. It occurs to me, as BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 Friday,] Bnoxs'rox—Ronns—Pn'rrrr. [October 24 . the gentleman from Warren says, we have not arrived at the point for such-— The CHAIRMAN. I will'have to rule the gentleman out of order; there have been two speeches already. And the question being taken upon the adoption of the amendment offered byMr. Quicksall, it was decided in the negative. And the question being taken upon the substitute offered by Mr. Bronston, it was rejected. The CHAIRMAN. The vote now re— curs on the first section, as ofl'ered by the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. BRONSTON. I move to amend the fourth subsection‘ by adding the words, “being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.” The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman be good enough to put his amendment in Writing ? It is impossible for the Secretary to keep the record unless it is so done. Mr. BRONSTON. I will do so, but it seems to me that it is very simple. The sub- section, as it now reads, “The right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions,” doesn’t contain a statement of the truth. It is not the truth, and it has been very earnestly argued by the distin- guished Chairman of the Committee, that we ought not state any thing in the Bill of Rights that is not true. Now, the prop- osition contained in the seventh section, if he means that that shall qualify the prop- osition in section one, it can only do that by construction; and I doubt very much whether, by any rule of construction, it could be made to qualify it. Therefore, it occurs to me that we ought to say what ‘every one of us knows to be true, the right to freely communicate their thoughts and opinions, of course, subject to the abuse of that right or that liberty. Another thing: it has been suggested that we ought to per- fect each proposition as we pass. Section seven may, possibly, not be adopted. At .any rate, I do not think the Convention ought to adopt as a proposition that which they know is not correct. Mr. RODES. In the trial of every case there is the presumption of innocence. It is always presumed that you intend to say that which is right. “Has the right to freely communicate his thoughts and opinions.” What is the presumption ‘? That it will be done properly. That is not a grant of power, because it is inherent. If we adopt the Bill of Rights, the whole has got to be taken together, and every part construed, one clause with the other. The CHAIRMAN. Read the amend- ment. ' The Reading Clerk read the written amendment offered by Mr. Bronston, which was the same as stated verbally by him And the questson being taken on the adoption of said amendment, it was decided in the aflirmative. Mr. PETTIT. The Committee reserve the right to have a vote upon this amend- ment in the House. Mr. BRONSTON. That is not necessary; that right is reserved to all of us. Mr. BECKHAM. It is with a good deal of difiidence thatI rise for the purpose of offering an amendment; but I suppose if it is not done now, it may be too late to do it hereafter. I desire to move to strike out the second subsection of the first section, “ the right of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of their own con- sciences,” and to substitute therefor section 5 of the present Bill of Rights. I will read it. The CHAIRMAN. Hadn’t you better reduce the amendment to writing? Mr. BECKHAM. I will reduce it to writing, but it is section five of the present Bill of Rights (reading): “ That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; that no man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any minis- ' 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] BECK n AM—RODES. [October 24w try against his consent; that no human au- thority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of con- science, and that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious societies or modes of worship.” I am, of course, aware, in offering this as a substitute for the second subsection of section one of the Committee’s report, that if adopted it will strike out section four of the report of the Committee; and I desire now to ask the distinguished Chairman of this Committee, if he sees proper to say anything in response to the suggestion I make, to say to us what limitation is placed upon power now that does not exist in section five_ of the old Bill of Rights. Is it possible that the people of Kentucky sent us here as a set of mere sciolists, to transpose terms and para- phrase language‘? What religious right is guaranteed to the people’of Kentucky by this transposition of terms that is not in this section five of the old Bill of Rights '-" Can the ‘gentleman tell us one? I am not here to offer captions opposition to the report of this Committee; but I do feel, when a section like this, a hundred years old, almost in the exact language it is now, that the Convention ought to have some reason for changing the language be- fore doing it. Besides, the language of this section is better language than that of the Committee, in my humble judgment. I believe it was Mr. Gladstone who said that he wished he knew one thing as well as Tom Macauley knew every thing. I am not going to set my judgment against the judgment of the Committee captiously, but i I would like the distinguished gentleman to tell me wherein the language or meaning is superior in the report of this Committee to section 5 of the old Bill of Rights: “All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences.” That is nowhere stated in the report of this Com- mittee in clean, clear-cut, unmistakable Y English, as it is in section 5. ‘The lan- , consciences.” guage of the Committee is that “all men are by nature free and equal, and have cer~ tain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned,” meaning “com- puted, counted or enumerated.” I say that the words “natural and indefeasible” are bet- ter English than “inherent and inalien- able.” They mean more; and, in addition to that, they are crystallized and sanctified by time. That is all I desire to say. Mr. RODES. The words “inherent ”' and “indefensible” and “inalienable” are . all sanctified by time, and they are “ crys- tallized,” and we have those words in this- Bill of Rights. The gentleman must see, and did see, because he read it, that we have- all he wants in this Bill of Rights, every single word of it, except the word “nat- ural,” which has been left out. What have we‘? “All men are by nature free and equal, and have certain inherent and ina» lienable rights.” We use “by nature” in- stead of “ natural.” “ All men are by nature‘ free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned the right of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of ' their own consciences,” etc. Now he pro- poses to substitute section 5 of the old Bill of Rights for that, which is exactly the- same thing—-“ All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own Haven’t we got that there, leaving out the word “natural?” And we‘ have the word“ natural,” for we say “ by nature.” “No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of wor— ship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent.” We have words equivalent to all that. The exact language: That no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or inte rfcre with the rights of conscience; and that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious. ’ societies or modes of worship. Section four- that we report embraces all that—nearly—letter for letter. “No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or sup- BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Friday,] STRAUS—-RODES—I\’I GORE—BRONSTON. [October 24 , port any place of worship, or maintain any ministry against his consent; no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of con- science; and no preferences shall ever be given to any religious societies, denomina- tions or modes of worship.” Now, down to that point, I say the gentleman wants to strike out the same thing and put in ‘the same thing. The Committee studied this thing over and did the best it could; it is all stated, and I don’t think we ought to disagree in this kind of style over a mere matter of grammatical phraseology that will notinterfere— ' Mr. STRAUS. Will the gentleman per- mit me a question? Why were these ques- tion s, so closely allied, separated and dis- tributed in the different sections? Mr. RODES. I mentioned that in the first speech I made. I didn’t go fully into the history of it, but I showed the reason for using the language then, and showed we used language that was equally as good, or, as We thought,'an improvement. Mr. MOORE. I object to any continu- ance of the debate in this way. Mr. STRAUS. Will the gentleman permit me to ask would it not be better to have the whole religious question in one section than to have it distributed through several. Mr. RODES. As I stated, we say “free and equal.” We distribute them one by one, clearly, distinctly and easily remem- bered. ' You can hang them up and see them, and see where each oneis. If they are so easily remembered, why do you object ? I say it is all the same thing. But then to my friend from Shelby I would say this, as we have gotthe same as you have— Mr. BECKHAM. Will the gentleman allow me to suggest that he has a good deal more than we have in section five. ? Mr. RODES. I was about to add, that if we have qualifying clauses which you don’t like, when we come to them you can move to strike out. And the question being taken upon the adoption of the amendment offered by Mr. Beckham, it was decided in the negative. Mr. BRONSTON. I have an amend-- ment to subsection 7. The CHAIRMAN. Send the amend- ment up. The‘Reading Clerk read Mr. Bronston’s- amendment, which is as follows : “Amend subsection 7 by striking out the words “their families,” and also the words “or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned,” and insert the words, “shall not be questioned.” ~ Mr. BRONSTON. I desire earnestly to ask the Committee to consider that amend- ment before making opposition to it. In the first place, I state it as a proposition, which I do not believe any good lawyer will deny, that the right to carry arms in self-defense, not only by the Courts in Ken- tucky, but in every State in the Union, has been construed to apply, not simply to those occupying the co-relation of husband and wife, father and child, or master and servant, but to extend even to a stranger; and if you insert the word “family,” you necessarily limit the right of carrying arms in self-defense, so that instead of the pur- pose of the Committee .being accomplished -—the purpose of extending—you limit. And, again, the Committee uses the words “ or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned.” Those words are not only surplusage, because, if a man has a right to bear arms in defense of his State, as a matter of course he can bear arms in defense of that State when legally sum- moned as a member of a posse comz'tatus. Now, if the words be surplusage, it is not unfair in me to assume that when a Court comes to construe the language of this Bill of Itights, it will hold that we inserted no word without meaning something by that word; therefore, the right to bear arms in defense of the State is already given, and when the Court comes to construe the meaning of the words, “ or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally sum- '16 . BILL or RIGHTS. Friday,] APPLEGATE—BRONSTON. [October 7'24 . moned,” would it not be compelled to con- strue them as words of limitation, rather than as words of extension? Would not they hold that you could not bear arms in defense of the State, unless thereto legally summoned by an oificer? I don’t think the gentlemen of the Committee mean that, and, for that reason,I have asked that the lan- guage ‘of the old section be adopted. The amendment is for the purpose of striking out words which will leave it in exactly the form of the present Bill of Rights. It is this: “That the rights of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned; but the Gen- eral Assembly may pass laws to prevent persons ‘from carryingv concealed arms.” I regard this as very important. Mr. APPLEGATE. The Committee were of the opinion that all men ought to be granted the right to carry arms on any occasion, so that they did not carry them concealed. There may be times of excite— ment when it would not be exactly prudent to permit men to assemble, bearing arms openly; but the right to bear arms in de- fense of one’s self, one’s family, or in ‘defense of one’s State, can never be ques- tioned. What other rights ought a man to have to bear arms, if the public safety should require that he should not bear them? The Constitution'does not limit a man’s right to bear arms, but says the Leg- islature shall never deprive any man of the right to bear arms in defense of himself, his family, or of the State, or in aid of the civil power when legally summoned there- to. There are four conditions here. He doesn’t have to wait until he is summoned to bear arms in defense of the State. If he is confronted with a case that a man should bear arms—should defend the State—he doesn’t have to wait, under the provision of the Constitution, nor can he be required by the Legislature to wait until he is sum- moned by the civil power. I think he should be limited as it is here. Mr. BRONSTON; Then you do ad- mit that ' you meant to limit the right in the 01d Bill‘? Mr. APPLEGATE. By no means. The Legislature should prohibit these privileges here. The Legislature, under that, might forbid a man under certain conditions from hearing arms publicly, but this Bill of Rights doesn’t command them to do it. It doesn’t forbid any bearing arms in public now, but leaves it to the Legislature in any case except where the Constitution limits it. Mr. STRAUS. Ha-ven.’t you then in- tended a very material change from the old Bill of Rights‘? Mr. APPLEGATE. No, I don’t think there is any very material change. And the vote being taken on the adoption of said amendment, it was de- cided in the negative. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer an amendment to subsection five of the report of the Committee. The CHAIRMAN. Report the amend- ment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Bronston, which is as follows: “The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction.” Mr. BRONSTON. I offer that in lieu of the language of subsection 5. The Con- vention will observe that in lieu of this language reported by the Committee, I have used part of the language of section three of the old Bill of Rights, striking out the reference to slavery. I have used the expression contained in the first line and a half: “ The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction.” The distinguished Chairman of the Com- mittee says that when he inade his first speech three weeks ago, he announced the proposition that that was not true, and that nobody had denied it. I can simply say that it was only out of charity for the dis- tinguished Chairman that the proposition was not denied. I do not believe, and I do BILL OF RIGHTS. 17 Friday,] RODES—BRONSTON—ASKEW. [October 24 . not think any Delegate upon this floor be- lieves, for one moment, that he could be correct when he says the right of property is not over and above constitutional sanc- tion. My judgment is, it is without ques- tion that the right of property comes alone from the Creator of man, who endowed him with facilities for enjoying it as well as for acquiring it. Mr. RODES. I did not mean to say that there was not partial truth in that proposition. Mr. BRONSTON. say that unqualifiedlyf Mr. RODES. But I do mean to say that the proposition, taken as a whole, is not true in law; not true philosophically; not true politically. Mr. Jefferson said it wasn’t true. You will find it in one of his letters written from France to James Madi_ son. It isn’t true philosophically. Why‘? I understood you to Because it implies that a man can go, like the King of Spain once did, land a ship on a shore, and claim the whole country. I . admit this: The labor of a man’s hands belongs to him indefeasibly by nature; whatever you produce is yours, your mova- bles; but I do deny that a man has an un- limited right to the possession of land. All he cultivates, all he uses for the time being, does belong to him. Mr. BRONSTON. Does the Chairman not know the distinction between property and possession‘? My language is “right of property.” Mr. RODES. I am talking about the inherent and indefeasible laws of nature. The first section of this reads: “All men are by nature free and equal, and have cer- tain inherent and inalienable rights ”—- what we have got by nature. That is what we are talking about, not in possession, not by convention. I maintain that the rights to your land that you cultivate comes by convention, by law, by agreement, by asso- ciation, by the social compact, and nothing else, and that has been held by the ablest- philosophers in the land. And I want to say, further, that one of England’s ablest men some two or three years ago elucidated that doctrine, in which he set forth the doc- trine that two sets of men in this country are now discussing. Prudon, the celebrated Frenchman, maintained that all property was theft. Robert Owen and other men hold that a community of goods is the true doctrine. But the true doctrine, as Jefi'er- son has it, although he did not pretend to argue it, is that what a man works or labors for belongs to him; his movables belong to him; but when you go beyond that, whatever property you own beyond what you cultivate comes by convention, and ‘by convention alone. Mr. ASK EW. Do I understand you to hold the doctrines of Henry George, that the State has a right to take land from a man at its own will? Mr. RODES. N o, sir. any thing about that. Mr. ASKEW. Will you tell - where your position differs from that? I have not said Mr. RODES. I am simply announcing the proposition that the indefeasible right of man is to hold in this way and no other. When you come to the doctrine that a'man has a right, indefeasibly and inherently and naturally, to own land, like Robinson‘ Cru- soe on the island San Juan Fernandez, as - far as his eye could survey it, I dissent‘. I have heard of persons in England claiming whole counties—thousands of acres. When you come down to the definite meaning of that right; when you settle them correctly, they are just as I tell you. There are va- rious conditions throughout the world, ‘and. you must get at them rightly and properly A word means an immense amount here; and the crystallized doctrine is as clear to my mind as any thing in the world. Look at the individuals going throughout the world selecting land! Two of my friends go to a country uninhabited. When, you go there, how- much land do you occupy ‘? Whatever you occupy or cultivate or pro- duce, whatever you use, belongs to you is BILL or RIGHTS. Friday,] BRO Ns'roN—Ronits. [October 24. That part of the earth that you subdue, according to the twenty-eighth verse of the first chapter of Genesis— Here the hammer fell. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that the time be extended for the gentleman to finish his remarks. Mr. CLAY. I make the point of order that the Committee cannot change the rules adopted by the Convention. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will sus- tain the point of order. Mr. BRONSTON. I simply desire to ask the Chairman of the Committee what he means by saying a man’s movables are beyond the contrcl of the government ? If he makes ten dollars, it is beyond and above the control of the government; but if he puts it in land, it is not over and above such control. Mr. JONSON. We have had two speeches on this subject, and our rules ought to be enforced. The CHAIR. The Chair will enforce the rule. Mr. BRONSTON. I am not making a speech. The Chairman of the Committee agreed to answer my question. The CHAIRMAN. The trouble is, that the gentleman has consumed the time. Mr. BRONSTON. I bow with the very greatest respect to the decision of the Chair; but the gentleman, when on the floor, said he would answer my question in a moment. The CHAIRMAN. The rule must be enforced. The question being put before the Com- mittee on the adoption of said amendment, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted as follows: 85 in the affirmative and 47 in the negative; and the amendment was rejected. Mr. AUXIER. I offer an amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows: Amend subsection 5, section 1, by adding after the word “acquire” the word “ enjoy- ing.” Mr. AUXIER. I think, in order to make that section complete, that word ought to be inserted. It would read then in this way: “The right of acquiring, enjoying and protecting property.” I think it is im- perfect without it. ' Mr. ALLEN. I will simply say this: That the Committee think the word “en- joying” is snrplusage, because the enjoy- ment consists in the acquiring and protect- ing; and you just re-duplicate when you say “acquiring, enjoying and protecting,” because it means no more than “ enjoying ” it while you are acquiring and protecting it. ' Mr. BULLITT. Will the gentleman al- low me to ask him a question '? How can a man protect his property if you take away from him the right of carrying arms? Mr. ALLEN. In various ways—by hold- ing on to it. The question being put on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Pike, and a division of the vote being called for, it was decided, 36 in the afiirma- tive and 41 in the negative; and the amendment was rejected. Mr. BRONSTON. I have an amend ment to be added as a subsection. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows: That absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a Republic, not even in the largest majority. Mr. BRONSTON. 1 would suggest to the Delegates that that is section 2 in the present Bill of Rights, which has been left out entirely by the Committee. I under- stand that the purpose of the Committee in grouping these inherent and inalienable rights was that they may be close together, so that even school children can under- stand what man’s inherent and inalienable rights are; and yet the Committee, as I un- derstand from the Chairman, because it has become obsolete, has omitted to state that which, in my judgment, is the very first and most important reservation for a BILL OF aien'rs. '19 Friday,] ALLEN-——BRONSTON—WASHINGTON. [October 25 . man to make when he delegates to govern- ment certain power as an agent through its legislative, its judicial, and its executive departments to do certain things, and we say here in unequivocal language that ab- solute, arbitrary power, over our lives lib- erty or property exists nowhere, not even in the very largest majority; and I do not believe that we, as Kentuckians merely, because that seems to be obsolete language, ought to leave it out of the present Bill of Rights. It is a thing that is dear and close to every Kentuekian who loves free- dom and loves to live in a Republican gov- ernment, to say to the government, “Whilst we delegate certain powers, we do claim that not even the largest majority can exercise absolute or arbitrary power over our lives or property.” Mr. ALLEN. I desire to call the atten- tion of the gentleman from Lexington to the fact that no power can be exercised by the General Assembly of Kentucky unless it is granted in this Constitution. DELEGATES. No! No! Mr. ALLEN. I stated it wrong. All powers are reserved to the Legislature, ex- cept those taken away by this Constitution; and nowhere in this Bill of Rights, or in the Constitution which is 'to be adopted, will be given the power to exercise arbi- trary and absolute power over the life, lib- erty or property of any man. That power is reserved, and it is utterly useless to put t in a Constitution. It is a general truth. Mr. BRONSTON. May I call the gen- tleman’s attention to the fact—because we want to get at this matter properly—if his position be correct, then I am entirely wrong; because my understanding was, that, unless we restricted the power of the Legislature, it was absolute. Mr. ALLEN. I said that. Mr. BRONSTON. You stated it had only such power as was granted. Mr. ALLEN. I modified that. The question being put on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Lexington, and a division of the vote being called for by the Chair, it resulted fifty- three in the afiirmative; and the amend- ment was adopted. The question being then taken upon the adoption of the first section of the Com- mittee’s report, as amended, it was declared adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Report the second section. The Reading Clerk read the second section of the Committee’s report, as follows: No man or set of men are entitled to sepa- rate, exclusive public emoluments or privi- leges from the community, but in consider- ation of public services. The amendment of the Delegate from Allen was read also, as follows: “Amend section 2 by striking out the following words: ‘But in consideration of public services.’ ” ' Mr. WASHINGTON. I desire to offer an amendment to that section. Mr. QUICKSALL. I desire to offer an amendment to the section. Mr. NUNN. I desire to offer a substi- tute for that section. Mr. KENNEDY. I desire to withdraw the substitute offered by me to section 2 of the report of the Committee on a former occasion, and to offer another substitute for that section. Mr. CLARDY. I have an amendment. Mr. RODES. I want some information. I understand the Delegate from Allen has offered an amendment. Then other gen- tlemen have introduced amendments. Is it not proper to proceed with the amend- ment of the Delegate from Allen before any thing else comes before the House‘? The CHAIRMAN. It has been con- sidered that gentlemen may offer amend- ments at any time; but the amendment of the gentleman from Allen will be con- sidered first. Mr. MoELROY. The amendment I of- feredwas in good faith, and I believe those words ought to be stricken out from this 20 BILL or RIGHTS. Friday,] RODES—BUCKNER—BRONSTON. [October 24.- . second section, because it is a Pandora’s Box, which has given rise to many evils and wrongs, as has been repeatedly stated by gentlemen upon this floor; but I propose to accept, as an amendment to my amend- ment, the amendment offered by the gentle- man from Christian county, and would advise its adoption. It will be read. Mr. RODES. If the Delegate from Allen and the Delegate from Christian will allow me a moment, the Committee would like to offer an amendment, which no doubt will be considered before all others. I do not sup- pose there will be any objection to it. We suggest that the latter part of section 18 shall be transferred and made part of this section 2. It will then read: “No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services; and no law shall be passed by the General Assembly making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities.” The CHAIRMAN. There being no ob- jection, the report of the Committee will stand as amended in that way. 1 Mr. BUCKNER. Is it in order to offer a substitute for the second section? The CHAIRMAN. It is in order to offer it, but it will not'be voted upon at this time. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to have the amendment read for information. The Readin g Clerk read the substitute, as follows: That no privilege, immunity, exoneration or exemption shall ever be granted to any man or set of men which shall not be as freely and fully exercised and enjoyed by all others under similar circumstances and on like conditions. That no public emolu- ment shall ever be allowed to any person, except in consideration of public services, the performance of which shall be required by law, or for which ‘‘the Chief Executive Magistrate or some other oificer of the Commonwealth shall be legally authorized to contract. ~ The Readin g Clerk read the amendmen of the Delegate from Christian to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Allen, as follows: Amend by striking out the words, “ but in consideration of public services,” and insert in lieu thereof the following: “ Ex- cept as shall be provided for in this Consti- tution.” Mr. MCELROY. ment. Mr. WASHINGTON. I ask that the amendment which I sent up be read. Mr. NUNN. I desire to have my sub- stitute read. Mr. KENNEDY. I desire that mine shall also be read for information. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Campbell (Mr. Wash- ington), as follows: I accept that amend- Amend section 2 by striking therefrom the words, “ but in consideration of public services,” and by inserting in lieu thereof the following: “ Except as provided in this Constitution; but this shall not be so con- strued as to deprive the General Assembly of the power, by general and uniform laws, to exempt from taxation property now so exempt under such law;” and by adding, as a subsection thereto, the following lan- guage: “ N o hereditary honors, emolu- ments or privileges shall ever be granted or conferred by the General Assembly.” The amendment of the Delegate from Morgan (Mr. Quicksall) was read, as fol- lows : No person or collection of persons are entitled to, or shall be granted, separate, exclusive privileges from the community; and none shall be granted emoluments ex- cept in consideration of services rendered, as may be provided in this Constitution. The substitute of the Delegate from Crit- tenden (Mr. Nunn) was read, as follows: That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate privileges from the community, except in consideration of public services; and in the granting thereof there shall not be granted any exoneration or exemption from the just burdens of the government, except-as l otherwise provided in thisiConstitution. BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Friday,] MARTIN—MONTGOMERY—OLARDY. [October 24 . The substitute of the Delegate from Nicholas (Mr. Kennedy), offered in lieu of the substitute heretofore offered by him, was read, as follows: That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and that no grant of separate or exclusive emoluments, privi- leges or exemptions shall be made to any man or set of men, but in consideration of public services, and every grant of a fran- chise, privilege or exemption shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or. amend- ment. Mr. MARTIN. stitute for section 2. The substitute was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: I desire to offer a sub- No separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges shall be granted to any man or set of men except as shall hereafter be pro- vided for in this Constitution. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I desire to offer a substitute for the Committee’s report. section 2, as amendment. The substitute was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: No man or set of men are entitled to sep- arate, exclusive public emoluments or priv- ileges from the community, but in consid- eration of services to the Commonwealth. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Christian has the floor on his amendment. Mr. CLARDY. It appears from the discussions, which have extended now through two weeks on this subject of the Bill of Rights, that this section has been the fruitful source of much corruption and evil in this State. One gentleman, I be- lieve, denominated it as the Pandora’s Box, which has brought evil, and only evil; and it appears that this last clause of this sec- tion has been the cause of all the trouble. It reads as follows: “But in considera- tion of public services.” My amendment proposes to strike out, “But in considera- tion of public services,” and insert in the place of it, leaving the first part of the sec- tion as it is, “Except as provided for in this Constitution.” Then there will be no grants made for public services, except as pro- vided for somewhere else in this Constitu- tion. The amendment of the gentleman from Harrison (Mr. Martin) is virtually the same as this. I think they are worded almost precisely alike, but this expresses the idea fully and clearly. Now, what will be provided for in this Constitution we do not exactly know, but we do know this-_that unless something is provided this section can do no harm. This cuts off the offensive part This shuts the door that some gentlemen have declared ought to be shut. When we come to vote upon the report on taxation, or the report on corporations, all the re- strictions necessary will doubtless be put in this Constitution. When that is done it will provide for all the provisions for public services that may be necessary in the Constitution. I think it wise now to adopt this amendment. and go on to some other part of the work before us. Mr. RODES. The Committee have, as you are aware, transferred the latter part of section 18 to this section. The proposition of the Delegate from Allen does not interfere with that, except to strike out those words, “but in consideration of public services,’ and adding the words further, “as provided for in this Constitution.” I think we meet the whole case. Perhaps one word might be changed: the word “ public,”-—I don’t know about that. Mr. PE'I TIT. I offer the following as a substitute for the amendment of the Dele- gate from Allen. The Reading Clerk read the amendment as follows : “No man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate emoluments or privileges from the community. The General As- sembly shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens. It may exempt from taxation public buildings, churches used for religious worship, bury- ing grounds, charitable institutions and pub- lic and private schools for the education of 22 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] PETTIT. [October 24 , children. Excepting private schools, no revenue-bearing property of this or any other class whatever shall be exempt from taxation.” Mr. PETTIT. This section of the Bill of Rights is prolific of trouble, and well deserves the careful‘ consideration of this Committee. Its importance is impressed upon the mind when it is remembered that the General Assembly possess all powers not reserved in the Constitution to the peo- ple, and that grievous wrongs and weighty burdens have been imposed upon them by reason of its provisions in this section of the Constitution. It is claimed that if this section is elnninated, as one of the pro- posed amendments suggest, that the flood- gates will be wide open to all kinds of un- , wise legislation. Some contend if the amendment of the gentleman from Marion be adopted, that no property can escape taxation. Others insist that all property under that amendment may escape there- from. This is the solemn opinion of mem- bers of the legal profession. They disagree on this section as widely as other Dele- gates upon this floor, whilst all, or nearly all, admit that some action should be taken to insure greater security to the citizen against the encroachments of class legisla- tion. The first sentence in my amendment, “ no man or set of men are entitled to ex- clusive special emoluments or privileges from the community,” is an old jewel im- bedded in our present Constitution, made more priceless, it occurs to me, by striking out the words, “but in consideration of public services.” Why should not this be done? It is thought by some that an era might occur in the history of our State when a soldier or statesman or a scholar,for valuable and distinguished services might be entitled to public recognition under this clause. Its elimination will not prevent that flattering mark of the favor of this noble people. Let the Gen- eral Assembly adopt resolutions attesting the fact, and inscribing the name among the long list of her other illustrious sons. The genius oi man can devise no higher honor or distinction. If the design be to make it a consideration of dollars and cents, let the barrier be so high that legislation can not o’erleap it. Should a case of this kind ever occur, a free-will ofi'ering from the individ- ual pockets of this generous people, from one end of the State to the other, will speed- ily and in the right spirit be made; but never permit one dollar for such a purpose to be taken from the Treasury, if thereby the door be open for the unjust legislation that appears on our statute books through the medium of this clause which I propose to strike out. The second sentence in my amendment, “ the General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens privileges or immunities which on the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens,” is from the Constitution of the State of Iowa, and appears in several of the ('onstitutions re- ccntly framed, and in words almost pre- cisely as in the amendment ofl‘ered by the distinguished gentleman from Marion and urged so ably upon this floor. It is a “ gem of the purest ray serene.” It is What many of us were sent here to enact. The third and fourth sentences, “It may exempt from taxation public buildings, churches used for religious worship, burying grounds, charitable institutions, and public and private schools for the education of children. Excepting private schools, no revenue-bearing property of this or any other class whatever slIall be exempt from taxation,” are nuggets from my own mine. They may be rough, but I insist that they have value in them. If not beautifully set, what is our Committee on Style here for if not for this identical purpose ‘I The substance is there. Let the Committee, if needs be, clothe it in more delicate and shadowy robes, that the form may be more attractive to the artistic eye; I care not. The sub- stance is what is really wanted by the good people of this State. Taken as a whole, BILL OF RIGHTS. 23 Friday,] BECKNER—OLARDY—PETTIT. [October 24 . the amendment that I propose meets the demands of the people, and in its simplicity of language it is so plain' that the “way- faring man, though a fool, need not err therein ”—so plain that a Judge or a law- yer, a farmer or a mechanic, may read and understand. (Applause) Mr. BECKNER. A number of amend- ments have been ofi‘ered to the Committee’s report on this section, and the gentlemen are apt to be somewhat confused as to which of them may be the best to vote for. I confess that I am somewhat confused myself in their present shape; and I would suggest that the amendments be ordered printed, and the further consideration of this matter be postponed until to-morrow, so that we may act intelligently upon the matter in voting. Mr. CLARDY. I rise to a point of or der. This motion would interfere with the regular order established by the Conven- tion, and this Committee has no right to in- terg'fere with it. The CHAIRMAN. This Committee has the right to control its own actions. Mr. CLARDY. _ I contend not, when- ever it conflicts with any order established by the Convention. Mr. PETTIT. It seems to be the uni- versal wish of the Committee that these amendments should be printed. It is an important matter, and we ought not hurry; I therefore move that the Commit- tee rise for the purpose of going into the House and obtaining that order; or, by unanimous consent, we might pass over this section and take up the next for considera- tion. - Mr. WASHINGTON. I will ask leave to withdraw that part of my amendment, offered awhile ago, which relates to the subsection. It seems to be the wish of this Committee that these amendments should be printed. I find, upon examination of section 22, that it about covers the idea which I intended to embrace in that part of my amendment. The CHAIRMAN. Without ‘objec- tion, the gentleman may withdraw his amendment. Mr. CLARDY. If the Committee de- sire to postpone the matter, I have no ob- jection. I simply desired that we should be in order. Mr. PETTIT. I withdraw my motion that the Committee rise, for the object can be otherwise attained. The CHAIRMAN. It is moved that the consideration of this matter be post- poned until to-morrow, and that the amendments and substitutes to this section be printed. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I rise to a point of order. This Committee of the Whole has no right to direct any thing to be printed. That can only be done by order of the Convention. The CHAIRMAN. The effect of the motion is to ask the Convention to have these amendments printed. The question being put on the motion of the Delegate from Clark (Mr. Beckner), it was carried. Mr. BULLITT. I would like to offer an amendment to section 2, which I desire to have printed along with the others. The CHAIRMAN. Let the next see- tion of the Committee’s report be re- ported. The Reading Clerk read the third section, -as follows: All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer an amendment, as follows: To insert after the word “happiness,” and before the word “and,” “ security.” The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentle- 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] BRoNs'roN--SM1TH—CoX. [October 24 . man wait until the other amendments are reported ? Mr. BRONSTON. Certainly. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by the Delegate from Carroll (Mr. Cox), as follows: Amend section 3 by adding in line 3, after the word “of,” the words “life, lib- erty and.” The sentence would then read, "for their safety, peace, happiness, and for the protection of life, liberty and prop- erty.” - The amendment of the Delegate from Hardin (Mr. Smith) was read, as follows: Amend section 3 by adding after “ prop- erty,” in line 3, the following: “The people of Kentucky stand pledged to the preserva- tion of a republican form of government, and subject to this limitation only.” Mr. BRONSTON. I offer my amend- ment now. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Lexington (Mr. Bron- ston), as follows: Amend by adding, after the word “hap- piness” and before “and.” the word “se- curity.” Mr. SMITH. I desire to withdraw my amendment. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may withdraw his amendment. Mr. COX. I was taught when I grew up to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. How I have lived up to the teaching is another question ; but the subject presented in the third section undertakes to state the objects for which free governments are founded, and I do not conceive that free governments are founded alone for the protection of property. I conceive they were established among men for the purpose of protecting life, liberty and property. I offered that amendment in good faith, not for the purpose of getting an opportunity to talk before this Conven- tion, but for the purpose of declaring be- fore the world that this Convention be- lieves that life and liberty are of greater value than property. Those by whose valor was secured to us the privilege of meeting here were not in that great Work laboring and expending their lives and their all for the purpose of protecting prop- erty. It is true, one man in that great army was willing to make sacrifices for property. That was Benedict Arnold. But the objects and purposes for which those brave men contended were to estab- lish and secure the protection of life and liberty, and that before any thing else upon the earth. For the purpose of securing that, they framed the Constitution of the United States. They framed Constitutions for the different States in this Union; and now we are here to-day deliberating upon that great question. We have heard the most eloquent appeals possible to be made to so frame the Bill of Rights as to declare that governments were founded for the purpose of sustaining all that belong and all that is valuable to man. What is more valuable to man than his life and his liberty‘? Nothing. And will-we adopt that section as it is, and say that we declare life to be of less value than prop- crty, or that liberty is of less value than the right of property? I hope not. If gentlemen upon this floor believe that property is of greater value than life and liberty, then they should vote this amend- ment down; but if they believe that prop- erty is of less value than life and liberty, they should sustain this amendment. It is true that this word came down to us from those who sat in this hall in 1849; bu while that is true, the objects and purposes for which we are assembled are to amend, change or alter that Constitution; and the amendment offered by me is to change it not only in its language, but in its true meaning. The meaning should be “to pro- tect life, liberty and property.” Mr. RODES. In the first part of sec- tion 1, which has been adopted in this Bill of Rights. appears the following: “All men are by nature free and equal, and have cer- tain inherent and inalienable rights; among which may be r eckoned—l. Th BILL OF RIGHTS. 25 Friday] a right of enjoying and defending'ttheir lives and liberties.” vI would most respectfully suggest to the gentleman from Carroll that that is saying as much upon the subject, perhaps, as ought to be said, unless we desire to recapitulate and re-state those words again. In this section which is under consideration it is said: “All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property.” The gentleman from Carroll has offered an amendment by which he de- sires, after the word “protection,” to insert the words “life and liberty.” The senti- ment we all approve. The idea we do ap- prove; but the first part of it has been al- ready secured by declaring it to be one of the inherent, inalienable and indefeasible rights. , Mr. COX. Will the gentleman permit me to ask a question? Does it appear any- where here in connection with the estab- lishment of free government? Mr. RODES. No, sir; except it says that “free governments are founded on the authority of the people,” embodying in one short line all the_.'desirable§in life. What does peace, safety, happiness and protection of property mean? “Their peace, safety and happiness.” Safety of what? Peace of what? Happiness of what‘? What does that embrace? It embraces life and lib- erty; it means it all; and to take that in con- nection with what we have already declared —and I beg pardon of my friend from Car- ‘ roll for having used the other day the word tautological. It is not tautological, but it does recapitulate the idea in a different way from what we have already said it. I do not care to add any unnecessary language to it, notwithstanding the sentiment may be right. The question being put on the adoption of the amendment of the ‘Delegate from Carroll, the same was declared rejected. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the COX—RODES—YOUNG. [October 24 . Committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to have the‘ amendments to the sec- tion under consideration printed. The question being put on said motion, the same was carried. The Committee thereupon rose, and the President, Mr. Clay, resumed the Chair. Mr. YOUNG. The Committee of the Whole have been in session, and had under consideration the report ’:of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again to-morrow; also, to have the amendments offered to section 2 of the report printed. The question being put on the adoption of the report of the Committee, the same was declared adopted. Mr. McDERMOTT. I want to ask the House, if it is not objectionable or incon- venient, that to-morrow, when the Com- mittee of the Whole come to consider sec- tions 5 and 6 of the Report of the Commit- tee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, that they will pass the same to a later day, be- cause I am the only person, I believe, who has offered an amendment to those two sec- tions. The House will probably differ with me on the questions, and I desire to say something on my amendments. A public duty will probably require my presence in Louisville to-morrow, and I would like to have the consideration of those sections passed. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the request of the Delegate will be granted. Mr. BECKNER. I desire to offer a resolution. - The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That the rules be amended so as to allow a Delegate who offers an amend- ment, in addition to his right to make his opening statement, five minutes to close debate on his amendment, which time he may give to or divide with any other Delei gate. ' The‘PRnsIDENT. Under the rules, the resolution lies over one day, -26 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] RODES.——ALLEN. [Octoberji2t4 . Mr. BOLIJS. I move that we now ad- ThdPRESIDENT. By unanimous con; journ. ~ ' ‘sent, it can be offered and ordered printed. Mr. ALLEN. Is it too late to offer a The PRESIDENT. The hour of ad, substitute for the second section of the re- joumment having arrived, the Convention port of the Committee, which I desire to stands adjourned until to-morrow morn- have printed? ing at 10 o’clock. _--_ <£onnention Record ‘KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL Coavsarion. Vol 1 FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 25. 1890. No.39 Saturday,] ALLEN—MCHENRY—BURNAM. [October 25 . The Convention was called to order at 9 o’clock by the President, Mr. Clay, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bagby. The Journal of yesterday was _read, cor- rected and approved. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I hold in my hand a letter from a constituent of mine, a man of intelligence, a man of character, asking that certain matters be inserted in the Con- stitution. I think it is worthy of some at- tention, and I would be glad to have it read. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the reading of it‘? The Chair hears none, and the Secretary will report it. The Reading Clerk read the petition presented by Mr. Allen, which was from R. H. Baker, and referred to the marriage relation and the granting of divorces. The PRESIDEI~ T. \Vhat reference does the gentleman desire‘? Mr. C. T. ALLEN. The Committee on General Provisions. Mr. MCHENRY. I would like to ask the gentleman if that petition is from a Minister of the Gospel? Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Mr. BURNAM. I have a communica- tion from the Rev. John I). Field, a promi- nent citizen of Madison county, calling the attention of the Convention to some im- portant matters. I will ask to have it re- ferred to the Committee on Revision. )Ir. IV. S. SMITH. I have acommuni- cation from the County Clerk of Monroe county, showing the indebtedness of the No, sir. county, which I would like to have referred to the Committee of which the Delegate from Anderson is Chairman. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Some time ago the Delegates sent letters to the Clerks _of the Courts of their counties, asking for infor- mation about the bonded indebtedness of the respective counties, and also of any towns in the county. I have an answer from the Clerk of my county, and I don’t know what disposition to make of it.‘ The PRESIDENT. It will be referred, without objection, to the Special Committee of which the Delegate from Anderson is Chairman . Mr. BECKNER. I don’t want it under- stood that Clark has no debt, so I file a similar statement for my county. When the State assumes the debts of the counties we want our share. Mr. JOHNSTON. I have a communi- cation from the Clerk of the Fayette County Court on the same subject. The PRESIDENT. The same refer- ences will be made. Are there any more petitions? If not, then reports from Stand- ing Committees are in order. MixFORREr‘TER. I have a petition from J. E. Graw, which I ask to he re- ferred to the Committee on General Pro— visions. The PRESIDENT. The pctition will be so referred. ‘ MizMcHENRY. I desire to make a report from the Committee on Rules. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the report. The Reading Clerk read the report of- fered by Mr. MeHenry, which is as fol- lows: 2 RULES. Saturday,] McHnxnY—J OHNSTON—BRO XSTON. [October 25 The Committee on Rules, to whom was referred the resolution offered by the Dele- gate from Carroll, have had the same under consideration, and beg leave to report that they do not believe that the business of the Convention will be facilitated, but will be retarded, by the holding of afternoon or evening sessions at this stage in the work of the Convention. Many of the regular Standing Commit- tees are now engaged on very important work, and are daily holding sessions in the afternoon and evening, and a session of the Convention at such times would prevent them from performing the very important matters which are intrusted to them-work which, in fact, is quite as important as the work in the Convention, and they there- fore report that it is inexpedient and im- proper to hold such sessions at this time, but that the same may be done at a later day. They say, however, that the Convention may begin its sessions at nine o’clock, and continue until one o’clock, and they report a standing rule on that subject. in place of the rule we now have. H. D. MCHENRY, Of the Committee. The standing rule reported was as fol- lows: That the session of the Convention shall begin each day at nine o’clock, stand- ard time, except on Mondays, when it shall be eleven o’clock, and the hour of adjournment shall be one o‘clock each day. Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to strike out the latter part of the report providing that a majority may suspend the rules. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Fayette moves to strike out from the re- port Mr. MGHENRY. I have no objection to the amendment. And the question being taken upon the adoption of the amendment, it was decided in the affirmative. And the question being also taken upon the resolution offered by the Committee as amended, it was decided in the affirma- tive. The PRESIDENT. Reports from Spe- cial Committees are in order. Motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. BRONSTON. I have a resolution which, under the rule, would be required to lie on the table one day, inasmuch as it is a change in the rules of the House; I, however, upon this, mqve a suspension of the rules, that the resolution may be put upon its passage. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Bronston, which is as fol- lows: “Amend Rule 22 by striking out, after ‘ debate,’ the words ‘ or explanation of a vote shall be given.’ ” Mr. MCHENRY. Is the motion to con- sider it now‘? The PRESIDENT. There will have to be a suspension of the rules before the res- olution will be before the Convention, and the Delegate from Lexington moves that the rules be suspended in order to take up the resolution. Mr. PETTIT. How will the rule them read? The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the rule, as amended by the propo— sition of the Delegate from Lexington. The Reading Clerk read the rule, as amended. Mr. MOHENRY. batable ‘? The PRESIDENT. A motion to sus- pend the rules is not debatable, but the question will be debatable after they are suspended. Mr. BRONSTON. I understand that a suspension of the rules will simply author- ize an explanation of the matter before the Convention. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, the gentleman may proceed, although a motion to suspend the rules does not ad— mit of any debate. Is the motion de- in‘ PRINTING. 3 Saturday,] CLAnDY—Bnoxs'roxi—McHENRY. October 25 , Mr. CLARDY. What I wanted to ask was, doesn’t it take a two-thirds vote to suspend the rules ? The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Christian is right. The Delegate from Lex- ' ington can proceed.’- Mr. BRONSTON. I have no disposi- tion to be hasty about the matter; but I have heard from a vast number of Dele- gates upon this fioor expressions of surprise and disappointment that, under the five- minute rule, after the general debate is closed, they do not have the right to make a short explanation, and my sole purpose is that justice may be done to every man upon this floor, and give them an opportu- nity, when they come to vote upon these various propositions submitted by the Com- mittee, to express their views by a short, concise explanation of their votes; and it is only for that purpose that I ask its con- sideration . Mr. MCHENRY. I would like to make a little explanation. It was one of the rules that was debated fully here when we had the rules under consideration, and the House, after deliberate consideration, voted to establish this rule just in the language reported by the Committee, and I think the rule ought not to be changed. We have a very thin House this morning, and when that rule is changed I want it done by a full House. I would have a call of the House before I would have this vote taken here this morning. We have had debate enough, and I don’t want an hour of speeches in the call of the roll when we are working under the five-minute rule, gentlemen say- ing that they haven’t had time to make in five minutes a speech long enough to ex- plain their views. When we commence the call of the roll it will probably take us a day to get through the vote of the House when it gets into the House upon some of these that I consider not very important amendments now under consideration in the Committee of the Whole. Let us take this thing deliberately. Of course, if the House wants it, we can have it. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to with- draw the motion to suspend the rules in order to give the Delegate from Ohio county, with whom this seems to be a pet measure, an opportunity to consider it The PRESIDENT. Then, under the rules, the resolution lies over one day. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move that the Convention resolve itself into Commit- tee of the Whole for the consideration of the Order of the Day. Mr. AUXIER. I second the motion. Mr. HENDRICK. I would ask the Delegate from Boyd to withdraw that mo- tion till I have an opportunity of offering a resolution which I have. Mr. MOORE. I do, sir. The PRESIDENT. The motion is with- drawn. Mr. HENDRICK. I find that, after climbing those steps. I am hardly in condi- tion to utter my sentiments. I have a res- olution here which I will offer and ask to have read. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Hendrick, which is as fol- lows: ' WHEREAS, The printed reports of the Convention proceedings show in the typo- graphical and grammatical construction of sentences, as reported and printed, such glaring mistakes as to render the reported utterances of Delegates senseless, and often ridiculously absurd; therefore, Be it resolved, That the President ap- point a committee of three Delegates, of which the President shall be ex oficio (.hairman, to take the matter under con- sideration, and if deemed advisable, employ a proof-reader, to keep his ofiice in the Cap- itol, whose duty it shall be to correct the printed Record and report to the Delegates apparent errors for correction, and prepare proper indexes for each volume of the Rec- ord when completed. The PRESIDENT. Under the rule, the resolution lies over one day. Mr. HEN DRICK. I would ask tha the House consider it at once. 4 PRINTING. Saturday,] HENDRICK. [October 25 , The PRESIDENT. That can be done by a two-thirds vote, on suspension of the rules, or by unanimous consent. Is there any objection‘? The Chair hears none, and the resolution will be put upon its passage. Mr. HENDRICK. I have offered this resolution for the reason that I believe I am one of the very few Delegates upon this floor who have not yet disported them- selves in a set speech; and I, therefore, could not have any personal reason for urging such a resolution. I have consulted with a number of the Delegates, and the large number of mistakes which appear in the Oificial Record are certainly enough to app-ill any gentleman who has hoped for posthumous fame. I believe Byron says that fame consists in having your name misspelled in the Ofiicial Gazette. While there is no misspelling of the names of the Delegates here, some of the most distin- guished men in the State of Kentucky are made by these ot‘ficial reports to utter non- sense such as was never heard even in a precinct convention, much less in a Con- stitutional Convention. For instance, take the distinguished Delegate from the count) of Marion, a gentleman whose scholarship and ability is “known and lead of all men.” In No. 24, page 15, he uses this remarkable sentence. Speaking of public service, he is say: “To the farmer in the far- ofi‘ field, who toils through summer’s head and winter’s cold, to earn an honest livelihood.” Now, anybody who knows that distinguished Delegate, knows that no such word was uttered by him in this Con- vention; and I am sure, that whatever changes the English language may undergo in the next forty years, any person, no mat- ter how scholarly, would find great difli- eulty in ascertaining the meaning of the distinguished gentleman when he says: “The farmer toils through summer’s head.” The fact of the business is, I have never yet known that summer had any head. My impression has been that the head of sum- made to mer rested somewhere near its caudal ap- pendage; and, for that reason, in no proper sense could summer be said to have a head. Now, take the second col- umn of page nine, fourteeenth line, he has introduced an entirely new word. He uses the words “political and juridical Zz'beratm'c.” Perhaps, in connection with the rest of the phrase, it might be under- stood that “literature” was what he meant. On page 5 the Delegate is made to use the word “poweas.” I am utterly at a loss to understand what the meaning of the gen- tleman is, unless there is a remote sugges- tion that “ powers” is understood or im- plied. Now, if you will take the venerable Delegate from Ohio, for whose scholarship every gentleman here has respect, he is also made to utter some very remarkable sen- tences. In No. 19, page eighteen, he uses such tautology as this: “Once having passed the act of incorporation incorporat- ing acounty;” and on page nineteen, in the first column, there seems to be a diifer- ence of opinion between two words. It is the most remarkable error that I think I ever heard or ever saw. It says “abou tit." I thought at first it might refer to Abou Ben Adhemmmay his tribe increase-— but that allusion is instantly dispelled by the “ tit ” which hangs to the other end of it. and his agricultural pursuits are instant- ly suggested, and it is “abou tit." Now, of course, this may seem funny to outsiders, but you will excuse me for saying that it is pretty rough on the Delegates to the Con- stitutional Convention. As I said, I may speak with the utmost freedom about the matter, because I have not yet been injured seriously. I have a regard and respect for my fellows on this floor, and we certainly want a plain, clean sheet of what we have said. N ow, my motion is to have the President appoint a Committee of three, which will take the whole matter under advisement, with power to act, and if found necessary, that they employ some compe- PRINTING. _ 5 Saturday,] HENDRICK—PETTIT. [October 25 . tent man, keeping his office in this build- , ing, who shall correct the reported Record of this Convention, and any gentleman who has made a speech upon this floor can have the opportunity of revising that speech with a competent proof-reader. It is fair and just to the Delegates themselves. It is, as I believe, now a matter of necessi- ty. I am informed by one of the Delegates, in whose ability this Convention and every one here has the utmost con- fidence, that there has not been a speech uttered by a Delegate upon this floor that has not been misquoted and mis— represented in the debate. I want it under- stood that this is no reflection on the Official Stenographers. They have reported it as accurately as could be done, and it is not their business to correct proof. The debates, so far as I am advised, have been reported with commendable accuracy; but this Con- vention has no shoulder upon which to lay the responsibility for these typographical errors, which have the ability to make a ' man utterly ridiculous when he may have been as wise as Solon; and I think, upon reflection, that every Delegate here will con- clude that this is a matter of such impor- tance as at least ought to claim the attention of a Committee, and with the President at the head of that Committee, and such others as he would appoint with him, it seems to me that we can confide in the‘ judgment of that Committee. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to ask the gen- tleman from Fleming one question. If he is certain these are the corrected proofs that he has been looking over? Possibly he has one of the first copies, and before the errors are corrected. Mr. HENDRICK. I have never been able to find what the gentleman designates as a corrected copy‘. If any such exists, they may have been sent out to my constit- uents, who are, therefore, much better ad- vised than I am about it. The copies I have seen are those taken from my desk. Mr. PETTIT. I will state to the gentle- man that, under the rules operating here; every morning there is a copy for our cor- rection placed on our desks; that we are then entitled to make the corrections there and give it to the Reporter, and he corrects it, and then it comes back to us in corrected form to be sent out. Mr. HENDRICK. I have heard that there is such a myth as that. I know that there is a tradition of that kind in this Convention, but I have never yet ascer- tained it as a fact. I, myself, have carried on two occasions some corrected matter to the Stenographer at the desk, but I never had anybody come kindly to me and say you are talking so and so. I suppose the reason for that is I have not been talk- ing much; but if I had been, I am sure the case would have been the same. I am sup- posed to be responsible for what I have uttered upon the floor of the Convention, but I cannot be held responsible for what the Public Printer and his myrmidons put in type. There have never been any sug- gestions made to me, and unless a member takes the pains to go and correct the mat- ter laid upon the desks of the Delegates, it is not done. To be sure, they have an opportunity to correct; but in the multitudi- nous duties that employ the Convention, it is not alwavs convenient for them to correct it. Mr. YOUNG made some remarks on the same subject, which, at his request and with the consent of the Convention by a vote taken, are withheld from the Record. The resolution of the Delegate from Fleming was then adopted. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move we now go into the Committee of the Whole. The question being taken upon said mo- tion, it was decided in the afiirmative. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from the Fourth District of Louisville will take the Chair as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole for the further consideration ‘of the report of the Committee’ on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. Young thereupon took the Chair. 6 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] M ILLER—SMITH—G'RAHAM. [October 25, The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary in- forms me that the amendments to the second section, which were ordered to be printed, have not been printed—at least they are not laid on our tables. IIlhe mat- ter under consideration yesterday was the third section of the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights. Mr. W. H. MILLER. 1 move that we pass that section until the printed amend- ments come in. And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I ask leave to suspend the motion until I send up this substitute. The CHAIRMAN. The motion has been declared passed. Do you insist upon the substitute? Mr. GRAHAM. I offer this as a sub- stitute to the second clause of the Bill of Rights. Mr. BRONSTON. I want to call atten- tion to the fact that we were considering section three. The CHAIRMAN. It was passed with the understanding that it would be taken up this morning. Anyhow, it has been passed for the present. The Delegate’ can ofier his substitute and have it printed. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I ask that it be taken up at the proper time. Mr. GRAHAM. I offer this as a sub- stitute, and ask that it be printed and taken up at the proper time. The CHAIRMAN. We can ask to have it printed, but we can’t order it printed. The Secretary will report the matter which was under consideration yesterday. Mr. LASSIN G. I want to ofi'er a sub- stitute to the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights—a substitute for section 2. I want it printed. The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will ask the Convention for leave to print. The READING CLERK. The matter under consideration is section 3 of the re- port of the Committee. There is pending to that an amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Lexington. The Reading Clerk read the said amend- ment, as follows: Amend by inserting, after the word “happiness,” the word “security,” in the third line. DELEGATES. That was voted on yes- terday. The Reading Clerk also read the amend- ment ofi'ered by Mr. McChord, which is as follows: Amend section 3 by adding thereto the following words: “Not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States or of the State of Kentucky.” The CHAIRMAN. The question now is upon the amendment of the Delegate from Lexington. Mr. L. T. MOORE. That was voted on yesterday. Mr. BRONSTON. I beg pardon; that was not voted upon. I have no desire to say any thing except to call the attention of the Committee to the fact that the word “security ” is found in the seventh section of the old Bill of Rights, of which this sec- tion three is a copy, with the exception of that word. and I thought that its omission might have been an oversight on the part of the Committee; but, upon consultation with one of the members of that Committee, I learned that the reason for its omission was that they thought possibly the word “ safety,” in the first part, meant the same thing as -‘ security.” “ For their peace, safety, happiness, and the protection of property.” The old Bill reads, “ for their peace, safety, happiness, security. and the protection of property.” I merely desire to say that there is a difference between the words "safety and security.” “Safety” is a result, while “security” is the means employed by the government to produce that result. One is passive and the =other is active, and it does seem to me that the very purpose of government is security to the individual member of the government. BILL OF RIGHTS. 7 Saturday,] RODES——WASHINGTON——MCCHORD. [October 25. Mr. RODES. The words “peace, safety, happiness and protection of property” are all I think the word “safety” implies Sup- results. “security,” and several other words. pose we said, “safety, salvation and se- curity,” and gone on repeating all the other words that mean the same thing. I apprehend it would have been regarded as tantamount, almost, to saying “abounded abundantly.” And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative. The CHAIRMAN. Report the amend- ment of the Delegate from Washington, which is now in order. The Reading Clerk again read the amend- ment offered by Mr. McChord. Mr. WASHINGTON offered the follow- ing amendment to said section: “Amend sec- tion three by adding at the end thereof, ‘provided such change be not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States.’ ” Mr. MCCHORD. It has always been a doubt in my mind as to what the latter‘ clause of section three in our present Con- stitution meant: “For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an in- alienable and indefeasible right to alter, re- form, or abolish their government, in such manner as they may think proper.” Under the Constitution of Kentucky a mode is pointed out for reforming or amending the Constitution. Then it seems to me that if they have the right to alter or reform the Constitution of the State of Kentucky by any other means than that pointed out by the Constitution itself, this Convention must recognize the right of revolution. If that be true, it seems to me that is the most dangerous clause in our present Constitution. We might go back to 1820 or 1824, which, it seems to me, were the darkest days this State of Kentucky has ever seen, in the contest between the Old Court and the New Court Party. That state of case might arise again under this section. We have had great diflieulty in calling this Convention. The people of Kentucky were, time after time, called upon to vote in favor of calling a Constitutional Convention. It was thought by many impos- sible to call that Convention under the mode provided under our present Constitution. It was said by wise and good men in the State that the people of Kentucky should come together under this section and rise in their might and demand a change of the Consti- tution of the State of Kentucky. What, then, would have been the result of a Con- vention called in that manner ? Sup- pose the people had come together in the capacity of a sovereign Convention. Sup- pose they had changed. the present Consti- tution without going through the form prescribed by the Constitution itself, and they had adopted a Constitution of that kind. What would have been the state of case in Kentucky‘? If a Constitution had been adopted by that kind of a Convention, the question would have come before the Courts for determination, whether that Constitution was law or not; and then, if the Courts should hold it was unconstitu- tional and in violation of the strict letter of the present Constitution, what state of case would we then have in Kentucky‘? I deny that We should not point out the mode of changing our Constitution. 1' deny the proposition that the people of the State of Kentucky have the right to alter or reform their gov- ernment in such manner as they see proper, because the Constitution of the United States itself guarantees every State in this Union a republican form of government. If that provision is correct, then the people would have the inalienable right of coming together in their sovereign capacity and organizing a Monarchy in this State, which I deny is true in any sense. I suggest that it would be a protection to the people of Kentucky if we provide in the Constitu— tion that the Constitution can only be re- formed or modified according to the Con- 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] BULLITT—WASHINGTON [October 25 . stitution of Kentucky and of the United States, and, therefore, I; have offered this amendment, which provides that we recog- nize the only wayto reform the Constitution shall be in conformity to the Constitution itself. If the people of the State of Ken- tucky were to come together and undertake to abolish this by force, that would itself be revolutionary; it would be treason against the government of the State of Kentucky, and if it was successful, it might be termed a revolution; but if it was not successful, the parties who engaged in it would be guilty of treason. Therefore I offer this amend- ment, and provide in so many words the mode of amending or changing this Con- stitution, so that it cannot be done except in conformity to the Constitution of the United States or of the State of Kentucky. Mr. BULLITT. I will call the gentle- man’s attention to the fact, that in all gov- ernments there is an unlimited and unlim- itable power. Whether that belong to a crown or to the government of the United States, or to the people, is the question that is now before the people of the United States. The State of Kentucky has always contended that that unlimited and unlimit- able power belonged to the people; and if we declare here that that does not belong to the people, but belongs'to the United States government, we reverse the order of things, and say that the sovereign power is in the government and not in the people, and therefore I hope that the amendment offered by the gentleman will not prevail. Mr. RODES arose. The CHAIRMAN. This is out of or- der. Two gentlemen have already spoken. Mr. BULLITT. I spoke on the amend- ment offered by the gentleman from Wash- ington. Mr. PETTIT. In order to make it in order, I move to strike out the last three words of his amendment, and yield my time to the Delegate. Mr. WASHINGTON. I only rise by reason of the fact that I have offered an amendment substantially the same as that of the gentleman from Washington, except that it does not include the words “ Consti- tution of the State of Kentucky,” which, in my opinion, cuts the throat of his amend- ment. This last clause embodies a propo- sition which, it seems to me, cannot be regarded as tenable. It embodies an idea which was very prevalent in this country a few years ago, and which was submitted to the highest Court known to man. There was a great difference of opinion about it and it was decided in the negative by a very large majority. I have never even heard of apetition for a rehearing being filed; and it seems to me that, at this late day, we should regard the question as res adjudi- cata. We have no right to change or abolish our form of government so as to bring it in conflict with the Constitution of the United States. That is a proposition of law which I suppose no lawyer in this Convention will dissent from. The Fed- eral Constitution expressly guarantees‘ to us, as has already been pointed out, a re- publiean form of government. Now, sup— pose we attempt, under this latitudinous expression in the third clause, to adopt some form of government not republican in character. Have we the right to do that, when we are an integral part of the Federal Union? Our Constitution must be in harmony with the Federal Constitu- tion. It seems to me that the proposition involved in the clause under consideration‘ is entirely untenable; and, therefore, I move as an amendment that the words “provided such change be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States” he added to the end of that clause. To add the words, “ the Constitution of Kentucky,” as suggested by the Delegate from Wash- ington, is simply to say that the peopleshall have no right to change, alter or reform their Government, if they find their Con- stitution in a certain condition. In other words, if they have a particular form of Constitution at the time. they cannot BILL OF RIGHTS. 9 Saturday,] RonEs—J OHNSTON—COKE. [October 25 , change it. That position is untenable, and cuts the throat of the amendment of the gentleman from Washington, as it seems to me. The Constitution simply represents the people. They can get together and can change that Constitution in such manner as they please, provided it be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States. Beyond that they cannot go. For that reason I offered the amendment. Mr. RODES. The right of revolution is not stated here. The statement here is an old statement in all the old charters in the State of Kentucky, and perhaps nearly everywhere else. It is an abstract propo- sition defining‘ the rights of the people. What are the people‘? You may say the people of Kentucky or the people of the United States. It does not matter much. That is the sense in which it is used here. But it is not necessary to discuss that at this time. As I say, it is an implied right the people have to alter, abol- ish or reform their government whenever they deem proper. The gentleman says they have no right to do so. I say they have, and why‘? I say because it is right and proper—not in a’ capricious manner— not because under impulse they choose to do it—but in a proper way. How is that proper way ‘? That is the way pointed out in the Constitution. That we understand, and any other way we understand is revo- lutionary. I am not talking about revolu- tion now, or what the right of revolution is, when the objects of government are not subserved. When the manner in which the government is exercised becomes de- structive, says Jefferson, then the right of revolution begins. We all understand that, and we are not talking about that. We are talking about what we should deem proper now in view of this Constitution and the Constitution of the United States, which we took an oath to support. The question being put on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Washington, the same was declared re- jected. ‘ Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I called ‘for a re- port of the amendment before the vote was taken, but failed to get the attention of the- Chair. The CHAIRMAN. twice. Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to reconsider- the'vote by which the amendment was de-7 clared rejected, in order to enable the gen- tleman to have the amendment reported. Mr. RODES. I have no objection to» that. The CHAIRMAN. There being no ob- jection, leave is granted, and the vote is re-- considered, and the amendment will be- reported by the Secretary. The amendment was again read. Mr. COKE. I believe the gentleman from Daveiss moved to amend by striking- It was reported out the latter part of, it—the last three- ‘words. The CHAIRMAN. The motion was- not put. The question is on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Washington, which has just been reported. The question being put on the adoption of said amendment, it was lost. The Reading Clerk read the amendment- of the Delegate from Campbell (Mr. Wash-- ington), as follows : Amend section 3 by adding thereto the- following: “ Provided such change be not inconsistent with the Constitution of the _ United States.” The amendment was declared rejected. upon the question being put to the House. The CHAIRMAN. be upon the adoption of the section as re- ported by the Committee. The question being put onthe adoption of said section, it was declared adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Read the next sec-I tion. The Reading Clerk read section 4 of the Committee’s report, as follows: No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or The question will- ' 10 BILL OF RIGHTS. ' Saturday,] BRENTS—RODES. [October 25 . maintain any ministry against his consent; no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and no preferences shall ever be given by law to any religious societies, denominations or modes of wor- ship. But the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices incon- sistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State, or opposed to the civil au- thority thereof. The civil rights, privi- leges and capacities of any person shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on ac- count of his religion. The amendment of the Delegate from Clinton (Mr. Brents) was read. as follows : Amend section 4 by striking out, in lines 9 and 10, and after the word “State,” the following: “Or opposed to the civil au- thority thereof.” Mr. BRENTS. The first amendment to the Constitution of the United States con— tains the following: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of re- ligion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” That is all it contains upon the question of liberty of conscience. Section 5 of the present Bill of Rights has the fol- lowing: “That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; that no man shall be com- pelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent; that no human au- thority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of con- science; and that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious societies or modes of worship.” The Supreme Court of the United States has, in an appeal from Utah, decided that the free exercise of religion does not protect pol yg- amy or justify any thing inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of society. The Bill of Rights has been construed by the highest Court of this Republic, and now the liberty of conscience is fully pro- tected without permitting lieentiousness or practices endanger-in g the peace or safe- ty of the State. The addition by the Com- mittee is not needed, but does authorize legislation which may endanger the peace or safety of the State. My amendment only goes to the latter part of the Committee’s report, and is to strike out the words, “ or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” The addition made by the Committee is this: “But the liberty of conscience hereby se- cured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or afiirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsis- tent with the good order, peace or safety of the State.” That has already been decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Committee add further, “or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” This confers power upon the Legislature of the State to legislate on the subject, and may not the Legislature of the State of Kentucky under this clause regulate the manner or mode of worshiping God? I believe it is a dangerous innovation. It cer- tainly does authorize legislation, and ought not to be'here. A Bill of Rights ought to prohibit, and should never authorize legis- lation. This does, and it ought to be stricken out. Mr. RODES. The motion made is to strike out the words “or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” The Constitution of the United States, as read by him, does not seem to meet adequately the case. It applies only to the Territories, and not to the State. There is nothing in this clause at all but what can be safely commended and established by the Constitution of any State. I am as much opposed as any man can pos- sibly be at any time to the imposition of any yoke or bondage on any one on ac- count of religious principles; but the qual- ification in the latter part of- that section amounts to this: That nothing under the pretense, shape or guise ofreligion shall ever be used by any one for the purpose of creating sentiment adverse to the peace and safety of the State. That is about all there is in BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 Saturday,] BULLITT—BECKHAM—BECKNER. [October 25 , it. The gentleman says that we have no right to put in any thing except something prohibitory; that we have no right to au- thorize legislation. I certainly disagree with him. That is not the definition of a Bill of Rights. I have taken occasion once or twice, when on this floor, to say what my opinion was about it; and I do not know that any one has uttered any thing ad- versely to it. A Bill of Rights contains not only things prohibitory, but it contains things mandatory, and sometimes may con- tain things permissive. To prevent great and flagrant wrong is one object of a Bill of Rights. To sustain absolute and perfect rights is another object of a Bill of Rights; and then sometimes it may be necessary to insert a provision to solve an apparent con- flict. Mr. BULLITT. Was it the intention of the Committee to authorize the passage of Sunday laws for religious reasons by that section '? Mr. RODES. Not at all. Sunday laws are not embraced by that at all, and cannot be by any fair construction. The question being put on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Clinton (Mr. Brents), and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted twenty in the affirmative and thirty-eight in the neg- ative; and the amendment was rejected. Mr. BECKHAM. I desire to offer as a substitute for section 4, now under consid- eration, the whole of section 5 of the Bill of Rights as it now is. The CHAIRMAN. “Fill the Delegate from Shelby kindly wait until we have dis- posed of the other amendments ‘? Mr. BECKHAM. Certainly. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Union (Mr. Spald- ing), as follows: Amend as follows: Insert after the word “worship,” in the sixth line in said section, the following, to-wit: “ Nor shall any per- son be compelled to send his or her children to any school to which he or she may have conscientious objections.” Mr. BECKNER. That amendment was originally offered by me, and the Delegate from Union, one morning when I hap- pened to be absent, thinking it would not be printed, had it called up. and it was offered in his name. He asked the other morning to have it withdrawn as offered by him, and leave it stand as offered by myself. When my amendment is reached, I shall want to say something. I would ask the Clerk if my amendment is on the list. The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will consider the amendment of the Dele- gate from Clark as now before it, and the Delegate has the floor. Mr. BECKNER. As is well-known, there is a large element of a great religious organization, to which many persons in Kentucky belong, opposed to the American system of public schools. Their opposition arises from the fact that thereis no religious instruction given in those schools. They are as conscientious in their opposition to those schools as I am in my belief in that system. I am anxious for this Conven- tion to do whatever can be done to render our system of public schools acceptable to all our people, and to remove ‘every objec- tionable or obnoxious feature. It is believed by many that the time will come when we will have compulsory education. I am cp- posed to inserting in this Constitution any provision looking to compulsory education, leaving it to the future to determine that matter, when our public school system shall have been made more perfect than it is, and when our people are better prepared for it. In the wisdom of those who succeed us it may become proper then to introduce that system. This amendment simply provides that in the future there shall be no provision made requiring those who are conscientiously opposed to send- ing their children to public schools to do so. We do not know what may arise in the future in the zeal of those who come after us; and they may attempt to compel persons who are conscientiously 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] BECK‘SER—BODES—PHELPS. [October 25 . opposed to the public schools to send their children to them, fixing pains and penalties for refusal. “ Conscience,” said William III., of England, “is God’s province.” It is a region into which man should not enter. I believe in absolute toleration; and as the last Convention was character- ized by devotion to slavery, I would be glad to see this Convention become known as having been inspired by the love of liberty and absolute freedom of conscience to all men; and, therefore, I am anxious to see this amendment adopted, so that all may feel that no laws may be passed that will intrench upon the domain of conscience. It was one of the glories of our history that the founder of one colony was the man who first divorced the State from the Church; and that the law-giver of another colony was the man who wrote an essay on “ Toleration.” I would be glad to see this Convention, representing the sovereignty of Kentucky, as it does, declare that there should be abso- lute freedom of conscience whenever the occasion comes for it, that all its citizens of to-day and of the hereafter will feel that they are free to worship God as they please, and that they are preserved from every effort of the law-makers to force their wills in any way different from that in which their conscience would lead them ; and therefore I hope the amendment will be adopted. Mr. RODES. I desire to say now, and I suppose it will be agreed to universally in this Convention, and I desire it to be made a part of the record, so that the persons who read the record may understand that the question of taxation, if any should arise, has nothing whatever to do with this proposition. The question is, whether the people shall be compelled, under the sovereign power of the State, to attend a school against their con- scientious convictions? This is no new question. It is an old question. It is a part of Plato’s Republic, as I suggested the other day, in which he undertook to ex- hibit the Utopian scheme of a State away off in the Atlantic Ocean, somewhere in the Hesperides, which undertook to train the child from the time it was born to the time it died. It was completely under the pro- tection and control of the State. The State bore on the individual from his birth to the grave. Such is not our theory. Our theory is that the government must not be too paternal. Mr. Jefi'erson’s motto was that the people are governed too much. That is our theory now; and we suppose that all adopt it. The people must not be governed too much. Let the paternal hand he kept off. The people are best governed when least governed, when they hardly know they have a government. I know in Germany, and in some States of this Union, education is compulsory, and some gentlemen are insisting that children should be compelled to attend school, or there is danger that ignorance will, “like a canker in the bud,” eat on the fair healthfulness of our State. I do not agree to that for one, and the Committee do not agree to it for another. We main- tain that we must respect the conscientious convictions of the people. There are in- ducements and possibilities high and glorious enough ahead of every child to induce this State to educate the child, and the few who never will come are too insig- nificant to be considered at all in regard to this matter. Let us, therefore. put on record now that no man shall be compelled to send his children to a school, or attend a church, or anywhere else, against his conscientious convictions; and in that way we are willing for the amendment to be adopted. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I offer an amend- ment to the amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows : Add after opposed, “provided they send to some other school tolerated by law.” Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I have an idea that this State some day will have a com- pulsory law, compelling the people to send their children to school; and I have an. BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 Saturday,] idea that the gentleman’s amendment, without my amendment, would simply ‘open a loop-hole for those who do not in- tend or wish to send their children to school at all, to fall back and claim their rights under conscientious scruples, and say: “ 1 am conscientiously opposed to this school, .and therefore you cannot make me send my children to school.” I want the laws of Kentucky so if the people should ever con- clude to have a compulsory law in regard to education in Kentucky, that no man—- no parent—can fall back on such a ground .and say, “ I am conscientiously opposed to free schools, and therefore you cannot compel me to send my children to school.” You can compel the young men of this country to go to the cannon’s month if it becomes necessary to protect this country or ‘State from foreign powers, or any thing that threatens the ruin of the State. I say they should be compelled to go to the free schools provided by law, or if they prefer, to some other school they may substitute for that, in the event Kentucky should undertake to have a compulsory education. I do not propose to have that loop-hole, and have a man ‘say: “I am conscientiously opposed to a school, and therefore you can- not make me send my children to school at all.” MI‘.RODES. I would not now arise except for the assertion of a principle the gentle- man has brought out. I say, after he has made the question, I distinctly put myself for the other side. There pught not to be anylaw in our Constitution or enacted by the Legislature to compel a man to send his child to school unless he wants to do it. It is an interference 011 the part of the pater- nalism of the Government; a direct inter- feren ce by the Government with the powers and rights of the family. The individual is not the unit. The family is the proper unit; and I think a good many gentlemen who have spoken will hear me out in the statement that the head of the family is the unity of government in this country, and PHELPS—RODES—BECKNER. [October 25 . h the family have some rights which ought ' to be respected and cannot be invaded, and if there are not' enough inducements for a man to send his child to school, the gov- ernment ought not to interfere. Keep your hands off, and if the glories of the country and of the State, of knowledge and power, all of which are wrapped up in the acquisi- tion of learning, if these objects are not grand and glorious enough to induce a man to send his children to school, nothing else will do any good. This modern idea, emanating from Germany, of compelling children to attend day school, does not meet my approbation at all, and I appre- hend it is a little too far advanced for the State of Kentucky. While we ap- prove of education, and earnestly wish to see school-houses in every valley and on every hill and in every town, and have them free as air, and open to the whole public. still we say keep your compulsory hand off, and let there be freedom. Mr. BECKN ER. I do not agree with the gentleman from Warren or with the gentleman from Russell. I believe the time will come when we will have compul- sory education in Kentucky. When our State fills up, and we have schools that are adequate and sufiicient for the wants of the people, and schools such that people should be compelled to send their children to, I have no more-doubt that there will be com- pulsory education than I have that we live in a free Commonwealth; but I do not want to put in the Constitution that any man shall be compelled against his conscience to do any thing in this Commonwealth, and I am, therefore, in favor of the amendment going in as it is. I do not think it will in any way interfere with the operation of compulsory education. There will always be Courts to construe laws. The Courts will construe the laws passed in those days, and the Courts will be able to tell whether .a man has conscientious opposition to send- ing his child to a school. I therefore am opposed to the amendment. 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] SMI'rn-ALLEx—Eflnaus. [October 25 . % ._____ The question being put on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Russell (Mr. Phelps), was declared re- jected. The question then being taken on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Clark (Mr. Beckner), the same was de- clared adopted. The amendment of the Delegate from the First Louisville District (Mr. Zach Phelps) was read, as follows: “Amend section 4 by striking out from line 1 thereof the word ‘man,’ and inserting in lieu thereof the word ‘person.’ ” The questiou being taken on the adoption of said amendment, the same was declared rejected. The amendment of the Delegate from Hardin (Mr. H. H. Smith) was read. as follows: “Amend section 4 in line 4, by adding after ‘conscience’ the words ‘in matters of religion.’ ” Mr. H. H. SMITH. I desire simply to say it makes it fuller and more explicit. The Committee’s report reads: “No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or sup- port any place of worship or maintain any ministry against his consent; no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of con- science.” It goes on to say: “And no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious society." I simply propose to add after “control or interfere with the rights of conscience,” the Words “in mat- ters of religion.” I find that these words are in twelve Constitutions, and, while it is not a material point, it makes that matter more explicit. Mr. ALLEN. It seems to me that the amendment offered by the gentleman is altogether useless. Full liberty of con- science is granted in the second clause of the first section, and instead of making it fuller over here, it seems to me it is a limi- tation. “ The rights of conscience limited to matters of religion,” instead of making it fuller actually places a limitation up- on it. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Is it not the idea of the Committee to apply that to “ matters of religion? ” Mr. ALLEN. There might be other matters, or any thing else. The question being put on the adoption of said amendment, the same was declared adopted. The amendment of the Delegate from Bullitt (Mr. Straus) was read, as follows: Amend by striking out all of section 4, commencing with the word “but,” in the sixth line in second sentence down to and including the word “thereof” of said sen- tence. The words proposed to be stricken out being: “ But the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace, or safety of the State, or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” Mr. STRAUS. As far as I have been able to investigate the question, these are new words in the Bill of Rights. They are untried words. The Committee, it seems to me, have gone out and gotten new lan- guage for the purpose of qualifying the old declaration of the liberty of con- science. It is possible that these words may in the future be fruitful of much trouble in this State. They are yet to be construed, and they materially qualify the whole declaration in favor of the liberty of conscience; and I would be very much obliged if some member of the Committee would inform us where they got these words. I have been unable to find in the Bill of Rights of any State in this Union any such qualifying words as are used here. It seems to me that there is an abundance of room here for construction, and we leave it with the Legislature of this State to de— termine the question what is licentiousness, or what practices are inconsistent with good order, peace or safety of the State. I can imagine a Legislature so composed of re- ligious fanatics that they will determine BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Saturday,] RoDEs~MU1R-—BULL1TT. [October 25 . that the doctrine of a number of gentlemen in the city of Louisville, who teach the doctrine of the Agnostics is contrary to the peace and order of this State, and, therefore, that they should not be permitted to assemble. I can so construct a Legis- lature that they will determine that the old-fashioned Methodist meetings in the woods, where they shout, is contrary to the good order and peace of society. You leave a wide door open for construction. It seems to me that we should be content to have a complete and clear declaration in favor of liberty of conscience, without any attempt whatever to qualify or limit it, or to abridge the power of the Legislature to determine what practices are inconsistent with good order and the peace and safety of the State. If the Chairman of the Committee can show where these words have been used in any Bill of Rights, or where they have been construed, and there- by relieve the minds of many Delegates of an apprehended danger which might come from these untried words. they will be en- titled to the support of this Convention; otherwise, we should leave that old declara- tion in favor of liberty of conscience as it has been for one hundred years in this Commonwealth. Mr. RODES. The gentleman has asked, “Where did you get the words ‘?" I re- sponded to that inquiry the other day in a way that is, in my estimation, a sufiicient response. No matter where we got them, if the matter is good, adopt them; but if they are not good, then do not adopt them. This age and day are very inquisitive; but I can answer still further; give specific i1- lustrations of this language in other Con- stitutions. The State of Florida has this language in ner Constitution. As I under- stand, the State of Illinois has similar lan- guage. So has the State of California, which comes as near to being a Godless institution as any in the land; and so also has Mon- tana. Mr. STRAUS. Will you please turn and see if any such declaration is in any of those Constitutions? Mr. RODES. I have not got any by me; but, as I said, I have compared them; and my friend from Nelson county (Mr. Muir) informed me that he had the memorandum with him. I have the Constitution of Mon- tana at my room, and I understand that the language, if I am not mistaken, is in the Constitution of that State. Mr. MUIR, I can give the gentleman the exact reference, with the page. Ben Poore’s Constitutions, Florida, page 347, section 5; California, page 179, section 4; Illinois, page 441, section 3. Mr. BULLITT. Have those words ever been before a Court of Justice for construc- tion? Mr. RODES. Not that I know of, ex- cept this. I can tell my friend from iWIcCracken, which will also be an answer to the argument adduced by the gentleman from Bullitt county, that there is not a Court in the land, from a Justice of the Peace up, that has not the power to say what is a breach of the peace, and they will still continue to have the power. This is merely assertive of the Common Law now. Mr. BULLITT. What do you mean by the word “ practices?" That does not mean breach of the peace. Mr. RODES. If I were to give an opin- ion it would not amount to any thing; but “practices,” we all know what it means. It means a course of life or action. Mr. BECKHAM. Does it include acts of licentiousness‘? The word “licentious- ness," I presume, is inserted there in contra- distinction to “misdemeanor” or “crime.” I would like for the gentleman to say what department of the government hereafter, whether the Legislative, the Executive or the Judicial, is to determine what are acts of licentiousness? Mr. RODES. I do not understand that that word “licentiousness” is used in con- trast to misdemeanor. It is almost cumu- lative to those words. Wc’understand 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] BECKHAM—BRONSTON—CLARDY. [October 25. what it means. Licentiousness means go- ing beyond a certain license. Mr. BECKHAM. Somebody will have to construe it. The Courts will have to construe it. They have to pass upon it as upon every thing else. Vow populi, 'vorv Dei; We are bound to be governed by the highest tribunal we have, the Supreme Court of the State. This does not excuse acts of licentiousness. It is not so in- tended. The Courts will construe it. Is it not easily arrived at in a legal proceed- ing to ascertain it‘? We simply say, these rights are secured. Still, nevertheless some people may doubt, and have doubted, and will doubt, and in the growing future, when there is a boiling mass of mankind, and fruitful sources and seeds of evil at the bottom, eternally seething in this everlast- ing caldron of our common humanity, we say that, and put it on record: “ Beware, don’t go too far.” Mr. BRONSTON. I offer an amend- ment to the amendment of the gentleman from Bullitt. The amendment was'read by the Read- ing Clerk, as follows: “ Amend by inserting before the word‘ no,’ in first line of the Committees report, the following: ‘ That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own eonsciences' ” Mr. BRONSTON. I reserve the right to close this discussion on that. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair does not understand that to be an amendment to the amendment, but it is an amendment to the original proposition. Mr. CLARDY. I arose simply for the purpose of making that point of order; that the amendment does not apply to the amendment of the gentleman from Bul- litt. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will sus- tain the point of order, but will hear the gentleman from Lexington. -Mr. BRONSTON. The amendment of the Delegate from Bullitt is to strike out a certain portion of the Committee’s report. As a matter of course, if you strike out a portion of the Committee’s report, that leaves one the right to amend it. Now I move to amend, when you strike out those words you shall add other words. It is perfectly germane for me to amend; that whcn you strike out you shall add other words. The CHAIRMAN. I suppose in that view it may come in; but the gentleman has not got it exactly in form. The motion ought to be to amend the amendment, and inserting the following words at the begin- ning of the section. Mr. BRONSTON. say. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will con- sider it then as an amendment to the amendment. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to reserve the residue of my time to close the discus- sion. DELEGATES. Object! call for the regular order. Mr. BRONSTON. I understand the rule was made this morning to authorize a reservation of a portion of the time allowed for the close. I am sure it was introduced by the Delegate from Washington. but I may be in error as to its adoption. I will proceed now, however. Before I say any thing, I must again apologize, because I am impressed this morning more than ever with this belief: that men who are offer- in g amendments to the report of this Com- mittee are being considered by the Com- mittee and their personal friends as making unnecessary objections to their report. On the contrary, I am endeavering, by the very closest study, to preserve the Commit- tee’s report as far as possible, provided I can be permitted to inject into that report the sacred principles in this old Bill of Rights, and to strike out of that report words that have been inserted there with- out careful consideration; and the distin- That is what I do Object i We BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 17 * Saturday,] B RONSTON—MUIR. [October 25. guished Chairman of the Committee has hurled at us this morning again that re- markable criticism. Because we asked where he gets words, he says “what difference does it make ‘?” I say it makes the great- est difference. Every word of the old Bill of Rights has been made sacred by blood and sanctified by tears, and when the gen- tleman proposes to inject words, we have a right to ask, “do they come with judicial approval? Have they been carefully weighed‘? ‘Have they been construed?” He answers, through one of his associates upon that Committee, that these words that are asked to be stricken out are found in other Constitutions. I challenged the statement at the time, and I challenge it now. No civilized people in these United States, or in the known world, who believe in freedom of conscience, have ever. pro- posed to impose such restrictions as this Committee has done. He referred to the Constitution of Florida. In the Constitu- tion of Florida you do not find any such provision. The Constitution of Florida referred to contains this provision: “The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship shall forever be al-' lowed in this State, and no person‘ shall be rendered incompetent as a witness on ac- count of his religious opinions.” I am using the reference the Committee gave, page 347, section 5. “But the liberty of con- science hereby secured‘ shall not be con- strued as to justify licentiousness,” which language of the Committee I will call at- tention to in a moment, “ or abuses subver- sive of the peace and safety of the State.” That is the Florida Constitution. The gentle- man of the Committee add these words: “ Or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” They say that in the Constitution of Illi- nois we find a similar provision. I deny it; nothing like it. The Constitution of Illinois contains this provision: “That all men have a natural and’ indefeasible right to worship Almighty God‘ according to the dictates of their own consciences; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his con- sent; that no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere-with the rights of conscience; and that no prefer- ence shall ever be given by law to any religious establishments or modes of wor- ship.” ' Mr. MUIR. Have you read it all‘? Mr. BRONSTON. I have. I call the attention of this Convention to these re- markable words. They start out by ‘saying that a man shall exercise freedom -of con- science; that he shall be permitted to wor- ship God according to the dictates of his conscience; and yet, for the purpose of allowing the distinguished Chairman of this Committee to make that beautiful ora- tion about licentious practices—— Mr. MUIB (interrupting). Will you allow me to read you here a moment? After stating that the free exercise of relig- ious worship shall forever be guaranteed,‘ and that no person shall be denied any civil . or political right, privilege or capacity on account of his religious opinions, it says: “But the liberty of conscience hereby se- cured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or aflirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsis- tent with the peace and safety of the State.” You did not read that. Mr. BRONSTON. I was reading from the other section, which was the one you referred us to. I will admit that that is in several Constitutions; but the Committee do not stop with those words, but add these ' words: “ Or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” It is those words that I say to the gentlemen of this Convention abso- lutely nullify the provision for freedom of conscience; because if the civil‘ authority can do it, who can say that in this great cauldron of public excitementto which the Chairman refers, Legislatures may not be ._, found that will‘ prescribe‘ the manner in which a man shall worship God‘; and then 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] where is your freedom of conscience, when they say, “ You can not do it—opposed to the civil authority?” And for that reason we have asked, and we ask now, “ where did the gentlemen get the words? ” In the other Constitutions from which this quotation has been made, there has been contained nowhere the provision which the Committee adds at the latter part of the report, and the ‘words used in Florida, Illinois and California have been a para- phrase upon the words used in the Ken- tucky Constitution. The words in the Kentucky Constitution are these: “The civil rights, privileges and capacities of any person shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion.” I submit to the distinguished Chairman of that Committee if that does not cover all possible contingencies that may arise in the future? If you say that my religious conviction leads me to an act of licentious- ness which is forbidden by the civil law of the land, I have a right to confront you with this provision of the Constitution, which says: “ Your capacities shall not be enlarged by reason of your religion.” If you propose to deny me because of my conviction, I say that that provision of the Constitution covers it; but I beg, gentle- men of this Convention, do not publish it to the world that you say that a man may worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and yet, in order to gratify the fondness of gentlemen for a flourish of language, you add at the end, “But shall not do it if it is contrary to the civil authority of Kentucky.” Mr. BURNAM. I understand the mo- tion of the Delegate to be, that he proposes to strike out all after the word “but,” in the sixth line, down to the word “thereof,” in the tenth line. There is no matter which has created more feeling in some Courts than this of privileged communica- tions. The proposition made is to strike out really that part of this Committee’s re- port which says that the liberty of BRONSTON—BURNAM. [October 25- conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or aflirma- Should that be allowed, shall any man who has had the control of the con- fessional in any kindiof church, Protestant or Catholic, be permitted to go before the Grand Jury, where a statement is to be made under oath, or where the laws have a right to require oath to be made, and say, “ By reason of my conscience, I decline to testify to any matter that affects the great- est rights of the State and the security of the people?” And it strikes me that that would be a great wrong to allow such a thing to occur; and I am free to own, I do not care where it comes from, whether from the minds of these gentlemen who composed this‘ Committee alone, or from other State Constitutions. I believe that no better amendment has been made to the present Constitution of Kentucky than this, which provides that this liberty of conscience, which is a creature of education, shall be permitted to authorize and justify, in this Commonwealth, acts of licen- tiousness, and to justify practices inconsist- cut with the good order and peace of the State. Shall this thing of fetichism, as it is known among the negroes of the land, be permitted, because it is a matter of con- science, to escape the condemnation of the Courts and every other tribunal of the country ‘.7 But a short time ago, in the City of Boston, right in that “hub of the uni— verse,” as it has been called—illustrious by so many great names in law and learning —a man felt it was his duty to sacrifice to his own whim his ‘child, and put it to death. I can conceive of repeated acts of licentious- ness of the gravest character, and some that are of more enormity, and important in themselves; and we should leave to the Legislature to punish these acts of licen- tiousness by grading the punishment ac- cording to the crime; but it ought to re- main, it seems to me, in this provision of the Bill of Rights. This ought to be left there: “This liberty of conscience shall tions. BILL OF RIGHTS. 19 Saturday,] RODES—BRONSTON—BECKHAM. [October 25. not be permitted to dispense with oaths or aflirmations, or excuse acts of licentious- ness, or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State.” As to what these practices may be, that will readily occur to the mind of every man who will think for a moment. There are many practices that it would not do to discuss even here. but are well known, and necessarily arise in the minds of every gen- tleman; but now I consider the words to which the gentleman has addressed himself last—“opposed to the civil authority of the State”--as a mere part of that which pre- cedes it, these practices inconsistent with the good order or peace or safety of the State, or which may be opposed to the civil authority of the State-_that is, to the laws of the land, to the Constitution itself, as the great and organic law, those statutes that may be passed in pursuance of it; and I repeat, that no part of the report of this Committee has so endeared itself to my mind as that made here; and I care not where it comes from, whether from Flor- ida, California, or from the brains of these gentlemen alone. Mr. RODES addressed the Chair. Mr. JEP. C. JONSON. I heard a Dele- gate, awhile ago, ask, under this rule, how much time was accorded to a Delegate under a five-minute speech, and he remarked that one gentleman had already occupied ten. If we are going to have the rule, we ought to have it all around. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will rec- ognize the Delegate from Warren by con- sent of the House. Mr. RODES. I desire simply to make an explanation rather than any thing else- I was guided in my own mind by the Con- stitution of Montana. I think the words are almost identical with those used here, and in regard to the proposition of the gentleman from Lexington to amend, I beg 'leave to say, in the first section which we have adopted, the right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of one’s con- science is already there. The CHAIRMAN. The question will be upon the adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Bullitt. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to say that the amendment offered by me is included in the section heretoforeéadopted. I offered that amendment for the purpose of getting this Convention to consider— Mr. W. H. MILLER. The gentleman is debating his proposition. Mr. BRONSTON. I am not debating; the proposition. The CHAIRMAN: The Delegate from Lexington will proceed by consent of the House. / Mr. BRONSTON. I was going to ask leave to withdraw the amendment with that explanation, which I think I had the perfect right to make. I offered it in order to get the Convention to consider the 1im- portance of the proposition made by the Delegate from Bullitt. The question being put on the adop- tion of the amendment of the Delegate from Bullitt (Mr. Straus), and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted 27 in the affirmative and 33 in the negative, and the amendment was rejected. Mr. BECKHAM. I desire to offer, as a substitute for section 4 of the report of the Committee, sections 5 and 6 of the present. Bill of Rights, and I will ask the Secre- tary to report the sections. The Reading Clerk read the amendments, as follows: That all men have a natural and inde- feasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own con- sciences; that no man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of wor- ship, or to maintain any ministry against. his consent; that no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and. that no preference shall ever be given by 2O BILL OF ‘RIGHTS. Saturdey,] BECKHAM—BUCKNER—RODES. [October 25. law to any religious societies or modes of worship. That the civil rights, privileges or capac- ities of any citizen shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion. Mr. BECKHAM. I desire simply to call the attention of the Committee to the fact that section 6, as reported by the Sec- retary, of the prespnt Bill of Rights, is identical almost with the last paragraph of section 4 of the report of the Committee, and as I stated what I had to say on the subject yesterday, I desire now to yield my time to the Delegate from Hart. Mr. BUCKNER. It seems to me, with due deference to the distinguished Com- mittee who have had this under considera- tion, that the experience of ninety-eight years of this State in reference to this Bill of Rights ought to count for something as against the proposition made by this Com- mittee, and extracted imperfectly, perhaps, from a few of the Constitutions of some of the‘ new States. After hundreds of years of contest, many of them bloody contests, we have succeeded in divorcing completely Church from State. It seems to me that these lines of the Committee give the pre- text for any legislative body, whatever may be its opinions, to introduce legislation on the subject of religion. That is op- posed, as a matter of course, to every Re- publican principle that we cherish. It is certainly not the design of the Committee; but look at the words: "But the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be con- strued to dispense with oaths or aflirma- tions, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State.” Who can tell what may be the judgment of some future legislative body as to what practice is injurious to good order? We, in our intercourse with men, have seen men of extreme views on many subjects. Some of them claim that a game of marbles by boys is opposed to- good order. I have heard men unreasonable enough to say the ringing of bells was opposed to peace and good order. In other words, we open the whole subject of legislation on religion. As it was said by the gentleman from Bullitt, we may imagine a Legislature so extreme in its views as to oppose the religious tenets of some particular body. I can imagine a Legislature so converted from the ways of right and goodness that they may be agnos- tie in their tendencies, and may be disposed to legislate against the religion of the people. In other words, we open the door to all sorts of views on this question‘ _ After having completely divorced Church and State, we are opposed to re-marrying them, or bringing them in close contact, 1 say the experience of ninety-eight years ought to count for something. Under that religion has prospered; morals have pros- pered; and to open the field to a new dis- pensation on this subject, by introducing words which have yet to be construed, seems to me impolitic, unwise, and opening the doors which have been closed against legislation on matters of religion. Mr. RODES. We have already adopted as a part of this Constitution a perfect pro- tection: “ All men are by nature free and equal, and have certain inherent and in- alienable rights, among which may be reckoned: First, the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties. Sec- ond, the right of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of their con- science.” Now, the fourth section, or part of it, is complementary or supplementary to that. In it we have chosen almost the very same words that are to be found in section 5 of the present Constitution of Kentucky, and in the last line or two lines, we have adopted section 6 of the present Constitution of Kentucky. This substitute is the equivalent of that stated over again. I acknowledge the gentleman has the right to call the attention of the Convention to it. It is all very well that the distin- guished gentleman from Hart, for whom we have the highest regard and the most BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Saturday,] BECKHAM—RODES—BRONSTON. [October 25. profound gratitude for the services he has rendered the State in his high capacity as Governor of the State of Kentucky, to al- lude to it; notwithstanding all that, I beg leave to say that there is no danger of the re-marriage of Church and State. There is nothing incorporated here but what we have had already, practically had, since we were a State. The State has already exer- cised the power to adjudicate upon what licentious acts were. Mr. BECKHAM. Will the Delegate allow me to ask him a question? I would like to ask the Delegate what power he means to give, if any power, by the inser- tion of these words, and if he means by these words to leave a power in the Legis- lature that it has not under the Constitution as it now is ‘? Mr. RODES. I think that all under- stand what you mean by a Bill of Rights. If it is not in the Bill of Rights or in the Constitution, then it becomes subject to legislative discretion; and if it is in the Constitution, it becomes permanent; it re- sides there, because the people have settled in their minds it ought to stay there, and it cannot be tossed about, like a foot-ball, ac- cording to the caprice of any Legislature. Now, I will ask the gentleman, and I do so in all respect, do you say we shall dis- pense with oaths or affirmations ‘? No, you will not. I know you will not. Or that we will excuse acts of licentiousness‘? No, I know you will not say that. Do you say that we ought to tolerate for one moment, much less for all time to come, ad infinitum, any more than we have from time immemo- rial, practices inconsistent with the good order, peace and safety of the State, or op- posed to the civil authority thereof ‘? No, you will not say that. But we will say that those principles are golden. Those letters must be written in our Constitution, and made just as permanent and golden and strong as we can stamp them upon paper. MLBECKHAM. Does the gentleman desire me to answer the question? Mr. RODES. No, sir. You have'had your speech. I know what you intend to answer. You intend to qualify the state- ment. You cannot qualify, because when I put the question categorically, you will have to answer in that way. I want to say one word furthermore. We are not after marrying Church and State. We repu- diate any such thing, and there can be no such conclusion. If there was any such purpose on the part of any one, I would be the first one to break the ranks and leave it. The question is, we are soon to have an immense population in this country. We have got two millions of people. England, a little bigger than Kentucky, had five millions of people four hundred years ago, in the days of Queen Elizabeth. We are now two-thirds as much as England. We have two millions, with two-thirds the ter- ritory of England. The’ time will come when our population will be as busy as bees The immense growth of this people will, necessarily—judging from the charac- ter of the humanity we have around us— make them emerge from this everlasting, restless, busy hive that we have about us, and do things that the State will necessa- rily have to lay its hands upon; and the question is, will you leave it in your Con- stitution or not‘? Men will arise. under dif- ferent and various guises, who will try to deceive you, and will cry out “rights of conscience,” and they will no more have right to it than in the instance quoted by the distinguished Delegate from Madison county, of the poor fanatic who sacrificed his child in Boston, because he thought he ought to do it. Mr. BRONSTON. Is not that covered by the latter part of section which states that a man’s civil rights shall be in nowise enlarged or diminished on account of his religion‘? Mr. RODES. That is for the pure relig- ious part of it. This is intended to pro- tect society. _' . Mr. BRONSTON. It says civil rights. 22 BILL OF RIGHTS Saturday,] BRONSTON—RODES—PHELPS. [October 25. Mr. RODES. Certainly. This thing is designed to protect society, and society has to be protected. If you put this clause in, there will be an opportunity given to test the question, and it will stand the test; and I call upon all the friends of good order-— 'and I do not mean to say there are any who desire bad order; what I say is in all respect and kindly meant—I do not want to impute any thing wrong at all; but ac- cording to my apprehension, and I can see no further in the future than a majority of the Delegates here, but I have my sensibil- ities and my experience to guide me, and I think I can see the time dawning upon us when we will have to settle these questions, and the law ought to be clothed with pow- er to say these men who wish to violate law and order cannot clothe themselves in such a garment and say: “ We protect our- selves under this cloak." That is all there is in it. Mr. BRONSTON. Has it ever been done? Mr. RODES. Frequently; in many places, and at various times. Mr. STRAUS. Do you mean to say the time will ever come when we will have re- ligious legislation‘? Mr. RODES. Never in the wd‘rld. The question being taken on the adop- tion of the substitute of the Delegate from Shelby. the same was declared rejected, upon a divided vote, as follows: 27 in the aflirmative; 35 in the negative. The question being taken on the adops tion of the fourth section, as reported by the Committee, the same was declared adopted. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will report the fifth section. Mr. RODES, The gentleman from the Fifth District of Louisville asked yesterday that sections five and six be laid over until Monday. He is performing his duties as Supervisor of Elections, and cannot be here to-day. ' The CHAIRMAN. The House will then proceed to the consideration of section seven. Section seven of the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights was reported by the Clerk. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I offer asubstitute. The substitute was read, as follows: "Every person may fully and freely speak, write and print on any subject, being re- sponsible for the abuse of that liberty.” Mr. J. L. PHELPS. My reason for offering that is simply because I think that much covers all that is intended by that whole section. I do not think it is intend- ed by the Committee that printing presses shall be free, or that any man, having a de- sire to issue any thing, shall consider print- ing presses free property. I think it is intended to mean. when the whole section is taken together, that every person may freely and fully speak and write upon any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty. I think that is all intended to be meant by the whole section, and all that ought to be meant. Mr. RODES. I understand the motion is to strike out the first part and leave the latter part. He proposes as a substitute the latter part of that section. We have the section as it is in the present Bill of Rights, and as it has been for the last ninety-eight years. The vote being taken on the adoption of the substitute, it was declared to have been rejected. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to offer an amendment. Amendment read, as follows: Amend by adding the following after the word “liberty,” in the sixth line: “And the free diffusion of knowledge among the people shall not be interfered with, except in cases as may be provided by the General Assembly.” Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I simply desire to say, that, in making this Bill of Rights, it should be our object to retain all the in- herent rights. I claim this is an inherent right—the right to diffuse knowledge BILL OF RIGHTS. 23 Saturday,] BRONSTON—RODES. [October 25. among the people. I think it is. a right of the very highest kind, and whenever that right is trampled under foot a remedy should be provided. We have a great number of foreigners coming among us, and I think we should recognize that in -our Constitution and give them freedom. The vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Monroe, the same was declared to have been rejected. The vote was then taken on the seventh section of the Committee’s report, and the same was declared to have been adopted. Section 8 of the Committee’s report was then read. The amendment of the Delegate from Lexington was read, as follows: Amend section 8 by adding the follow- ing: “Provided the intent must be gath-_ ‘ered from the publication and not from extraneous sources.” Mr. BRONSTON. This matter has been before a Committee of which I have the honor to be Chairman, and I desire to -call attention to the fact that the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure have made a report. I do not know but what my friend from Shelby was cor- rect, and that that Committee was a fifth wheel to the wagon; but if that Committee had any thing to do, this matter now under consideration especially belonged to it. The Committee has reported unani- mously on the subject in fsivor of the pro- vision of the present Bill of Rights. We do not propose to stand on any high ground; we all want to do the best we can for the good of the work of this Convention. Our report is of equal dignity with this. We are willing our reports should be consid- »ered together; but if the Convention don’t intend to wipe out my Committee, we think this matter should be left with us. I ‘do not know what the gentlemen of my Committee will do about this. We are the .agents and servants of the Convention, but when you appoint us and direct us to re- port on this matter, I think our report should be considered. Mr. RODES. The Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights was also estab- lished by this Convention, and they were to take under consideration the Preamble and Bill of Rights. That was well known and well understood. Three of them have heretofore been made in this State. There was no Committee on Crimes under the old Constitution. It was considered by the Committee on Bill of Rights, and I think that it belongs exclusively to this Committee now; but if the Committee on Crimes thought this belonged to them, they ought to have said so. But being a part ofthe old Bill of Rights, I do not ap- prehend it ought to be detached now. Mr. BRONSTON. Now, I did expect a little more consideration from that Com- mittee, inasmuch as they have been getting so much from other members, both publicly and privately, on this floor. He says there was no such Committee as mine under the old Constitution. I grant it. He says there was a Committee on Bill of Rights in 1849, and that they considered the whole subject of Bill of Rights. I grant that that was the case. But the Committee on Rules, selected by reason of their experi- ence and wisdom, saw proper to carve out a new Committee called the ,Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Proce- dure, and that Committee was required “to report upon all propositions relating to crimes, punishments and criminal proce- dure.” Now, if the gentleman says that this matter is specially within the province of his Committee, and does not belong to mine, other Chairmen of other Committees can say the same thing in regard to other provisions. There is not a thing in the whole Constitution that could not be re- ferred to, or which would not come under the jurisdiction of, some other Committee. Therefore, you might as well wipe out my Committee, and I, for one, would be glad of it. We did not want to assume the re- sponsibility of investigating this matter, but we have investigated it, and have made 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] BRONSTON—APPLEGATE—MILLER. [October 25. a report. The gentleman says we did not complain soon enough. As members of the Bill of Rights Committee can testify, my Committee had this under consideration before the Committee. on Bill of Rights made their report. New I make this point again before the Convention, that if you will accept the re- port of the Committee on Crimes as of equal dignity with the report of the Committee on Preamble, and consider the two together, we will save time and expedite matters; but if you are not willing to do that, and the gentleman don’t seem to be, I insist that this matter shall be referred to the Commit- tee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. It is the most important mat- ter that that Committee had to consider, and they have reported upon it. Their re- port is printed and before this Convention, and, it seems to me, it is nothing but just and fair and proper that you consider the two together, and let the Convention deter- mine which one shall be accepted. Mr. APPLEGATE arose and secured recognition from the Chair. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I call for the or- der, and I desire to serve notice on the gentleman now that I shall insist on the order. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate is out of order. Mr. APPLEGATE. How can the Chair know that I am out of order when I have not opened my mouth. I have a point of order. I presume the Chair knows my point. It is that the Convention has re- ferred to the Committee of the Whole cer- tain matters for its consideration ; and this Committee has nothing to do but consider the matter referred to it by the Convention. To take up any other report, or to refer any part of this report to another Committee, is beyond the power of this Committee. The CHAIRMAN. No such motion was made. Mr. BRONSTON. That was my mo- tion. The CHAIRMAN. Then it is out of order. The Committee of the Whole can- not do that. Mr. BRONSTON. Then I change the form of my motion; that the Committee of the Whole recommend to the Conven- tion that that be done. The CHAIRMAN. I hardly think that is in order. Mr. STRAUS. I think it is perfectly proper to make a motion to recommend to the Convention what to do with a part of this report. The CHAIRMAN. But not to do something with part of some other report. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that the Committee recommend the reference of section 8 of this report to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate will please reduce his motion to writing, and send it to the Clerk’s desk. Mr. APPLEGATE. Is that motion de- batable? The CHAIRMAN. I think it would be. Mr. APPLEGATE. I belong to each of these Committees, so I cannot be said to be speaking with any special feeling for either. I believe I am the only member in the Convention on each of the Commit- tees. I do not‘ believe that this matter belongs exclusively to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure. The law of civil libel is involved the same as criminal. Mr. BRONSTON. Not in the section as in the old Bill of Rights. Mr. APPLEGATE. I think it is. The report here is “civil”-“in all civil cases.” It is the declaration of a principle that be- longs to every individual; if he publishes or expresses his thought on any question of public interest, in either a civil or criminal case against him, he shall have the right to defend that it was published with good in- tent and true when published. That is a. BILL OF RIGHTS. 25 *— Saturday,] BRONSTON—RODES—PETTIT. [October 25-. proposition submitted by the Committee on Bill of Rights. It has always found its place in our Constitution in the Bill of Rights, and I submit that the civil question involved in this clause ought never to go to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to make this suggestion: Under the Constitution of 1849, which I presume is familiar to every- body, the Committee on Arrangement had the right to take up the matter section by section and arrange it under any head they pleased. They could assign to “Bill of Rights” something that might have been reported by some other Committee. Now I suggest that that can be done here. Our Committee upon this special subject can re- port on that subject, and the matter can afterwards he placed under its proper head by the Committee having that matter in charge. This Committee, according to the gentleman, recognizes the fact that in the Convention of 1849 there is no reference to a Committee on Crimes; and yet—- Mr. W. H. MILLER. I call for the regular order. The CHAIRMAN. He has a right to speak on his motion. Mr. W. H. MILLER. He has already spoken. The last time he started out to make a suggestion. Mr. BRONSTON. That was in response to the Delegate from Pendleton. We did not want to arrogate this matter to ourselves. I feel that the proposition that I made was a fair one, and they should have accepted it, to have this Committee of the Whole con— sider the two reports together. As they de- clined, I believe I would not be doing my duty to the Committee, of which I have the honor to be the Chairman, did I not ask the Convention to refer that matter, which, by its rule, early in the Convention, it forced my Committee to consider, to my Com- mittee. Mr. RODES. The effect of this will be to say that this shall be taken entirely from the Bill of Rights and translated to another part of the Constitution. Mr. BRONSTON. Not to be taken from the Bill] of Rights, but from the Bill of ‘ Rights Committee. A vote being taken on the motion of the.L Delegate from'iLexington to recommend to the Convention the reference of the section under consideration to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure, the same was declared so referred, the vote, on adivision, standing: affirmative 31, negative 30. Mr. PETTIT. I make the point of order that there is no quorum. Mr. CLAY. I think it is the universal parliamentary usage that a majority of the— Committee constitutes a quorum. There is- no specific rule as to what shall constitute a quorum of the Committee of the Whole here. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair holds that the motion is carried. Mr. PETTIT. I move a reconsidera- tion. Mr. BRONSTON. You did not vote on the right side. - Mr. PETTIT. There was no roll-call, and you cannot tell how I voted. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair knows you voted in the negative. Mr. PETTIT. The Chair cannot tell how I voted, because there is no record of the vote. This is not in Congress, but in the great Constitutional Convention of Kentucky. The CHAIRMAN. The motion is car- ried. ‘ Mr. HENDRICK. I was not present when the vote was taken, but I would like to know whether the ruling of the Chair‘ was that there was a quorum. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has so .ruled. Mr. HENDRICK. I would like to know the ruling of the President. Mr. CLAY. The President of the Con‘ vention is not in the Chair. Mr. RODES. Then, as I understand, 26 BILL OF RIGHTS. ISaturday,] HENDRICK—BRONSTON—PETTIT. [October 25 . ‘this Committee has taken from the old Bill of Rights what has been in it for a cen- tury. The CHAIRMAN. No; they simply report that to the Convention. Mr. HENDRICK. I move to recon- sider the vote just had. Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point that the Delegate did not vote on either side of the question, and therefore cannot move a reconsideration. The CHAIRMAN. Did the Delegate ‘vote? Mr. HENDRICK. I did not. The CHAIRMAN. Then you cannot move a reconsideration. Mr. McHENRY. I move that the Com- ‘mittee rise and report this action to the Convention. A vote being taken on said motion, the same was declared to have been carried. The President having resumed the Chair, Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President. the Com- mittee of the Whole has been in session, having under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The Committee recommend to the ‘Convention that section 8 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights be referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Proce- dure. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the report. Mr. PETTIT. I am opposed to the ac- tion as recommended by the Committee, and I am astonished at the gentleman from Lexington urging any such proposition. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman must (confine himself to the question of reference. It is the only question upon which debate “can be allowed. Mr. PETTIT. I will try to confine my: :self to the question of reference, and in regard to that, I was about to express my astonishment at the gentleman from Lex- ington making such a motion and urging it here. From the time we began these pro- ceedings the gentleman has been a stickler for the old Constitution. He don’t want one single section or asingle paragraph touched upon this point; and when the Committee, which has made the report, come here and present this section of the old Constitution, he is the gentleman who op- poses it. Now, I oppose it; and I make the point that here this eighth section is almost identical with what is in the old Constitu- tion. It was referred to the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, and they took it under consideration. Questions af- fecting that section were referred to them that they discussed in their proceedings, and they were the first to report here for the action of this Committee; and if it is to be discussed anywhere—if this question is to come up—had we not better meet it to-day and in this place than any other. I simply submit. that we can gain time by pursuing the report of the Commit- tee on Bill of Rights without varying or going to another Committee, but take it up here; and if that Committee want to amend it, here is the proper place to amend it, and let the amendment come, and let us consider it here in its proper place. Here we have had this section of the Bill of Rights in all the Constitutions, I believe; certainly in the last. Why shall we not maintain this portion of the old Constitution right here, and at this point ? Mr. DEHAVEN. Is it proper at this time to amend the motion? If it be, I de- sire to amend the motion made by the Del- egate from Lexington, that this particular section be referred to a joint Committee, composed of the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure and the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The report of the Committee is not subject to amendment. Mr. DEHAVEN. It does not seem to me exactly fair to the Committee on Bill of Rights that that shall be taken entirely BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 27 Saturday,] RonEs--BRoNs1‘oN—-HENDRIcK. [October 25 . from their jurisdiction; but inasmuch as the very same subject-matter has been submit— ‘ted to the Committee on Crimes, Punish- ments and Criminal Procedure, and they have considered it and reported also a proposition upon the identical subject, it seems to me, as both Committees are sup- posed to be of equal dignity, and both have been considering it, it would be eminently proper to refer these two sections to a joint Committee, composed of the members of the Committee on Bill of Rights and the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and *Criminal Procedure. Mr. RODES. I wish to say, as this question has come up, that this is the open- ing wedge. If this means anything, it means that the old Bill of Rights is to be mutilated. Mr. BRONSTON. Allow me to sug- gest that it is not at all contemplated that this should be taken from the Bill of Rights. If our provision is accepted, it will be assigned to its true place under the ‘Constitution—the Bill of Rights. Mr. RODES. Then you are going in that roundabout way to get your provision .in. If the Committee on Bill of Rights had any thing to consider, it was this very ‘thing. The proposition is directly before you as to Whether you will take this out of the old Bill of Rights. Are you going now to 'take it out of its proper connection, and have this ‘other Committee put it back there at some other time? Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to ask you where you found your language. Did you say ‘? Mr. RODES. I did not. We under- stand what the meaning of a Preamble and Bill of Rights is. It means what has been regarded as the Bill of Rights heretofore-— 'every thing connected with it. And it is now proposed to take this out of the hands . of my Committee, and put it in the hands of another Committee, to enable them to recommend it back, and have it follow in this circuituous route. I say it is where it properly belongs. If you want to take it away from this place, you can do it; but I tell you now, if it is done, it has to go down on that record in the shape of yeas and nays. Mr. HENDRICK. I exceedingly re- gret that there should be any contest be- tween these two Committees. It places me in an extremely embarrassing attitude, in view of the fact that the Chairmen of both Committees are gentlemen for whom I have the most ardent admiration and pro- found personal regard. It seems to me that the suggestion made by the Delegate from Oldham is one which would adjust this thing in a pleasant manner. I now move, as a substitute for the report of the‘ Committee of the Whole, that the whole -matter of this section, and any other sec— ' tion reported upon by the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Proce- dure, be referred to a Joint Committee composed of the members of the two Com- mittees. The PRESIDENT. Please reduce your motion to writing. ' Mr. HENDRICK. I understood that to be the motion of the Delegate from Oldham. That is a universally recognized parliament- ary practice. It is one which, in my judg- ment, is used for this very purpose of reliev- ing strained relations between committees. Now, I shall not say what is my opinion about this matter, as to which of these two Committees shall have this matter; but I am willing to go to any length rather than see this contention between Committees on , this floor. I am recognizing the perfect equality of the Committees in point of dig- nity and standing. Mr. MCHENRY. I do not think there is any necessity for this circumlocution. It does not strike me that there should be any feeling as between these two Commit- tees on this subject. Each Committee had a right to report as they saw proper. It seems that both of them have reported a section within the peculiar jurisdiction of both, and those sections reported on the 28 BILL OF RIGHTS. Saturday,] MCHENRY—MGGHORD—BRONSTQN. [October 25 , same subject are not identically the same. Suppose they had reported the same identi- cal thing, would there then be any necessity for a committee of conference? And it occurs to me, as both of the reports are here on our tables, the matter is for the consider- ation of the Convention. We are consid- ering the work of the Committee on Bill of Rights, and if any other Committee has arrived at a different conclusion, they may have that conclusion put before the House by way of a substitute. There is absolutely no necessity for referring this to any Joint Committee. I think all that is necessary for the Convention to do is to disagree with the action of the Committee of the Whole upon this subject, and say that we refer this matter back to them, and to go on and finish their work of considering the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights. There is nothing to prevent the Delegate from Lexington offering his work of his Committee as a substitute. Then we can decide it in that way before adjourning, the time for which is not half an hour ofi“. Mr. McCHORD. I desire to offer a res- olution. The CHAIRMAN. It is not in order. There is a report from the Committee of the Whole, and an amendment offered by the Delegate from Oldham, and a substitute offered by the Delegate from Fleming. The Clerk will report the substitute offered by the Delegate from Fleming. The substitute of the Delegate from Fleming was read, as verbally stated by him. Mr. McCHORD. I offer this as a sub- stitute for the report of the Committee and the substitute offered by the Delegate from Fleming. The CHAIRMAN. A substitute to a substitute is not in order. However, the Clerk may report the resolution. The substitute of the Delegate from Washington was read, as follows: Resolved, That section 8 of the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights, and sec- tion 5 of the report of the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro~ cedure, be, and the same are, referred to the Committee of the Whole, having the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights under consideration. The CHAIRMAN. That will be in or- der when the other substitute is voted upon, provided the first substitute is not adopted. Mr. BRONSTON. In response to the distinguished Delegate from Ohio, I desire to make a statement. I believe the Com- mittee on Crimes, Punishments and Crimi- nal Procedure was the handiwork of that distinguished gentleman. Now, will he do me the kindness to take the Constitution and point out in it where any matter that comes more specially within the purview of my Committee than this? If he will, I shall be obliged to him. Mr. MCHENRY. I did not intimate that his Committee didn’t have jurisdiction of the subject. I assumed it did have. But here is a conflict between two Com— mittees, and the matter has to come before the House; and if the House should take the work of either Committee, it could not be a reflection on the other. Mr. BRONSTON. Why did the gen- tleman create the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure, un- less he expected that Committee to take up that subject-matter wherever it was found, and report upon it? If he did expect them to report on it, how could he expect them to find it anywhere but in the Bill‘ of Rights? Do I understand, that merely Ebe- cause this matter is found in the Bill of Rights, that a Committee carved out and designated for the purpose, shall not take the subject under consideration and report upon it? You havea Committe on Executive Oflicers for Counties and Districts, and un- der this same idea you could wipe out the Committee on County Courts, because the matters coming under the consideration of that Committee could properly be consid- ered by the first. Now, in response to the BILL OF RIGHTS. 29 4* Saturday,] BRONSTON—MCHENRY—DEHAVEN. [October 25 . Delegate from Daveiss. He says I have been a stickler for the old Bill of Rights. It is true, and I am a stiekler now; and I am making a fight for it, the best fight I can. I believe I am following the wishes of the people who sent me here. And when I find Delegates supporting a propo- sition merely because it has been reported by a Committee, I am taught the import- ance of having a report of a Committee. You say I may offer mine as a substitute. The very minute it is offered as a substi- tute it is treated as not of equal dignity with the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights. If it were only treated as of equal dignity, I would have nothing to say. The Committee on Crimes have stuck to the old Bill of Rights. They have not sought to inject any thing on the subject of intent, nor have they changed the right of the jury to pass upon the law and facts. They have reported the exact language of the present Bill of Rights, and when we come to the next section, which is criminal prosecution, and which involves the right of the defend- ant to a trial by jury, to have counsel, to meet the witnesses face to face, I shall have the same request to make. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would inform the gentleman that he must confine himself the question of reference. Mr. BRONSTON. I see no reason for the reference to the Committee of the Whole. I want to say, in response to some of the Delegates who ask why can’t I, or some other gentleman of the Committee, offer as a substitute the report of the Com- mittee on Crimes, I can tell you why, and the very first reason is that the Delegate from Ohio voted against it because he wanted to stand by the report of the Com- mittee. Mr. McHENRY. I did not say that. Mr. BRONSTON. If this came as a re- port from my Committee, he would prob- ably stand by me; but that is not the only reason. Here is a report which. comes from a Committee created by this body, and that report ought to be considered, being a report from a Committee appointed especially for that purpose. When we make a report as a Committee, we feel that we ought to have an opportunity to give the reasons why you should adopt this work of ours and put it in the present Constitution. Is it not just that my Committee should have that oppor- tunity? If you do not think so, don’t refer it to us; but if you do not refer it to us, let it go to Joint Committee on Legis- lative Department for conference, as sug- gested by the Delegate from Oldham. Mr. DEHAVEN. I said toa Conference Committee composed of these two Com- mittees. Mr. BRONSTON. I don’t care where it goes. The PRESIDENT. The vote will first be on the motion of the Delegate from Old- ham, as that is in the line of perfecting the report of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. RODES. This law on the subject of libel has always belonged to the Bill of Rights, as I have tried to say now two or three times. I want it distinctly under- stood that you are taking that out of the Bill of Rights, Mr. BRONSTON. I deny that propo- sition. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I rise to a point of order. I have a great deal of respect for the opinion of the Chair on parliamentary questions, but we have a rule to the effect that when a motion is made to refer, and different Committees are named, the ques- tion shall be taken in the following order: First, to the Committee _of the Whole; second, to a Standing Committee, and third to a Select Committee. It seems to me, un- der that rule, when the Committee of the Whole has been named by the Delegate from Washington, the question must first be taken upon that motion. I understood the motion of the Delegate from Washing- ton was to refer the matter to the whole House, including the matter reported by the Committee on Crimes. 30 BILL OF RIGHTS. —-- Saturday,] Mr. BRONSTON. I have no objection to that. Let the two propositions go before the Committee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT. This is not simply a motion to refer. There are other matters involved. Mr. HENDRICK. I withdraw my sub- stitute, as the Chairman of the Committee on Crimes is content to have the matter go before the Committee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the substitute of the Delegate from Flem- ing may be withdrawn. Mr. MCHENRY. I want to understand the parliamentary status of this proposi- tion. When it goes to the Committee of the Whole is it open under general debate, or is the debate under the five-minute rule ‘I The PRESIDENT. The Chair would state that if the report of the Committiee of the Whole, is defeated, the question is then in its original status in the Committee of the Whole, and that the quickest way to efi'ect the purpose of those who want to get the matter back before the Committee of the Whole, in exactly the same status, is to defeat the motion. Mr. APPLEGATE. I am opposed to all of these motions. The report of the Committee on Bill of Rights was made. It was referred to the Committee of the Whole, and a very extended discussion was had. I am a member of both Committees, and it looks like I have made contradictory reports; but when the time comes I can ex- plain my position. But if this clause is to he sent back simply because the Committee on Crimes may have had jurisdiction of it, I want to call attention to the fact that you must send back some of the rest of the re- port; because section 9 is quasi criminal proceeding, because it provides that the people shall be secure from searches, except upon warrant. Section 10 provides for the right of the accused in criminal prosecu- tions, and to be heard by counsel, and to meet the witnesses, &0. Section 11 pro- HENDRICK-MCHENRY—APPLEGATE. [October 25 . vides that for an indictable offense nobody shall he proceeded against by information, 850. Then section 12 says that no person shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. That has reference to criminals. Section 15 says that all prisoners shall be- hailable, and the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, &c. Those matters are all matters of criminal procedure. They are all reported upon in this report of the Committee on Bill of Rights, and they re- ported first. Mr. BRONSTON. I merely wish to say that we had our report ready and postponed it for three days for the gentleman, and during that postponement the Committee on Bill of Rights made their report. Mr. APPLEGATE. I was here when the Committee on Bill of Rights reported, and I was only away for two days, and I don’t see why you postponed it three days for me. If you are going to send this sec- tion back, you will have to send all the others that I have read, when here we have discussed this matter in full, and ought to be ready to act upon it. It seems to me that the Convention is as well advised as it ever will be as to whether you want to adopt the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights or the report of the Committee on Crimes. I see no reason for referring this matter to any Committee, and I am opposed to all the motions, and shall vote against them. Mr. CLARDY. The hour for adjourn- ment is very close at hand, and I move that the session be extended until this matter can be disposed of. A vote being taken upon said motion it was declared to have been carried. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the pre- vious question. Mr. AUXIER. WhilstI have the great- est respect—- The PRESIDENT. The motion for the previous question does not admit of debate. Unless the gentleman arises for a parlia- mentary inquiry, or to make a point of order, he is out of order. Mr. AUXIER. I want to be heard on the main question. The PRESIDENT. That order. Mr. MCHENRY. I move that we ad- is out of journ. - A vote being taken on the motion, the same was declared to have been carried. {causation Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1.] FRANKFORT, OCTOBER 27, 1890. [N0. 40 Monday,] CLARDY—KNOTT—YOUNG. [Octobci 27 . The Convention met pursuant to ad- journment at 11 o’clock A. M_., and the pro- ceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Father Young. The Journal of Saturday was read. Mr. CLARDY. I think the Journal is wrong relating to the motion to extend the time. The motion was carried, as I think—— Mr. KNOTT. Mr. President, I was not able to be in my seat on Saturday, and con- sequently failed to hear the mirthful and witty remarks of my genial friend (Mr Young) who sits at my right. I know him well enough to know that he would not do a wanton injustice to anybody; but from what I have been informed, I very much fear that he has inadvertently been the means of doing at least a slight injus- tice to certain gentlemen, attributing to them a fault that is almost totally my own. I want no man to be responsible for any error or omission of my own, however slight it may be. I do not know whether the Reporters or the Printers or the Proof- Readers attach any importance to the re- marks that he made concerning the typo- graphical errors that appeared in my own speeches; but still I think it is due to them to say that most, if not all, those errors are attributable to my own accidental negli- gence. In both instances I was handed carefully-marked proof-slips. The one I received on Friday came to me while I was in my seat. I noticed that every error that I have since been able to detect had been carefully marked. There was, however a very curious disarrangement of the mat- ter in a paragraph that required my personal _presence at the printing oifice; inasmuch as the Proof-Reader himself, and I do not suppose anybody else in the world except myself, could have properly arranged it. Those accidents are liable to all printing establishments. I, therefore, left my seat, as they were anxious to go to press, and not out of any disrespect to the Committee, or to the matter under consideration at the time, or to the Convention, but in order that the business might be facilitated. When I reached there, I found that the Proof-Reader himself had gone to dinner. The Business Manager of the printing office and myself at once set to work to arrange that paragraph. It took us considerable time to do so, as there was much difficulty in the matter, and when I left I simply called his attention to that error; and the other errors in the proof-slips were not brought to the attention of the Proof-Reader at all; so that the blame is upon myself, and not upon the Reporters, and not upon the Proof-Reader, nor anybody connected with either one of those departments. I have not, as I said, seen either the Proof- Reader or any of the Reporters; but I will take upon myself whatever is wrong in this matter. I know that my friend meant no injustice to me and no injustice to anybody else. I thank him, however, for calling my attention to the results of my own negli- gence. Mr. YOUNG. The fact is, that I did not say any thing about the Delegate from Marion at all. I did not criticise his speech, and the speech that was criticised is not the one that went through the print on Saturday, but went through two or three weeks ago; so that I could not have done 2 PRINTING. Monday] KNOTT—YOUNG~—HE1\ nmvx. [October 27 . him a wanton injustice. It seems to me that is conclusive of that question; and the errors referred to occurred in his first speech, and not in the last one. I have not had the honor of examining the proof of his last speech. Every time any criti- cism is made upon these Records it seems that somebody gets mad, and that the dis- tinguish ed Delegate is the vehicle through which this seeming pain at any objection or criticism is expressed. I want to say this: I am not attacking the Public Print- er, or anybody else. I examined these Records and I find these errors; and I have the right to call the attention of this House to them, in order that they may be cor- rected. I made no criticism upon the Pub- lic Printer. I made no criticism on the Stenographic Reporter, or anybody else. I stated that these corrected Records show a certain state of facts. They are here. They speak for themselves. These things have come about by reason of circum- stances beyond the control even of the Public Printer. _ The PRESIDENT. The Chair would state that there is no question before the Convention. Unless there is a motion to correct the Journal, this debate is out of order. Mr. KNOTT. I arose to a matter of personal privilege as a member on this floor; and now I desire to say that I do not know what the gentleman referred to. I was not here. I was informed that he created considerable merriment over an error in using the Word Tamus in place of the word Taurus. Mr. YOUNG. That was the Delegate from Fleming, and not me at all. Mr. KNOTT. I take it back. I apolo- gize. He says I have always been the vehicle through which the discontent of the Printers is manifested to this House. Cer- tainly the gentleman will not do me the injustice, upon reflection, to insist upon that. I have never been their organ here. I did on one occasion get up and insist that, as a matter of justice, the Public Printer should he heard. He had not asked' me to do any thing of the sort—had not suggested any thing of the sort. In this instance, I distinctly avow that I attributed no bad motive to my friend. I distinctly avow that I had neither seen the Proof— Reader, the Printer or the Reporter. I rose upon my own responsibility, to take upon my own shoulders the consequences of my own delinquencies. I am not defend- ing anybody; but I am doing simple justice to myself, and to others who have no voice on this floor. Mr. HEN DRICK. I rise to a question of personal privilege. I certainly do not desire my honorable friend from the Fourth District of the city of Louisville to suffer or bear any of my own iniquities. It was I who selected the remarks of the Delegate from Marion and the Delegate from Ohio as legitimate topics of criticism in the re- marks which I submitted to the House. I regretted, upon suddenly entering the House, as I had selected those speeches, that the Delegate from Marion was not present. The Delegate from Ohio was in his seat. and if there was any reflection whatever upon himself or upon the Dele- gate from Marion, every Delegate here failed to recognize it at the time. If there was any thing offensive in it, it was cer— tainly not intended as such ; and I believe the Convention and the President will bear me witness that every remark made was simply a criticism of the arrangement of a sentence or of a typographical error ex- isting in the reported speech. If this be an ofi‘ense, I have offended. Otherwise, I have certainly not offended either the canons of good taste or the feelings of any gentleman upon this floor. CertainlyI had no desire to do such a thing. Mr. KNOTT. I have not attributed to the gentleman any offensive remarks; neither to him nor my friend from Louis- ville. I did not say he had offended me. The PRESIDENT. Are there any mo- RESOLUTION S. 3 Monday,] RAMSEY tions to correct the Journal‘? If not, the Journal will be considered as approved by unanimous consent. The first thing in order will be the reception of petitions. Mr. RAMSEY. I have a communica- tion containing a copy of two resolutions passed by the Kentucky Methodist-Episco- pal Church, recently in session at Barbours- ville, Ky. The first one relates to bribery and the use of money in elections; and the other is in relation to taxation for the sup- port of schools. As they are very short, and only two of them, I will ask that they be read, and that the first one be referred to the Committee on Elections, and the other to the Committee on Education. The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the reading of the communica- tions? The Chair hears none, and the Sec- retary will report them. The papers were read, and referred to the Committees designated. Mr. CLARDY. I have two petitions; one in reference to turnpike corporations, from Polk Cansler, of Christian county, and the other in reference to county offi- cers, which I desire referred with‘out read- ing, one to the Committee on Corporations, and the other to the Committee on Execu- tive Ofiicers for Counties. The PRESIDENT. Are there any more petitions? Reports from Standing Com- mittees are in order. Reports from Special Committees are in order. Motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. FARMER. I offer a resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That section ‘20 of the Bill of Rights, as reported by the Committee on Bill of Rights, be eliminated from the re- port. Said section reads: “The estates of such persons as shall destroy their own lives shall descend or vest as in cases of natural death; and if any person shall be killed by casualty, there shall be no for- feiture by reason thereof.” The resolution was referred to the Com- mittee of the Whole on Preamble and Bill of Rights. CLARDY—FARMER. [October 27 _ Mr. MOORE. I desire to give notice this morning that I propose to move to re— consider the vote by which the resolution of the Delegate from Fleming was passed on last Saturday. I find by the rules that I have to give notice of the motion, and I now give notice that on to-morrow morn- ing I will move to reconsider that vote. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I offer a reso- lution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the Constitution to be formed by this Convention contain the fol- lowing: (1.) Every person who shall be convicted of having given or offered any bribe or treat to procure his election, or the election of another, to an office of trust or profit, and any person who shall be con- victed of accepting any bribe or treat to vote for or assist another in procuring his election to any oflice of trust or profit, shall forever be disqualified from holding any ofiice of trust or profit, and shall be deprived of the right of suffrage, provided, that at any time after five years from conviction, the Governor may, by pardon, remove such disability. (2.) Females shall not be eli- gible to any of the ofiices provided for by this Constitution, or which the General Assembly are authorized to create, except the office of Librarian and trustees of com- mon schools. The resolution was referred to the Com- mittee on General Provisions. I Mr. SWANGO. I have a resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading. Clerk, as follows: Senators and Representatives shall be chosen according to the rule of apportion- ment established in this Constitution until the next decennial census by the United States shall have been taken. and the re- sult thereof as to this State ascertained, when the apportionment shall be revised and adjusted on the basis of that census, and every ten years thereafter upon the basis of the United States Census, such ap- portionment to be made at the first session of the General Assembly after each such census; provided, that if at any time, or from any cause, the General Assembly shall fail or refuse to district the State for Sen- ators and Representatives, as required in this section, it shall be the duty of the Gov- ernor, Secretary of State, and Attorney- 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. Monday,] m General, within thirty days after the ad- journment of the General Assembly, on which such duty devolves, to perform said duty, and to file in the ofiice of the Secre- tary of State a full statement of the dis- tricts formed by them, including the names of the counties embraced in each district and the number thereof; said statement to be signed by them and attested by the seal of the State ; and upon the proclamation of the Governor, the same shall be as binding and as effectual as if done by the General Assembly. The resolution was referred to the Com- mittee on Legislative Department. Mr. MOORE. I move that we resolve ourselves into a Committee of the Whole on Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would remark, in regard to that motion, that the proper motion would be to take up the special order pending before the Conven- tion, being a report from the Committee of the \Vhole, and that ought to be disposed of before going into Committee of the Whole. Mr. MOORE. I withdraw my motion. Mr. NUNN. I desire to offer an amend- ment to the resolution offered by the gentle- man from Washington county, where the figure 8 appears to add 9 and 10, and where 5 occurs in that resolution on the report of the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure, to add the figures 4 and 6. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection, the Chair will consider the Special Order as now before the Convention, and the gentleman’s motion will be in order; but the Secretary requests the Delegate to write out his amendment. Mr. W. H. MILLER. 'I would like to ask the Chair what Special Order is referred to? The PRESIDENT. The Special Order is the consideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. W. H. MILLER. The Journal shows that we adjourned on Saturday when MOORE—NUNN—MILLER. * [October 27 . the motion for the previous question was pending. The PRESIDENT. The Chair was un- der a misapprehension of the facts when he stated that the amendment of the Delegate from Crittenden would be in order. That amendment is cut off by the pendency of the motion for the previous question. The question now before the Convention is as to whether the main question shall be now put. The report of the Committee was, that it recommended to the House that sec- tion 8 be committed to the Committee on Crimes and Punishments. To that there was an amendment offered by the Delegate from Oldham, to refer it to a Joint Com- mittee consisting of the two Committees, the Committee on Crimes and Punishments and the Committee on the Preamble and Bill of Rights; and to that the Delegate from Washington offered a substitute; and upon these various motions the Delegate from Lincoln moved the previous question. The question now is, shall the main ques- tion be now put? The vote being taken, the motion was declared carried. The PRESIDENT. The vote is first upon the substitute of the Delegate from Washington, which the Secretary will please report. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Harrison county. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, leave of absence is granted to the Del- egate from Harrison. The Reading Clerk read the substitute of the Delegate from Washington county (Mr. McChord). The question being put before the House on the adoption of the said substitute, and a division of the vote being called for, it re- sulted: 31 in the affirmative and 36 in the negative; and the substitute was rejected. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs upon the amendment offered to the BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Monday,] MCHENRY—PETTIT—JONSON. [October 27. report of the Committee by the Delegate from Oldham. Mr. MCHEN RY. I rise to a parlia- mentary inquiry. Suppose this motion is voted down. Then, I ask the Chair whether the next question is, shall the House con- cur in the report of the Committee of the Whole ‘? and if the House refuses to concur, whether it does not go back to the Commit- tee of the Whole? The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is correct; only the question is first upon the amendment of the Delegate from Oldham, and then it is upon the report of the Com- mittee. After the amendment of the Dele- gate from Oldham is voted upon, then the question recurs upon the adoption of the re- port of the Committee. The question is upon the amendment proposed by the Dele- gate from Oldham, which the Clerk will report. The amendment Was read by the Score- tary. The question being put on the adoption of the amendment, and a division being called, it resulted: 27 in the afiirmative and 41 in the negative; and the amendment was re- jected. The PRESIDENT. The question now is on the adoption of the report of the Com- mittee, which the Secretary will please re- port. The Reading Clerk read the report, as follows: The Chairman of the Committeereported that the Committee had, according to order, had under consideration the said report, and recommended that section 8 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights be referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure, and asked leave to sit again. The question being put to the House on the adoption of said report, the same was declared rejected. Mr. PETTIT. Has the previous ques- tion been exhausted? The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion is now exhausted. Mr. PETTIT. I now make this motion. The Reading Clerk read the resolution as follows: ' That the Convention resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of further considering the report made by the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights; that they proceed with the eighth section, as reported by said Committee, under the rule, and that no recommendation of refer- ence therein be had of said section to any other Committee of this Convention. Mr. J ONSON. I ask for a division of the question. I do not believe that that provision in regard to recommendation of reference to any other Committee ought to be submitted in conjunction with the rest. Mr. PETTIT. I would call the atten- tion of the gentleman from McLean that this only applies to the eighth section of the report. It has no reference to any other. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the resolution again, and the gentle- man will designate at which point he de- sires a division. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows : “That the Convention resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of further considering the report made by the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights.” Mr. JONSON. At that point I wish a division. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon that much of the resolution as read by the Secretary. The question being put before the House, that part of the resolution as read was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Read the balance of the motion. The Reading Clerk read the same, as fol- lows: “That they proceed with the eighth sec- tion, as reported by said Committee, under the rule.” The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of that part of the motion just read. 6 BILL OF RIGHTS. Monday,] HENDRICK—JONSON—BUCKNER. [October 27 . And the question ‘being put before the House on the adoption of the same, it was declared adopted. The Reading Clerk read the balance of said motion, as follows: “And that no recommendation of refer- ence therein be had of said section to any other Committee of this Convention.” The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of that part of the motion just read. Mr. HENDRICK. I have no opposi- tion myself to the adoption of that clause of the resolution; but, as is very well known to the Convention, the Chairman of the Committee on Crimes and Punish- ments and Criminal Procedure is not here. I would therefore ask that that part of the resolution be made a special order for to-morrow morning, if it is divisible; and certainly we can divide that part, and give the gentleman an opportunity to be present. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is un- der the impression that it is only divisible in regard to a vote, and not in regard to a postponement. Mr. J ONSON. My object in making this motion was not to indicate any prefer- ence that this section should be referred to any other Committee, because that is not my preference. I will oppose any such motion; but, as suggested by the Delegate who has just taken his seat, I knew that the Chairman of another Committee, who had an interest that he regarded as personal to himself, was not present, and who had in- dicated a desire heretofore that this part of the report should be referred to that Com- mittee; and as I regarded it as an injustice to -him to act upon this matter in his ab- sence, I made this motion ; and I hope, as it will not in any way impede our action or discussion of this section now, that this part of the resolution will not obtain. I believe that a sense of proper privilege, of proper personal as well as Delegate right, in favor of any individual occupying the position of Delegate upon this floor, ought always to obtain, whether we are in favor of his par- ticular views or not; and I want to say now that that is the sole reason that I had for making this appeal to the Convention, and I ask it to sustain it as doing no injury to any one, no injury to the right of any part of our constituency, and avoid what might be construed into a personal disad- vantage to a Delegate not now upon this floor. Mr. BUCKNER. I have but a word to say on that subject. That part of the mo— tion already voted will enable the Commit- tee to proceed at once with their work. I do not think that it is proper myself for the Convention to say to that Committee that under no circumstances shall they appeal to the Convention for any action they may desire them to take. I think it is entirely an unnecessary dictation to the Committee. They might possibly get into some trouble, and may desire to consult the House; and it might be necessary for the Convention to take action. For that reason I oppose it. Mr. MCHENRY. The House is always the master of the Committee of the Whole. We have the right to send any thing to the Committee of the Whole, compelling them to consider it, and to consider it under s rch rules as we may direct. They have se‘t this Bill back to the House, with the re quest that we refer it to another Standing Committee. The House does not want that done. It is very proper to say that we disagree in their report; and we ask the Committee of the Whole to consider the matter, and not refer it, or ask the House again to refer it, to another Committee. This whole thing is to come up before the House again. This action upon the part of the House is intended to facilitate the busi- ness of the Convention, and I do hope that the Convention will vote that part of the resolution. Mr. PETTIT. I simply want to say that I had not observed the absence of the gentleman from Lexington. I certainly BILL OF RIGHTS. 7 Monday,] BULLITT—PETTIT—BECKNER. [October 27 . (lid not intend any discourtesy to him, be- cause it is foreign to my nature to act discourteously to any one; but I want to say, and believe that this Convention in- tend to prosecute their business—to get .along with this Committee’s report so that it may be got out of the way, and let other reports be acted upon. I would say that, :after we get this order from the House, I will upon my own personal responsibility, in the Committee of the Whole, ask the unani- mous consent of that Committee that this section may be passed over until some other day; but I believe that this is in the order of business that is intended by most (of the members of this House. Mr. BULLITT. It occurs to me that if :the Convention, as the gentleman from Ohio has said, instructs the Committee of the Whole to proceed in a certain way, that the Committee of the Whole will .have to proceed in that way; and the pledge of the gentleman from Daveiss, that he will move to postpone action on the eighth section, will be then outside of the ,power of the Committee of the Whole to do; and if, as is contended by the gentle- man, the Committee of the Whole have to .act in accordance with the instructions of the Convention, then we cannot do any thing of that sort. We are bound to consider the question that the Convention directs us .to consider, or else we will have to disobey theinstructions of the Convention; and if we ‘can disobey the instructions of the Con- vention, why should the Convention ham- .per the Committee of the Whole in a useless sort of an order. If the vorder may be disregarded, then the Convention is ‘doing that which will stultify the Conven- tion, and it seems to me that the addition ‘of the third clause ought not to pass. The question being taken on that part of the motion last read by the Secretary, was declared rejected. The House then resolved itself into Com- mittee of the Whole, and the President nequested Mr. Young to take the Chair. The CHAIRMAN. The matter under consideration by the Committee of the,‘ Whole at the time of adjournment was section 8 of the printed report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. PETTIT. In accordance with what I promised in the House, I ask that unani- mous consent be given that the eighth sec- tion may be passed over until to-morrow. Mr. MOORE. I object. Mr. PETTIT. If it does - not require unanimous consent, 1 make it in the form of a motion. Mr. BECKNER. I second the motion. Mr. MOORE. I yield to the Delegate from Lincoln. Mr. W. H. MILLER It seems to me that the motion is not in order. The order of the House was; for us to go into the Com- mittee of the Whole and consider this mat- ter section by section, and we have no right to depart from that order without leave of the Convention; and if we take any action at all, the motion must be for the Committee to rise and ask leave of the Con- vention to pass that section, otherwise we should proceed to the consideration of it. Mr. RODES. I think I can obviate the whole difficulty by saying this. Of course I do not mean to say any thing but what is fair at any time, and I want it understood that I am not on the floor except by the permission of the House and by the order of the House. I have a right to occupy the floor five minutes upon any distinct proposition. In regard to this matter on hand, we have passed over section 2 al- ready; we have the amendments printed, and they are on the tables, and that will occupy all day—I know it will, very cer- tainly, and will therefore give an opportu- nity for gentlemen in the future to say any thing about the other propositions. Mr. MOORE. In addition to the second proposition passed over, I- think sections 5 and 6 were passed over. If it is going to occur that every time some member is ab- sent this Convention will postpone matters, s BILL or RIenrs. Monday,] B ECKNER—RODES—M GORE. [October 27 a I want to know when we are going to get through. I have no objection to the Dele- gate from the city of Lexington being present, and I do not say I am opposed to his measure, but say this: that I am op- posed to postponing measures because of the absence of any individual in this Conven- tion. I shall oppose all motions of that kind in the future. Mr. BECKNER. We do not lose a moment of time, because we have to con- sider all these sections when they come and as the Delegate says, we have the second section properly up this morning. It has not yet been considered. It was passed over from Saturday. We have now printed copies of all the amendments be- fore us, and I move we take up that sec- tion. a The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has proceeded under this order, which says that we proceed with the eighth sec- tion, as reported by the Committee, under the rules, and make no reference or recom- ' mendation of reference. Mr. RODES. I suggest there is no in- congruity between them. We have passed over the eighth section, and we will, of course, take the eighth section in order when we arrive at it, having transacted the business connected with the second. Mr. MOORE. I want to say that I do not want to appear as objecting to the postponing of this, and considering section 2 now. So that we can get to work and get along is all we want; it makes no differ- ence if we take up section 2 or section 8, or any other. Mr. BULLITT. I move that we now go back and take up sections that have been passed, and act upon them seriat'im in their regular order. Mr. BECKNER. I second the motion. The motion being put to the House, it was declared carried. Mr. FORRESTER. Is it in order to offer amendments to the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights at: this time ? The CHAIRMAN. Ithink so. _ Mr. FORRESTER. I would like to offer an amendment to paragraph 10. Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a point of order. Under a rule adopted September: 30th, the Committee ‘of the Whole re- solved that this report be adopted section by section, and under that rule amend- ments to any section are only in order when the section is under consideration. The CHAIRMAN. I understood the President of the Convention to say the other day that amendments were in order all the time under that rule. If I am wrong, will he correct me? Mr. CLAY. I do not hike to proffer any suggestion, but I think if the Chair- man will read the amended rule in regard to proceedings in Committee of the Whole, that that will give him the proper under-- standing of the question. Mr. HENDRICK. The rule that I re- ferred to was the one adopted on September- 30, 1890, which reads as follows: “That each section or paragraph of the report of ' a Committee, which shall contain matter to be inserted in the Constitution, and which shall refer to a separate and inde- pendent subject, shall be treated as an in-- dependent proposition, subject to debate, amendment, postponement, committal,” etc., and that all amendments to a report shall be considered in order; and if of the same degree, and otherwise parliamentary, shall be voted upon in the order of presentation. The point that I make is that the amend- ment is only in order; of course it can be“ filed at any time, but is only in order to any section when that section of the Bill is- under consideration ; otherwise endless con-- fusion will necessarily ensue. ' ' The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman only desired to file his amendment, as I un- derstand. Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire to offer‘ an amendment to section 2 of the Com- I BILL OF RIGHTS. 9 Mon day,] MOORE—APPLEGATE—DEHAVEN. 4 [October 27 . mittee’s report on Bill of Rights: I ask that it be reported. On offering an amend- ment, the party offering has the right to speak five minutes to sustain his position on that amendment. Mr. MOORE. There are other amend- ments in advance of his, and they are en- titled to precedence. The CHAIRMAN. The amendments must be discussed in their regular order. Simply because you offer an amendment does not give you the five minutes now for discussion. Mr. APPLEGATE. We proceeded under that rule Saturday. Several amend- ments were offered and discussed at the time they were offered. The CHAIRMAN. That was done be- cause' there were no other amendments pending at the time. Mr. DEHAVEN. May I make an inquiry as to the mode in which we are proceeding ? My understanding is that the first thing in order is the amendment offered by the Chairman of the Committee; That is in our printed report. . The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary in- forms me that the first amendment offered is the one offered by the Delegate from Al- len. Mr. RODES. That was adopted, as I understand, the other day—done by agree- ment. There was no opposition, as I un- derstand, to that. If I be wrong about it, I will be glad if the Clerk would correct me. Mr. APPLEGATE. I had not yielded the floor. Whether I was recognized or not I am certainly entitled to have my amend- ment reported, if nothing else, in this Con- vention. The CHAIRMAN. There is certainly no objection to that; but you have no right to discuss it at this time. Mr. APPLEGATE. Undera rule adopt- ' ed September 30, 1890, section 4 reads: When general debate is closed by order of the Convention, any Delegate shall be al- lowed five minutes debate on any amend-- ment he may offer. There is no limitation in there as to when that debate is to take place; and if there is any other rule under which the Chair is acting, I would like to know what it is, be- cause I do know that on Saturday, when amendments were offered, they were dis- cussed by the party offering them. The CHAIRMAN. That was when there was no other amendment pending. Mr. J ONSON . I want to call the atten- tion of the gentleman to this fact: The- Chair or President having given a decision on the point, there is only one way to reach that. The decision has been rendered. The only matter that can now be considered is an appeal to the House, and I think the gentleman is out of order. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks- the gentleman is out of order if he under- takes to discuss his amendment. Mr. APPLEGATE. I am not under- taking to discussv it, and only desired to call the attention of the Chair to what I con-_ ceived to have been done on Saturday; but if the Chair has decided the question, I have. nothing to say. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will de- cide you have the right to have the amend- ment reported. ' The Reading Clerk thereupon read th amendment, as follows: Amend section 2 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights by striking out the word “public” from the second line of said section. ' Mr. GRAHAM. I wish to withdraw my amendment to section 2 of the Bill of‘ Rights, as reported by the Committee, and offer this as a substitute in lieu of it. Mr. PETTIT. I call for the regularv order. The CHAIRMAN. The regular order will be enforced. The Secretary will report the first amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment. offered by Mr. McElroy, viz.: 10 BILL OF RIGHTS. Monday,] Pn'r'rr'r— M CHENEY—APPLEGATE. [October 27 , Amend section 2 by striking out the fol- lowing words: “But in consideration of public services.” To which Mr. Clardy has offered the fol- lowing amendment: Add to the amendment the following words, and insert in lieu thereof, “except as shall be provided for in this Constitu- tion.” For which amendment Mr. Pettit has offered the following substitute: No man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate emoluments or privi- leges from the community. The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not be- long to all citizens. Excepting private schools, no woman having property of this or any other class whatever shall be exempt from taxation. Mr. PETTIT. amendment as that. Mr. McHENRY. I do not understand That amendment is away I never wrote any such the matter. down the list. The CHAIRMAN. They were not printed in order. Report the original sub- stitute. Mr. PETTlT (to Secretary). ‘Just scratch out those words “woman having.” The CLERK. “ “t i=1‘ *5 excepting private schools, no property of this or any other class whatever shall be exempt from tax- ation. Mr. PETTIT. I will call the attention of the Committee to the correction; the “second, third and fourth”-_ Mr. APPLEGATE. I rise to a point of’ ‘order. The CHAIRMAN. The question now under consideration is the substitute offered by the Delegate from Daveiss, upon which the Delegate from Daveiss has five min- utes. Mr. APPLEGATE. He has been heard upon that. When he offered the resolution he made a ten-minute speech, and the rule says you can’t speak twice to a question. Mr. PETTIT. Yes; I have exhausted my five minutes. Mr. APPLEGATE. I submit the rule. Subsection four says he shall have five min- utes to speak upon it, and that the first mem- ber who shall obtain the floor has five min- utes in which to oppose it. The CHAIRMAN. I was going to rule just that way. The gentleman says his time is exhausted. Mr. PETTIT. I don‘t think I am entitled to any further talk. but I want to call the attention of the Committee— The CHAIRMAN. I will have to en- force the rule. Mr. PETTIT. I merely wanted to call the attention of the Committee to these words that have been stricken out, so that I may get my amendment right before the Convention. Tht CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is entitled to that. Mr. PETTIT. The amendment reads: “ Excepting private schools, no revenue- bea'ring property of this or any other class whatever shall be exempt from taxation.” Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire the floor in opposition to that. Mr. MCELROY. I make a point of order that the gentleman from Christian and myself occupied five minutes in oppos- ing the original resolution, and I think that is all we want. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary in- forms me that the five minutes were not taken up. The point of order is not well taken. The gentleman will proceed. Mr. APPLEGATE. I am glad the au- thority on points of order is overruled for once. With all respect for the gentleman who has made such talks upon the second section of the Bill of Rights as reported by the Committee. I do not think there has been a greater fallacy urged before this Convention than the objections that are stated to that section. It has been said upon this floor that all the evils in legisla- tion have grown out of the provisions of BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 11 _ lege. Monday,] APPLEGATE—KNOTB—HENDRICK. & [October 27. this second section. New, I challenge any gentleman who has made that statement, or who adheres to that thing, to cite a single case that has been decided by the Court of Appeals of Kentucky that says that legis- lation or the rights granted were obtained or guaranteed to them by this section of our present Constitution. They have sim- ply said this: That the provisions of this section of the Constitution do not prohibit them; and they could have said that about every other section in the Constitution; because if there had been a section pro- hibiting such legislation it would have been constitutional; but to charge this sec- tion with the responsibility for it is a fal- lacy, because there is no limitation named. New, in the Whipps lottery case, they did say this: that the words “ public emoluments and privileges” here did not prevent the Legislature from passing a law authorizing him to establish a lottery, because it was not a public privilege but a private privi- If we strike out in consideration of public services, I want this Conven- tion to solve this question: How can the Legislature of Kentucky say that it will exonerate doctors or ministers from sitting on juries‘? How can the Legislature of Kentucky say that it will be a crime to carry concealed deadly weapons, and say a sherifi' in the discharge of his duty can carry one‘? Is not that class legislation? If we strike this section out, I want to know how the Legislature can have these powers they ought to have. The only evils that have come under this are simply from the fact that the Court has said that “public emoluments” did not apply to a private person when the privilege was given him privately; and for that reason I offered that amendment to strike out the words “public emoluments and privi- leges,” because the Courts have said that such a privilege is not public, but private, and then it would be “ any privilege or any emolument.” The Legislature ought to have the power to make a distinction, and ,in such matters‘? give certain classes privileges over other classes, because by virtue of their business they should have it. Doctors should not be required to serve on juries, because the public need their services; ofiicers should be permitted certain privileges, because their duty to the public requires it. If you destroy that provision of the Constitution, I want some gentleman to answer the question, how shall the Legislature proceed We all concede that these parties have those privileges. Mr. KNOTT. I think it is very easily explained. If the gentleman will recur to the language of the amendment, “under like circumstances and upon like con- ditions.” ()fiicers can be granted the priv- ileges of carrying concealed weapons, be- cause all oflicers, under like circumstances and upon like conditions, will have the same privilege; doctors can be excused or exonerated from jury service, as I have explained, because they are all in the same class, and all under like circumstances and the same conditions. But what I Mr. APPLEGATE. I rise to a point of order. The gentleman has spoken on the amendment under consideration. Mr. KNOTT. I was speaking about You have made a speech your criticism. upon that very idea. Mr. APPLEGATE. Under our rules he cannot speak until it comes to his amend- ment. The CHAIRMAN. He was speaking upon the substitute offered by the Delegate from Daveiss. Mr. MOORE. I call for a division of that. Mr. HENDRICK. I call for a report of it. The CHAIRMAN. Please report the substitute. The Reading Clerk read the substitute again. Mr. MCHENRY. I would like to get straightened out about this thing. Are we considering Mr. McElroy’s amendment? 2 BILL OF RIGHTS. Monday,] M CHENRY—PETTIT—BUCKNER. [October 27. The CHAIRMAN. This is offered as a substitute for Mr. McElroy’s amendment. Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. McElroy’s amend- ment has not been read yet. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. McElroy, as follows: Amend by striking out the words “but in consideration of public services.” Also Mr. Clardy’s amendment thereto, as follows: “Section 2, line 2, strike out all after ‘community’ and insert the following‘: ‘Except as shall be provided for in this Constitution.’ ” The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Allen accepted that amendment; and for that the Delegate from Daveiss has offered the following substitute: SEC. 2. N 0 man or set of men are enti- tled to exclusive, separate emoluments or privileges from the community. 2. The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens privi- leges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citi- zens. 3. It may exempt from taxation public buildings, churches used for religious wor- ship, burying grounds, charitable institu- tions and public and private schools for the education of children. 4. Excepting private schools, no woman having property of this or any other class whatever, shall be exempt from taxation. Mr. PETTIT. I ask unanimous con- sent that I may change my substitute in this particular: I want to ‘add there, “free public libraries.” I believe they ought to be exempted from taxation. Mr. BUCKNER. I have an amend- ment. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will report the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Hart. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Buckner, as follows: Provided, That the number of private schools exempted from taxation shall not exceed the number of dwellings in the Commonwealth. Mr. BUCKNER. I offer that amend- ment to show that, as I understand the substitute of the Delegate from Daveiss, it would enable almost every piece of prop- erty in the State to be exempted from taxa- tion under the pretense that it is a private school. Having offered that resolution, and after making that statement with general consent, I will withdraw it. Mr. PETTIT. I hope the gentleman will not withdraw it for a few moments. I want to say this: That I hope the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Hart will not be adopted for obvious reasons. For the enlightenment of the chil- dren and the citizens of this Common- wealth, I believe that private s’chools ought to be exempt. I have worded my amendment in such a way that I do not think there can be any misunderstanding by judge or jury or citizen in regard to its intent and meaning. “Excepting private schools, no revenue-bearing property of this or any class whatever shall be exempt from taxation.” I know that the churches, andI know that the schools throughout the Commonwealth of Kentucky. have an immense amount of property that ought not escape the burthens of taxation, and whenever it becomes revenue-bearing in the least, whether it belong to churches or schools or what not, it ought, as a mat- ter of right and justice, to pay tax- ation, and be compelled to pay what taxation other citizens are compelled to pay. Now, upon this amendment as a whole, I believe that it conforms to the wishes of two-thirds of the members of this Convention, and two-thirds of the citi- zens of this State. We ought not make a radical change in the mode of taxation; but I do not believe that the good people of this State desire that their churches, used exclusively for religious worship; their burying-grounds, their charitable in- stitutions, their public libraries, or their public or private schools for education of children, shall be taxed. I believe this amendment ought to be adopted. It is the BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 Monday,] MOORE—PETTIT—AUXIER. [October 27 . safe and the sure way out of the difficulty that surrounds us in this State. It makes these institutions bear the burthen of taxa- tion to a just extent. I understand that there is property in the city of Louisville belonging to churches that yields revenue-— that is, renting the same for business; some of the property belonging to them is rented, I learn, for questionable purposes. How- ever that may be, if it is rented for any purpose, and brings to those institutions a revenue, it ought, as a matter of justice. to be taxed as other property. Mr. MOORE. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. Why do you insert ‘this question of revenue into the Bill of Rights ? Mr. PETTIT. I do it for this very rea- son. Here in this Bill of Rights this sec- ond section, as has been stated upon this floor, has been the Pandora’s Box from which have sprung all the evils of legisla- tion. And if in this second section, and at the very first opportunity, we can relieve it ‘of that, I believe that we ought to adopt it; .and I will say to my friend from Boyd, as I stated here the other day, that if it is found, after mature consideration, that this is not the proper place to insert it, then the Committee on Style may come in here and, by unanimous consent, change it to reve- nue and taxation, or wherever they may think proper. Mr. MOORE. Your idea is to make .another Pandora’s Box‘? Mr. PETTIT. Not by any means. Mr. CLARDY. May I make an explan- ation? I don’t want to make a speech. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob— jection, you can proceed. Mr. CLARDY. The Committee on Revenue and Taxation had this matter un- der consideration, and have given a good deal of time to it, and when they make ‘their report to this Convention they do not believe the Bill of Rights ought to include 'every thing, and be reported on by the Committee. This matter will be brought up at that time, and I believe we ought not to act on it now. Mr. AUXIER. I have an amendment to the substitute offered by the Delegate from Daveiss. The CHAIRMAN. We have had one amendment already. I don’t think another is in order. Mr. BUCKN ER. amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Auxier, as follows : Amend by striking out the word “private schools” in the third section. Mr. AUXIER. I do not believe there is any more reason for exempting— Mr. W. H. MILLER. Is debate in or- der ? The CHAIRMAN. There is only one amendment pending. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I thought the Delegate from Hart offered one. The CHAIRMAN. That is withdrawn. Mr. AUXIER. There is no better rea- son for exempting private school property I. withdrew my than there is for exempting the property- of a railroad corporation, of a turnpike, or any other enterprise. Private schools are instituted not only for education, but the persons engaged therein have the addition- al object of making money. They build their houses, they buy their ground, they erect improvements, and they charge tui- tion, and I cannot see any reason under the sun why private schools should be exempted from taxation. Iamin favor of exempting the public schools, the churches,and our bury- ing places, and things of that character, but I have never heard urged upon this floor a good reason why private enterprise, whether for school purposes or not, should be exempted from taxation. I think we should stand on putting their-— Mr. PETTIT. I believe in meeting every question plainly and fairly. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I rise to a point of order. He made a five minutes’ speech. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Monday,] PETTIT—HENDRICK—BECKNER. [October 27 . from Pike offered an amendment and spoke five minutes. Some other gentle- man has the right to speak five minutes in opposition to the amendment. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to call the at- tention of the gentleman from Pike to this one question. It is well-known in the State of Kentucky that there is a denomination, the Roman Catholics of our State, who do not, whilst they pay all the taxation imposed upon them by the State for our public schools, take advantage of those pub— lic schools. They have their parochial schools. Now, that equality and justice may be done to them, I have inserted this amendment, which I think every just citi- zen ought to approve. I know that it opens the door to other private schools than those of the Catholic persuasion, but in opening to one I find that I am compelled to open to all; and upon the general theory that it is to advance the educational inter- ests of our State, I believe that the citi- zens of the State will approve of it. The CHAIRMAN. The question now is upon the amendment of the Delegate from Pike. And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the afl‘irmative, on a division of the House, by a vote of 50 yeas and 15 nays. Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to offer an amendment. Mr. BECKNER. I want to inquire whether it would be in order to move to strike out the third and fourth paragraphs of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Daveiss, and have them referred to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation ‘? The CHAIRMAN. It is in order to move to strike them out. Mr. BECKNER. I move, then,to strike out the third and fourth paragraphs of said amendment, and refer them to the Com- mittee on Revenue and Taxation. Mr. PETTIT. I make the point of order that a motion may be made to strike out, but this Committee cannot send it to any other Committee. Mr. BECKNER. I make the motion in order that the whole matter can go to the correct Committee—the Committee on Rev- enue and Taxation. The gentleman offers an amendment to his own substitute by putting in public libraries, which shows that it has not been maturely considered by the gentleman who offered the substitute. The CHAIRMAN. If the motion is not in order, it is not in order to speak upon it. The Chair decided that the motion to strike out was proper, but the motion to re- fer was not. Mr. BECKNER. I was merely giving my reasons for making the motion. That is my motion—to strike out. Mr. P. P. JOHNSTON. I desire to offer a resolution under Rule 55. I want to test the sense of the Convention on this very proposition. If it is the desire of the Convention to consider these matters, when another Committee has to report on it, I want the Convention to say so, and I want them to do so understandingly; and for the purpose of getting the sense of the Convention on that subject, I introduce the resolution under that rule, which reads . “ It shall be in order to introduce and”— The CHAIRMAN. The Committee cannot consider that. Mr. P. P. JOHNSTON. I am reading from the Rules for the Committee of the Whole: “ 2. It shall be in order to introduce and discuss any resolution when in the Committee of the Whole, with a view to test the sense of the Conven- tion upon the question proposed.” »I think if you will have that resolution reported I believe it is pertinent, at least the Com- mittee, of which I have the honor to be Chairman, will be glad to have the sense of the Convention on this question, and will bow to its decision. I ask that it be read. Mr. BECKNER. My motion is pend- ing. BILL OF RIGHTS. ; 15 Monday,] J OHNSTON——M ILLER—PETTIT. [Octoberg27 _ The CHAIRMAN. Your motion has precedence of the resolution. Mr. P. P. JOHNSTON. I ask that the resolution be reported. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. P. P. Johnston, as follows: Resolved, That it is ‘the sense of this Convention that the Committee on Bill of Rights is the proper Committee to in- troduce the matter of revenue and taxa- tion, and that this is the proper time to do so. The CHAIRMAN. The vote is now upon the motion made by the Delegate from Clark, to strike out sections three and four of the substitute. Mr. SACHS. Is that motion debat— able‘? ' The CHAIRMAN. Not now. . And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative. The CHAIRMAN. Report the resolu- tion ofl'eredby the Delegate from Fayette. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I rise to a point of order. The resolution is not in order. We are in Committee of the Whole execut- ing an order of the Convention, and the rule which the gentleman has just read is not in order for that reason. We are here executing that order, acting under instruc- tions from the Convention, and nothing is in order except to carry out the instruc- tions of the Convention. Mr. P. P. JOHNSTON. WVe have certain rules which are to govern us in Committee of the Whole, and, in order to arrive at an in- telligent conclusion, I have offered the resolution. I have read the rule re- ferred to, No. 55, and if the gentleman will refer to it with prayerful attention he may come to the conclusion that the resolution is in order. It is possible to go on and shut out all debate and every effort to arrive at a proper decision. Here is a ques- tion that, in the judgment of some mem- bers, it is not proper to report from this Committee. I offer this resolution, pre- sented after mature consideration, and I want an expression from the Convention. _ substitute‘? I am not sensitive about it; I don’t care how it is disposed of, but I want’l'to'proceed understandingly, and if the Convention votes to consider the question'of taxation now, it will relieve the Committee on Revenue and Taxation from further con- sideration of the subject, andjI will be just as well pleased if you vote one way ordthe other. Mr. WV. H. MILLER. I call for ,":_the reading of the resolution under which we are acting. Mr. PETTIT. I now desire to with— draw my substitute, if I can obtain unani- mous consent. The CHAIRMAN. Is there any objec- tion to the gentleman withdrawing his If not, it will be withdrawn. Mr. P. P. JOHNSTON. I call for a vote on my resolution. The CHAIRMAN. Did a gentleman call for the reading of the resolution under- which the Committee is acting? .Mr. W. H. MILLER. I called for it. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Pettit, introduced in the morning, under which the Committee is. acting. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I did not refe to that at all. I referred to the resolution a few days ago limiting debate—the original resolution under which we went into Committee of the Whole to consider- the report of the Committee on Preamble- and Bill of Rights. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is in great doubt whether a resolution of the kind is in order, but will decide in favor of the resolution. Read the resolution ofl’ered by the Delegate from Fayette. The Reading Clerk again read Mr. J ohn- ston’s resolution. The question being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative. ‘ The CHAIRMAN. Read the next amendment on the original printed list. The Reading Clerk thereupon read Mr. McElroy’s amendment to section 2 of the report, as amended by Mr. Clardy. 16 _ BILL or RIGHTS. Monday,] MILLER—CLAY. [October 27 . And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative, on a division -of the House, by a vote of 32 yeas and 30 nays. ‘Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make the point of order that there is no quorum. The CHAIRMAN. It has been de- cided that only a majority of the House constitutes a quorum in the Committee of the Whole. It was decided on Saturday. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I understood it was so decided on Saturday, but I can find no authority for such a decision as that. The parliamentary procedure is, that when- ever there is no quorum in Committee of the Whole the matter must be reported to the House; when it is reported to the House, if there is no quorum, the proceed- ing must be taken afterwards. There is no way of determining what is a quorum of the Committee of the ‘Whole except by the rule of the House, and the rule of this House says a quorum shall consist of sixty- seven members, or two-thirds of the mem- bers-elect of the Convention. It seems to me that there are two-thirds of the mem- bers here present; and if there are two- 'thirds of the members present, we should have some means of having members vote upon every proposition that comes up, and I think the ruling made on Saturday was an error. As I stated, I think I can show abundant authority for it. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair appeals to the highest authority known to this body, the President. Mr. CLAY. I would like to state the reason for that opinion. I did not decide from the Chair that it was the universal con- clusion that a quorum of the Committee of the Whole is a majority of the House. I notice that the authorities state that a quo- rum of the Committee should usually be the same as a quorum of the House. The reason for that is that the usual parliamen- tary rule in an assembly is, that a majority constitutes a quorum; but in a good many cases a great deal less than a majority con- stitutes a quorum. Now, in Parliament, , where they have five or six hundred mem~ bers, I think fifty constitutes a quorum. It would be very wrong for Parliament to require that a quorum of the Committee of the Whole should be a majority—three hundred—when a quorum of the House is but fifty. In Congress one hundred con- stitutes a quorum of the Committee of the Whole. A majority is a quorum of the House. The whole object of these decis- ions is in requiring a quorum of the Com- mittee of the Whole not to be the same as that for the assembly, and that in no case shall a quorum of the Committee of the Whole be over a majority of that body, and all the decisions are based upon that idea, that a quorum of the Committee of the Whole should not be more than a quo- rum of the House, which in all these cases is only a majority of the body. Now, I claim that there is no harm at all in that decision. It is warranted by universal parliamentary usage, that a quorum of the Committee of the Whole ought to be a majority of the body, and I claim that no harm will come from that rule, because this Committee is but the creature of the Convention; its reports have to be made to the Convention, and then be adopted by the Convention, of which sixty- seven is a quorum. It is a rule that I claim ought to be adopted by the Conven- tion, because it will do much in the way of facilitating the business of the Convention. If the Chair had decided that sixty-seven constituted a majority of the Committee of the Whole, half the time we have been considering these matters we could not have considered them at all, and we would have lost several days—I don’t know how much time, but a good deal. What harm can there be in deciding that fifty is a quorum of the assembly, when you recol- lect that whatever we do here comes up again for adoption by the Convention, in which sixty-seven constitutes a quorum? Therefore, the point of order was made by myself, because it was in the interest of BILL OF RIGHTS- 17 M onday,] PETTIT—CLAY—HENDRICK. [October 27 . business, of accomplishing the purposes for which we are here; and, second, because, by universal parliamentary usage, a quo— rum of the Committee of the Whole is a majority of the Committee, and, besides, because no harm could possibly result from that decision, as all our work has to be in- dorsed and acted upon by the Convention, in which the quorum is sixty-seven. Mr. PETTIT. I would like very much to agree with the President of this Conven- tion upon this ruling. I know the necessity for having just such a ruling and just such arule as this, and it will be remembered that when this rule was up in the House I endeavored to secure a majority in the House to constitute a quorum, as it was nec- _ essary to do most of the business in the Committee of the Whole, and thereby have a majority of fifty-one to do business in both the House and the Committee; but I believe this proceeding contrary to the rules of this Convention ; and if we have a bad rule, let us correct that rule, but don’t let us whip the devil around the stump. I call your attention to rule 57: ‘-' The rules of proceeding in Convention shall beob- served in Committee, so far as the same are applicable.” Now, the rule in the Conven- tion is that two-thirds constitute a quorum of that Convention, and that rule applies in the Committee of the Whole just as surely as it applies in the Convention. Mr. CLAY. I ask, then, why can you not call the yeas and nays, or move the previous question ? Mr. PETTIT. Simply because that is provided otherwise in the rules. I contend that if we want to make any exception, as far as a quorum is~ concerned here, we ought to make it in the rules. . Mr. CLAY. Will youplease point out in the rules where the call of the yeas and nays is prohibited, and where the previous question is prohibited in Committee of the Whole '? -. Mr. PETTIT. I believe it is right here . n'this proceedings, and I am certain that it is the rule everywhere, and I could point out a dozen instances if I had but a moment to do it. It is here and everywhere in par- liamentary proceedings. Mr. HENDRICK. I move that the gentleman be given five minutes to find it. Mr. PETTIT. I will find it. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair decides that there is a quorum, and we will proceed to business. The next amendment is that offered by the Delegate from Henderson. Mr. FARMER. I wish to withdraw that amendment and have it referred to the Committee on General Provisions. The CHAIRMAN. It can be with- drawn, but we cannot place it before any Committee. The CHAIRMAN. The next amend- ment is that offered by the Delegate from Campbell. The Secretary informs the Chair that that has already been stricken out. Mr. WASHINGTON. Stricken out? What, the amendment? It covers a little more ground than that. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Washington, as follows: “ That this shall not be construed as de-s priving the General Assembly by general and uniform laws from exempting property now so exempted.” Mr. WASHINGTON. I claim for that amendment that it at least has the merit of being~ definite and certain. It leaves no room for misconstruction. Anybody can understand it ; and it accomplishes ‘the end aimed at. In the second place, it leaves us free, as other reports of Committees shall come in, to incorporate“ in other parts of the Constitution such provisions as we may deem wise and proper at the time. In the third place, it does not attempt to deprive the Legislature of the pc wer, which it has long exercised, and precisely as it now ex- 't s,‘ to exempt from taxation, by general and uniform laws, certain property now ex- empt by such laws. In the fourth place, it relieves us of those troublesome words, “ in 18 BILL- OF ‘RIGHTS. Monday,] consideration of public services,” the evils of which have been borne witness to by so many Delegates upon this floor. And justly so, as it seems to me. No mortal can un- derstand them. They have never been able to do it up to this time; they are not able to do it now. And who shall say that they will be able to do it in the future‘? How can we tell who will occupy the Court of last resort in the future? How can we tell by what influences they will be surrounded ? It seems to me, in view of these facts, that this amend- ment is such that any‘ gentleman in this Convention who desires to shut out ex- clusive privileges to private corporations can conscientiously vote for it. If you ask me in reference to towns and cities. I point you to the opinion of the Court of Appeals, published in 84th Kentucky, page 167, where you will find a remedy pointed out, easy, clear, complete, and resting upon ele- mentary principles of the law. If you say that in the future we may desire to testify our appreciation of some public character, my reply is, do not prohibit it in the Con- stitution. The rule is that we can do almost gany thing we please if it is not prohibited in the Constitution. And in addition to that, I point you to section 22 of the report of this Committee, which says: “ The General Assembly shall not grant any title of nobil- ity or hereditary distinction,” thereby say- ing, by implication, that if these distinctions are not hereditary they may be granted. If you ask me in reference to such a case as that of ~Whipps, by which power was con- ferred upon him to dispose of his property by private lottery, I point you to the lottery section, which meets that case. So it gets rid of every thing, taken in conjunction with other sections. This amendment has refer- ence solely to exclusive corporate privilegesf And it is my judgment that it ought to be inserted at this time. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I would like to ask ‘the gentleman if his amendment would WASHINGTON—ALLEN—GLARDY. [October 27 . 2 prevent such a monopoly as the Louisville Gas Company ? Mr. WASHINGTON. That is the character of case that Iaintended to men- tionfg You can say, by general law, that every municipal corporation in the State shall have the right to erect, maintain and operate gas-works, just as in the Newport case, in which the Court of Appeals say that what a city can do itself, it can do through others; and, therefore, it has the right to contract with a gas company for its supply of gas. And if the natural and logical result of the contract is to confer an exclusive privilege, it is not obnoxious to constitutional objection; for it grows out of the contract relation alone. and is pro- tected by legal principles. Mr. CLARDY. Notwithstanding my very high esteem for the opinion of the gentleman from Campbell. I desire to make this statement: that has already been adopted. An amendment, substantially, I believe, exactly the same as the first part of his. That is to say, striking out "but in consideration of public services,” and in- starting “except as provided for in this Con- stitution.” That much of this amendment has already been adopted by this Commit- tee. As to the remaining portion of his amendment, I would say this: It simply goes on to state that the Legislature may, by general and uniform laws, exempt from taxation property now so exempted un- der such law. My impression is, that it is the intent and purpose of this Convention to prevent the exemption from taxation of some property, the exemption of which is now authorized by law. Now, if we just strike out the latter part of this and let it stand as it is, it will be about the same as that we have adopted. The reports of the different Committees on Taxation, Corporations, and other Committees, when they make their reports for this Convention, will settle the question as to what property shall be exempted from taxation. BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 19 M onday,] Mr. WASHINGTON. I have no ob- jection to that whatever. Mr. CLARDY. That would be the same as if we left it just as it is now, and as it has already been adopted by this Commit- tee. That is the objection I have to the latter part of the amendment of _the Dele- gate from Campbell. Mr. WASHINGTON. I think the gen- tleman is correct about that. It is immw terial to me in what part of the Constitu- tion the exemption provision is inserted. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the Committee now arise. The CHAIRMAN. Will we take a vote '? This matter has been discussed. And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I now renew my WASHINGTON—CLARDY—MILLER. *— [Octobcr 27 A w motion that the Committee rise, report progress to the House, and ask leave to sit again. And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative. President Clay resumed the Chair and called the Convention to order. Mr. YOUNG. The Committee of the Whole has been in session, and has had under consideration the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again to-morrow. " The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the report of the Committee of the Whole. And the vote being taken thereon, it was decided in the aflirmative. The Convention thereupon adjourned. Convention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol.‘ 1 FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 28. 1890. No. 41 'Tuesday,] BECKHAM— M CHEN IVE—BECKNER. [October 28. The Convention was called to order at '9 o’clock by the President, Mr. Clay, and ‘the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Father Young. The Journal of yesterday was read, cor- rected, and approved The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. I Mr. BIJCKHA M. I have a petition from the Farmers and Laborers’ Union of my county, requesting certain changes to be made in the Constitution, and suggest- ing some changesjin the Legislative De- partment. I ask that it be referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT. The reference will be made. Reports from Standing Commit- tees; reports from Special Committees; motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. MCHENRY. I offer this resolution, and ask its present consideration. The resolution was read, as follows: “ Resolved, That the rule which requires the Convention to stand adjourned at 1 o’clock each day, be suspended during this week, and that on this day and to-morrow afternoon sessions be held, beginning at 3 o’clock, and the Convention shall not ad- journ, but take a recess at its morning ses- sions on those days.” Mr. MCHENRY. I suppose if there is any serious opposition to that, it will have to lie over until to-morrow, because it sus- pends the rules. It will require two-thirds majority to carry it. Our rules require that we shall adjourn at 1 o’clock. That is the regular rule, and it will have to be sus- pended before we can have afternoon ses- .sions. The PRESIDENT. The Chair does not think it changes the rules, but it will re- quire a two-thirds vote to carry it. Mr. BECKNER. The Chairman of the Committee on Rules reported, a few days ago, that there was no necessity for evening sessions. The reasons he gave then exist yet. Mr. McHENRY. I have not surren- dered the floor yet. We are going to take a recess. We have been here seven weeks yesterday, and we have accomplished very little. I do not know that any of us are to be reflected upon about it. It is one of those‘ things we cannot help, but it is not very well understood before the people. I do not want to go back to my constituents and say after seven weeks’ session we have not gotten through the Bill of Rights. I want to make an effort to get through the Bill of Rights this week—at least get it out of the Committee of the Whole. We will sus- pend the Committee work. All I said the other day I will stand to now, and that is that I do not think we ought to interfere with the Committee work; but I think the Convention might suspend that work for two days at least, in order to make a grand effort to get through the Bill of Rights. I can say this, because I made no speech on the subject, and I stand with the minority of the House, because a majority has spoken. I think we ought to settle this question this week, and then all of us will be ready to go home to take a rest, and take in the election. Mr. BECKNER. If the gentleman simply wants to please his constituents by this motion, I have no objection. But ‘I cannot think he 'is in earnest about this matter, considering the report he madea 2 PRINTING. Tuesday,] BECKNER—AIOORE—HENDRD K. [October 28. few days ago; I do not think he is afraid to go home and meet his constituents. I know he has the backbone. Mr. MOHENRY. I don’t want to go home without this matter disposed of. Mr. BECKNER. We have been trying to do our duty, and I think we have done it. I think the Convention has been act- ing wisely in not having afternoon ses- sions. We have been doing Committee work, looking up matters, and preparing to make intelligent reports. I see no reason for changing the programme on which we have been acting. The vote being taken upon the adoption of the resolution, it was decided in the afiirmative. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to insist on the motion to reconsider the vote by which the resolution offered by the Delegate from Fleming was passed. I desire to give the devil his dues. According to the state- ment of the gentleman from the swell dis- trict of Louisville, the “devil” has been playing the devil with our speeches. I de- sire to say, that after an examination of the report of my speeches, I find that the word ~‘Larro” is not in it, but the word “Larvae,” and other changes, have been made as I desired. Now, so far as the criticism upon my mythology or my knowledge of natural history is con- cerned, that is a matter wholly with myself and my constituents. If I am unfortu- nately unacquainted with natural history or mythology, and I choose to deal in them, I am responsible for it. If I do not speak sufficiently definite for my constitu- ents to understand, it is their fault in send- ing me to the Convention. If I want anybody to write a speech for me, I pro- pose to select my own agent; and I do not desire the Convention, at the expense of the State, to select a man to write my speeches for me. I do not think any Dele- gate ought to ask that we have a man ap- pointed for the purpose of revising or mak- ing speeches for us; and I think we are amply able ourselves to revise our speeches and see that they go properly in the re- ports. If we do not, we should elect- a man to write our speeches for us, and go home and let him conduct the whole busi- ness. The .esolution 'of Mr. Hendrick, as to ap- pointing a Committee to consider the mat- ter of Proof-Reader was read. Mr. HENDRICK. I am rather pleased that the Delegate from Boyd has entered, and now calls up a motion for the recon- sideration of this resolution. I say I am glad, for the reason that this resolution was- adopted by the unanimous vote of this Convention on last Saturday. The reasons suggested by my distinguished friend, the Delegate from Boyd, are not good. There has been no reflection made on his scholarship or learning. There is none in the resolution- I listened, and listened with very great pleasure, to his speech, which did honor‘ to him and to the Convention, but I failed to recognize that speech after it had passed through the mysterious processes of the Printer’s office; and I say now that the- reason for this resolution was simply pro- tection to him and other Delegates upon this floor, who had hoped, like Caesar's murderer, that these deeds were to live in ages hence; that States unborn and ages yet unknown should lisp the number of gentlemen here. But the Delegate from Boyd cannot avoid the real issues in this case by charging to his own want of schol- arship or knowledge the mistakes which occur in this printed record. He has been to our District for many years, and was in his young days, the very flower and hope of the young Democracy. I recollect him as the Knights of the Round Table recol- lected King Arthur, armed cap-a-pie, from plume to spur. as he shot through the lists at Camelot, and charged before the eyes of ladies and of Kings. But it is not a reflec- tion upon the scholaship, or learning, or integrity of any gentleman here. It is simply this proposition, that these report-- PRINTING. 3 Tuesday,] HENDRICK. [October 28 . are imperfect, and so imperfect as to render the speech of the Delegate from Boyd, and of every other man who has spoken on .this floor, absolutely ridiculous, as I under- take to say, after a very careful examina- tion of two-thirds of the speeches which have been made. Now I propose to dem- onstrate this by referring to some of the mistakes, and I propose to call the atten— tion of the Convention, not only to my own conclusion, but to the conclusion of a Committee of this House, with reference to this very proposition. Now, take the remarks as reported by the Delegate from Oldham. In number 25, October 9th, page 10, column 2, he uses this language: “ Except for crime of which the person shall have been du y convicted.” Onapage 11, column 1, line 19: “that the spirit and genius or our government.” Page 11, column 1, thirteenth line from the bottom: “They haue been settled.” Page 12, about ten lines down: “I listened very with great pleasure.” Now, I want to say that these are the corrected Reports sent us from the Public Printer. On page 13: “ To correct its gram- mar; to make more florid, if you will, it rhetoric.” . I Mr. MOORE. I want to ask if you are reading what goes into the books? Mr. HENDRICK. In making these criticisms, we have used what was given to us as the corrected proof. _ Now, take the Delegate from Caldwell. On page 23, column 1, twenty two lines from the bottom, he says: “There let me stand among them; let me fall, if fall I must.” On page 14, six lines from the bot- tom of the second column, the word “ librty.” Five lines from the bottom on the same page, and in the same column, “who im- places their sign manual upon it and makes it the law of the land.” Same page, col- umn one, fourteen lines from the top, “ I stand here to-day recognizing the fact that t s; qthe highest mark of a statesman, if you please, to correct his own work if he finds an error therein.” Also, on the same‘ page, same column, and nine lines from the bottom, “and establtsh this Constitution.” On page 16, fourth line from the top, we find “enjoying and defending his iife.” I cannot tell whether it means defending his wife or his life. Page 26, eleven lines from the bottom, “what objection can there of this arrangement. ” On page 17, “then understand.” Page 18, “so it seems to me that the fourth paragraph of the first sec-sec- tion of the substitute really means nothing.” Page 19, “ shall fully express his senti- ments and opinons.” ' Now, come to-the Delegate from Lexing- ton. Record number 27, page 9, second column, fifth line from the top, we find the word “neeessity.” What that is I don’t know. Same page, second column, eigh- teen lines from the bottom, “ Liberty of consoience.” Page 10, first column, first line, he speaks of “residuum.” It is not residuum, but residuum. On page 10, second column, five lines from the para- graph, he introduces another legal light, “ Blackstone.” I have never heard of him before. On page 11, second column, “and defending their lifes and liberty.” On page 12, second column, thirteen lines from the top, he uses this remarkable language: “ To deny every citizen of the Commonwealth those little licentious prac- tices which are a source of a great deal of pleasure to gentlemen who love to smoke and drink and go to a horse.” Any gen- tleman here knows that my friend is a pure man, and that he never used such language on the floor of this Convention, and yet I say to you that this is there in that way. I might go on and cite various other in- stances, but these are suflicient. Now, you appointed a Committee to re- port about this matter, and what did that“ Committee say? And let me stop right' here, and say that this is not intended as a reflection on the Public Printer. the business of the Printer. If you are It is not " 4 PRINTING. Tuesday,] HENDRICK. [October 28. determined to publish your reports, there should be an editor, whose responsible duty should be to this Convention. Now, let us see what this Committee said: “The first work was done in old type, which did not always show clearly. The proof has been poorly _made. We fear that it will not be satisfactory to the Delegates when they look over their work as re-pro- duced in the printed debates, to think that their culture and precision of speech will be judged from what these pages show.- We do not charge that the fault is wholly with the Printer. The work has been going on without a responsible editor. He _is liable to make mistakes, and no doubt does. He has undertaken, and it is understood to be his duty, to prepare the reports for the Printer, who, of course, cannot go behind the copies that he receives. Some of the members look after the printing, so far as it relates to what they themselves have said; but in the meantime, however, the work is going on with no supervision save that which the Stenographer gives it. We are trying to make a faithful report, so that the Convention may understand the situation, as it is and act accordingly. We have no power over the matter, and can only state the facts as they appear to us. The trouble has reached a point where a heroic remedy is needed.” As to the, heroic remedy, it has been sug- gested to me that the expense of the mat- ters is large, and that the State should not be burdened with it. I am perfectly willing to accept that proposition. I never yet -was an advocate of these printed debates. I believe this Convention would do its work more satisfactorily to itself and the people of Kentucky if not a line that you utter were taken down by that Sten- ographer, and printed in the reports. I believe it was Erskine, the great English lawyer, who said, “I always feel em- barrassed when I am talking before a man whom I know is taking down all I say.” And if we were to abolish absolutely the stenographic corps, I believe we would make fifty per cent. better progress than with a man here to transcribe what we utter. want a Stenographer; but I say when you have done that, it is a matter of simple justice to every man upon this floor to have these debates reported properly. I would join any man or set of men here in wiping out the whole business, and I can certainly afford to say that, as I have said nothing so far in a set speech. Now, I have listened to the speeches on this subject on Bill of Rights, and much of what has been said on that subject was worthy to be heard in any Convention; but still I say the ex- pense of the matter is such that I am perfectly willing that the entire expense should be taken away, and the stenographiic corps excused; but if we are to have them, in the name ,of all that is proper and decent, let us have what we do reported in a fair, impartial and exact manner. This is all there is about it. I offer this resolution out of respect for gentlemen who sit with me on this floor. If you desire your speeches properly reported, get you an editor. The Public Printer is not responsible. It is his business to take the reports from the Stenographer and print them. I have always endeavored to be per- fectly fair and just. It has been sug- gested that there is a job in this. The job is just this: In connection with other gen- tlemen, I noticed these mistakes. I know of a good man now in this city who was suggested to me as a proper man to take charge of it; a man who, according to the certificate of the President of the Conven- tion is the best equipped man for that work in Kentucky. It was suggested by the gentleman from Louisville that it would be a very good thing to have him take- charge of it, and that is every thing that I know. I shall recommend that man to the Committee, and I hope, if this resolution is not reconsidered, that that gentleman will But you have decided that you PRINTING. Tuesday,] HENDRICK—WASHINGTON—MOORE. [October 28. be appointed. I do not know that he will be, but I would rather see him than any- body else, but for the only reason that he would serve the Convention faithfully, in season and out of season. But let me say, in addition that you have already in this discussion consumed four or five hundred dollars’ worth of money, and that amount would almost pay the cost of the ofiicer. I have deemed it proper that I should say this much in response to the statements of the Delegate from Boyd. Mr. WASHINGTON. I desire to vote intelligently and proper. Do you think it proper for any Proof-Reader, in correcting these reports, to change speeches from the way in which they were given on this floor? Mr. HENDRICK. Certainly not; but look in number 24. Beginning at page 21 you have a report from the Clerk of the Court of Appeals c._>vering five pages, which is a mere list of cases now upon the docket of that Court which are undecided or before the Judges. Take number 16, and you will find an Auditor’s report cov- ering thirteen pages of our debate. It is utterly out of place, and should never have gone in there. Mr. L. T. MOORE. This Convention was carried from its pins, on the day this resolution was introduced, by the very witty remarks and eloquent speech of the gentleman from Louisville. The seductive tones of the gentleman from Fleming are very persuasive to me, but not sufiiciently persuasive to make me abandon my motion to reconsider. I think it a very sad com- mentary upon the wisdom of the Conven- tion to say that its members have not sufficient sense or accomplishment to speak or deliver what they desire, or that the Reporters are very inefficient, and never should have been elected, or that the Pub- lic Printer should be removed. Mr. HENDRICK. What I said was this: That _I thought your speech, and other speeches that I have listened to, were worthy of this or any Convention ; but the report was such as would not enable me to recognize your remarks, Mr. L. T. MOORE. I understand the gentleman, and feel complimented with the manner in which he speaks of my speech; but that is not the point. It is the first time 1 have ever known that a Convention had to have an editor. It may be absolute- ly necessary. It may be that we are il- literate, or that the Reporter is unable to report what we say, or the Printer unable to print what he is given. If that is so, it is a sad commentary on the communities which have elected us, or on us, that we have elected men who are incapable of dis- charging their duties. Now, I do not understand from the criti- cisms the gentleman has made, or the citation from the works of the Public Printer, that it is' necessary for us to have some man to write our speeches or to edit what we have to say in this Convention. I have made no imputation of any job; but I know that members have been ap- proached since this motion was made for the purpose of getting them to vote against the motion for a reconsideration; but I did not impute to anybody any job in this matter. Mr. AUXIER. I think the conclusions arrived at by the distinguished gentleman , from Boyd are incorrect. ' The resolution of the Delegate from Fleming does not imply that we have incompetent Stenogra- phers; it does not imply that our Printer is not a competent man ; but every man on this floor will observe, that when an ad- dress is being delivered to this Convention, there is more or less noise and confusion, and the Reporter does not always catch the‘ exact language used by the speaker; and then, if the Delegate is representing his constituency in that manner in which he ought to represent them, he does not always have the time to go to the Reporter to make corrections and read the proof before it en- ters into the press. Why, sir, as the Dele- 6 PRINTING. Tuesday,] MOORE—AUXIER—YOUN'G. [October 28 gate from Fleming has said, I would rather see not a line published or written of the debate in this Convention than to see it appear in print imperfect and improperly printed. These debates will be read by future generations, forty, fifty or one hun- dred years from now. If these imperfect Reports appear and are permitted to re- main incorrect, future generations will say that the Convention of 1890 was inferior to that of 1849—that it was a delegation of illiteracy. Mr. MOORE. I would like to ask a question. Will they judge of the ability of the Convention from the editor’s work, or from what we do‘? Mr. AUXIER. From both—from what appears in the Record. They will judge us more by the speeches we make than the Constitution we adopt. From what we say in our debates they‘ will judge of our capacity, and they will say that the people of 1890 elected an incompetent set of men ; and, therefore, they will not have the same respect for the document which we adopt as the Constitution of Kentucky. As to the expense of this matter, I have insisted for two or three weeks that we ought to have evening sessions, and this morning, for the first time, this resolution has been adopted. By holding evening sessions we save the State of Kentucky $250 a day'. The cost of a Proof-Reader will not be ten dollars; and suppose we are in session one hundred days, what is $1,000 to the State of Kentucky, when each Dele- gate and each one of our constituents are interested in having a perfect and correct report of the proceedings of this Conven- tion. I did not come here to make a record; but if I have any motive at all, it is to do the best work we can for the people of Ken- tucky in adopting this organic law, and having the proceedings correctly published, and let no man be misrepresented by the printed proceedings of this Convention. Mr. YOUNG. I will not detain the Convention very long. I want to say that those extracts which were made were from the corrected proofs handed to me in the Public Printer’s office; and I want to ask the Delegate from Boyd a question. Did he not go back a second time to correct his proof in order to get his speech right? Mr. MOORE. I corrected my speech for the Stenographer, and then for the Printer. Mr. YOUNG. This is sad, that a Dele- gate must not only revise the work handed him by the Stenographer, but also go down to the Public Printer to see that it gets printed right, or else be made ridiculous and absurd in the future by what he may have said. What is ten dollars a day to the great State of Kentucky, with her five hundred millions of dollars, when the intelligence of her sons is concerned? Is it possible the constituency the gentleman represents are willing to advertise to the world that the one hundred men who are gathered here are stupid and ignorant, in order that this cry of economy he made, and that ten dollars a day be saved to the Common— wealth? Remember, that this Common- wealth has a proud reputation among the Commonwealths of the world. Her sons on the battle-field and in the forum have never stood second to any set of men, whether called upon to wage wars for their country, or to discuss the great Constitu- tional principles which are involved in our Government. Take the reports made of the proceed- ings of the Convention of the State of Illi- nois. Read the first ten pages, and you will find but one error, one letter left out. Shall we stand here and declare to the world that we ai‘e less able than the men of Illinois, who are in large part the children of Kentucky? Shall we say that we are un- worthy of these, our children, or that they are more intelligent and more, cultured than we? Take the very first three lines of our report, and there is an error any school-boy would be ashamed to mak PRINTING. 7 'Tuesday,] YOUNG. _— [October 28. *‘ The Delegates elected to the Convention to re-adopt, amend or change the Constitu- tion of this State, assembled in the House of Representatives at the city of Frankfort, .in the Capital of the State,” etc. “ Capital” .is an adjective. Capital City is ‘well- known. If we come to Frankfort to delib- erate, we come to the Capital City, but when we come into this building, We come ‘into the Capitol. These are little things, but men are judged by little things. I am surprised that the distinguished Delegate from Boyd should feel a little bit of feeling about the remarks I had the honor to make on Saturday. I am sure I spoke more kindly of him than he would of himself, being a modest man. I said that he and another man, now a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, had shown that a man could be great before thirty. I still repeat that; and if the gen- tleman does not care to protect that reputa- tion for Kentucky, I do. As a Keutuckian, his reputation is clear to me, and I want to protect the reputation of every man on this .floor. Here is the distinguished Delegate from Oldham—a jurist, a man of learning, aman highly considered by all the people of the State who have known him in the discharge of his official duties. I ask him, would he for a great many dollars—even of his own money—be willing to go down to posterity as having made these ridiculous and absurd errors? And if the Delegate from Oldham told me he did not care, I would say I care for you. You do not represent only the county ‘of Oldham-you represent the State of Ken- tucky in her intelligence, in her learning, .and in her jurisprudence—and if you will not protect yourself, we will protect you for Kentucky’s sake. Take the gentleman from Pendleton- trite, witty—let him read some of his re- marks. Won’t he feel ashamed of some of the errors? Will he not feel a hesitancy in sending them to some of his friends as an evidence of what he had done in the Convention? Take these reports in 1849, and read the first ten pages, and there are no errors, except two words run together in one place. Why are they so much better than ours? Be- cause, on the second day of the session, they elected two men as Public Printers, learned men and skillful. If you will look over the report of 1849 you will find no flagrant error. I ask the distinguished Delegate from Boyd if he desires it to appear that the Convention of 1890 was less learned, or less scholarly, or less reputable than the Convention of 1849? It is the duty of the State to protect her reputation, and it is not the business of the Public Printer to look after what we may say. He is to print what we say. I was surprised, with all my admiration and love for the Delegate from Boyd, to hear him use the argument that it was an admis- sion that we could not write our own speech- es. There is nothing in that resolution of that sort. Nobody asked anybody to write any speeches for us. There is no Delegate on this floor who is not able to discuss any question, intelligently; but in the excess .of earnestness and vehemence, a man may mix things up a little,’ like the distin- guished Delegate from McLean, who missed a date six hundred years. Is it just to him that the State of Kentucky, for a little parsimonious five or six dollars a day, shall allow him to be put down as missing Runnymede six hundred years? Take the Delegate from Boyd, and in the years to come, when he takes this volume and shows it to his grand-children, and says, “ I participated in the proceedings of this Convention,” how would hefeel to have his grandson say, “ Grandpa, did you ever go to school?” “Yes, my son; I not only went to school, but I went to Congress.” “Grandpa, you talk mighty funny for a man who went to school and Congress.” How would the gentleman feel? And yet there is not a boy fifteen years old 8 PRINTING. Tuesday,] Youxe—JoNsoN—FUNK. [October 28_ who would read these debates, who a few years back, ask the question, “what could not make that criticism. It is are we here for?” I am as much opposed to not worth talking about. Your dig- going down to posterity as making incorrect. nity, your reputation and your scholarship are involved, and I do not believe that in any part of Kentucky there is a single man who, when he knows what is involved to the people of the State, would deny us an editor, who may correct these manifest er rors, and who will prevent us from going down in these debates as men who are both stupid, ignorant, and unscholarly. We did not bring out all these errors. We could entertain you for hours. They are both amusing and ridiculous. But I beseech the Convention, for the sake of their own reputation and for the State of Kentucky, if we do not love ourselves, let us love our State. There is no grander feeling except love of God than love of country. Where is there a man born in Kentucky who is ashamed to own that he is from Kentucky; and yet I predict that if this volume is carried on, and is read by the culture of the world, there is no man who will not be ashamed of the fact that he is from Kentucky, Another thing: this resblution appoints a Committee. Are you afraid to trust the President of the Convention and two other men to investigate the matter? You can- not be afraid that they will do wrong; you know they will do right. Your reputations are involved, and I feel now that we have already taken up too much time in the discussion of what is a trivial matter. Mr. J ONSON. I rather regret that I got into the paper as saying Runnymede occurred in the Nineteenth Century. I heard a Delegate on the other side of the House say he didn’t come here to make a record. I regretted that, for I did. I came here for that purpose, and I have been try- ing to do it. I believe if he will think about it and sleep on it and dream on it, he will change his mind. If we did not come for that purpose, I will, like the politician statements of fact, and all that, as the Dele- gate from the Fourth District of Louis- ville, and yet I am opposed to what was done the other day. My reason for the opposition is this: We have employed a sufiicient corps of Reporters. It is univer- sally admitted that the force is ample, and that we are paying them a fair remunera- tion. We have employed a Public Printer. I have been under the impression, and am under it now, that those gentlemen are our servants; that they belong to us, and that this Convention does not belong them. I have no sort of hesitancy or disposition to contradict any thing that has come from the distinguished Delegate from the Fourth Lou- isville District. 1f what he says is true, and these errors appear, let us correct them; but let us make the men we have employed to do the work do it. They are not incompetent- It is not our business to do the proof-read- ing for the Public Printer. There is not a sheet published in a county seat in the State of Kentucky that does not and ought not assume the responsibility of correct printing. Is our Public Printer so incom~ petent that he can not do this? Is it a. fact that these Stenographers are so inefli- cient that they cannot make reports of the speeches delivered on this floor? If itis, I want protection. I want every member of this Convention to have protection; but I want to have it at the fountain head. I do not believe in employing men to do the work, and then paying somebody else to do it. Mr. FUNK. I would like to ask the gentleman from the swell district of Louis- ville aquestion, and that is this: In case we employ this Editor, will he revise the work that has already been done? Will he take it up from the first number, and correct it up to the present time? Mr. YOUNG. My judgment is, that it is due to the members to burn up the first. volume and have it reprinted. PRINTING. 9 Tuesday,] FUNK—PHELPS—ASKEW. [October 28 . Mr. FUNK. That being the case, I am heartily in favor of the Editor. Mr. PHELPS. When home Saturday, after supper I went over I went down to the corner grocery to see some of my constituents, although I am not represent- ing a swell district of working people. One of my neighbors, who is an uneducated man, but a very valuable man to have for you in an election, said: “You fellows up at Frankfort are wasting more time and money than any Legislature ever did.” I must confess that I have been led to think a little about that, and on Saturday night I sat down to figure up what this Conven- tion costs; and when I compare the cost of the Convention with the work done, I am led to say: “ You fellows are wasting more time and money than any fellows I have ever seen.” I have the figures, and they will astound you. We have been in session fifty days. One hundred members, at five dollars a day, $25,000; twenty-five dollars apiece for stationery, $2,500; average mile- age, twenty-five dollars, $2,500; Stenogra- pher, $1,750; Secretaries, thirty dollars a day, $1,500; other employes at forty dollars a day, $2,000; incidental ex- penses, estimated, $1,000; printing up to this time, estimated by a printer who was competent, $5,000; total, $41,250.00. What have we done to show for the expenditure of this large amount of money‘? It seems to me that every day we have on foot some effort to put some new man into office, and, for one, whileI do not know the gen- tleman who is proposed to be put into the ofiice (he may be a worthy and capable man, and a good man for the place), I shall vote against making any new oificers or creating any new expense. I asked the Re- porter why it was that these mistakes were so apparent, and he tells me that the mis- takes occur in the first edition, the proof copy, which is laid on the desk for the, members. Mr. HENDRICK. We have taken these from the corrected proofs handed us by the Printer. Mr. PHELPS. I am telling you what the Reporter told me. He tells me that a majority of the mistakes are 1n the original proof. I am told that the Public Printer says he is willing and anxious to have every member come there and revise his proof. I know that has been done in many in- stances, and I know visits from members are courted by the Public Printer. As stated by the Delegate from McLean, we pay not only for the printing but for proof- reading, and we should insist on having it done. Mr. ASKEW. On Saturday, when this resolution was ofi‘eredJ was against it, for the simple reason that I had been butchered in a report, and I did not care who else was. But, on investigation of this matter. I think the reasons ofi'ered by the gentleman, and the gentleman from Louisville, are conclu- sive. I would not have said any thing, however, but for the fact that the gentle- man from the Fifth District uf Louisville and the Reporter state that these apparent errors occurred in the primary edition laid on our table. The experience in my case was, that there was a printed piece'of gib- berish laid on my table, and I went down to the printing oflice and told them if that was my speech I wanted it suppressed, and the man said if I could get it back by Mon- day morning he could get it in the book. I spent all the time I could lawfully spend between Saturday evening and Monday morning in trying to make some sense out of it. These young men all seem to be busy; they are all intelligent, but they make them up in a hurry; and if a few sentences have no ideas in them, the speech may be absurd. An intelligent Editor would call the attention of the members to it, and they could correct it. Mr. MOORE. I move the previous question. A vote being taken, the previous ques» tion was ordered. 10 PRINTING. Funk, J. T. Tuesday] BOLES—MCELROY—HENDRICK. [October 28 . Mr. BOLES. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. ELMORE. I second it. Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire to explain my vote. Mr. MCHENRY. I make the point of order on my friend from Pendleton, be- cause I do not want to see that obtained. Mr. APPLEGATE. Is there a rule that a vote cannot be explained? The PRESIDENT. There is. The roll-call on the motion to reconsider resulted as follows: YEAS—47. Allen, C. T. Knott, J. Proctor Applegate, Leslie T. Lewis, W. W. Ayres, W. W. McChord, Wm. C. Beckham, J. C. McElroy, W. J. Berkele, Wm. Miller, Will. Birkhead, B. T. Montgomery, J. F. Blackwell, Joseph Moore, J. H. Boles, S. H. Moore, Laban, T. Bourland, H. R. Muir, J. W. Brummal, J. M. Nunn, T. J. Buckner, S. B. Parsons, Robert Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Pettit, Thomas S. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey,W. R. Elmore, T. J. Rodes, Robert Field, W. W. Sachs, Morris A. Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Twyman, I. W. Washington, George Jacobs, R. P. Wood, J. M. Jonson, Jep. C. NAYS—éil. Amos, D. C. Hogg, S. P. Askew, J. F. Holloway, J. W. Auxier, A. J. James, A. D. Beckner, ‘W. M. Johnston, P. P. Bennett, B. F. Kirwan, E. E. Blackburn, James Lassing, L. W. Brents, J. A. Martin, WV. H. Bronston, C. J. May, John S. Brown, J. S. McHenry, H. D. Buchanan, Nathan O’Hara, R. H. Bullitt, W. G. Petrie, H. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Smith, H. H. Cox, H. Smith, W. Scott DeHaven, S. E. Swango, G. B. Farmer, H. H. West, J. F. Forrester, J. G. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Hanks, Thomas H. Woolfolk, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Youn , Bennett H. Hines, J. S. Mr. resident Clay. Hines, Thomas H. ABSENT—~12. Allen, M. K. Kennedy, Hanson Clardy, John D. Mackoy, W. H. English, Sam. E. McDermott, E. J. Glenn, Dudley A. Miller, W. H. Goebel, William Spalding, I. A. Hopkins, F. A. Straus, F. P. Mr. MCELROY. I offer a resolution. The resolution was read by the Reading Clerk, as follows: Resolved, That hereafter no speeches or incidental remarks made by Delegates dur- ing the sessions of this Convention shall be printed in the Record, and in lieu thereof only the ofiicial journal of its proceedings. Mr. HENDRICK. Do I understand that the resolution is in order? The CHAIRMAN. The resolution is before the House, and it is subject to amendment by substitute or otherwise. Mr. HENDRICK. I offer this as an amendment to the subtitute of the Delegate from Allen. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows: “Resolved. That the Committee having the matter in charge settle to this date with the Stenographer and his assistants, and that from this date the Convention proceed without a printed Convention record.” Mr. MCHENRY. I move to lay the whole matter on the table. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman from Daveiss desires to make a few re- marks. Does the gentleman withdraw the motion‘? Mr. MOHENRY. Yes. Mr. PETTIT. It is no use to blame the Printer or the Stenographer. That is not the question; but it is apparent that the printing laid upon our tables of this Record is not satisfactory to this Convention; and I intend to say that the Convention have ' reason to be dissatisfied with the reports as they are laid upon our table, and will be printed and bound in book form. It is sup- PRINTING. 11 Tuesday] PETTIT—HENDRICK. [October 28 . posed that the President of this Convention appointed the Committees of this Conven- tion; but yet take the reports, and it appears that I have appointed the Committees and not the President himself. This is a glar- ing error in the reports. Then, besides, we know full Well that page after page is print- ed in these reports that ought not to be printed therein. It simply encumbers the volume. It makes it unsightly, and does not present just such a report as we desire. Then, there have been errors in this report. Icharge no one with having made them. The fact exists that upon a proposition every single solitary Delegate who voted “110” was recorded “aye” upon a proposi- tion, and that was the creation of an office. True, it was corrected; but- it was just sim- ply because I happened to be interested in it, noticed the error, and called the attention and charged the Stenographer with the er- ror, without calling the attention of this Convention to it. I want to say further, that other errors have occurred. One of the very best citizens of our town, Mr. Quint Haynes, goes down to posterity here as Mr. Quint Owens, and no such man exists in our town. Hundreds of these errors, to the detriment and to the incorrectness of the Record, are made to appear. I think it is the duty of the Stenographer to edit and to furnish to the Printer true and correct copies. We pay him for that. It is the duty of the Printer, in a skillful manner, typographically and oth- .erwise, to present them here. That is where our duty ceases. That is where we ought to be satisfied with the work; but there is dissatisfaction, and some remedy ought to be had. There is another point. We have refused to publish our Journal. Ought we not, therefore, to have this report and this Record as correct as possible? I believe so, and for that reason I hope. that the Committee, as suggested, will be ap- pointed to take this matter into consider- ation, and, if it is necessary, to employ an editor. I believe the editor was charged with the duty of indexing, and if so, we are compelled sooner or later to pay for that work; and if we can consolidate both offi- ces in one, and compromise this matter and get it out of the House, get the reflections upon the Printer, the reflections upon the Stenographer, and the reflections upon ourselves wiped out, it would be a cheap way to do it, and a satisfactory one. Mr. HENDRICK. We have brought this matter now right to the point of the proposition originally made. The Delegate from Allen (Mr. McElroy) ' has moved that the J ournal be printed, and that no further Convention Record be printed. My amendment is that the Stenographers be settled with by the Committee having the matter in charge to date, and that no Con vention Record from this time be printed. The Delegates have all indicated that they do not want an editor, and they do not want the reports as they are. I put it to the Convention seriously and earnestly that if the matter is to proceed without an editor, in the condition which it now is, it were better for every man in this house that a millstone were hung about his neck and he buried in the depths of the sea. I do not want any Stenographers, and I do not want any work such as this done; and in addition, I say, what is really known to every man here, that if these Stenographers are discharged and paid to date, the work of this Convention will proceed more rapidly and more satisfactorily than it has ever done before. We ought to do it, if we are to be thus misrepresented in the reports. I have not suffered, but I speak for those who have suffered. I may, therefore speak the more impartially. Let us discharge our Stenographer. Let us save this expense to the State, and proceed with the business of this Convention. That, I understand it, is the resolution of the Delegate from Allen, as amended by me. The only point I make is to settle with the Stenographers to date, publish our Journals, and proceed with our work, and I sincerely hope that the Conven- 12 ‘ PRINTING. Tuesday,] BURNAM—MCELROY—BECKNER. [October 28. tion will do it. If you do it, and I appeal to you gentlemen who are now voting for econ- omy, you not only save the State an im- mense deal of money, but you will expedite your business here at least thirty or forty per cent. You will, at least, save that much time. Every man will speak with more freedom, and we will do our work in half the time, and, in my judgment, fifty per cent. better than if we had a man to re- port our utterances. ;\'r. BECKHAM. It is manifest that there are mistakes in the work that comes to this Convention from the printing office. Whether we can remedy those mistakes by having an editor here, is a matter that, for one, I am not advised about. Those mis- takes ought to be corrected. The evil that we complain of ought to be done away with in some way; but I am not sure of the, proper way of doing it. My own idea is, that when we select a Public Printer, it is his duty to have a competent Proof-Reader, who may see that these reports are right before they finally come to this Conven- tion. In order that we may be advised about the matter, get rid of the matter for the present, and get to work on the matter that the Convention has had under con- sideration for several weeks, I move that the resolution and the substitute, and all the amendments. be referred to the Commit- tee on Printing. The PRESIDENT. I will ask the gen- tleman to withdraw his motion, as the mover of the substitute has attempted two or three times to get the floor, and he is entitled to be heard. Mr. MCELROY. With the explanation of the gentleman from Fleming, I am dis- posed to accept his amendment to the substitute, and have the Stenographers set- tled with and discharged, and that we may proceed with the work of the Convention by publishing the Journal of the daily proceedings and shorten this work. The PRESIDENT. Does the gentle- man withdraw his motion ‘.7 I have had it three times. Mr. BECKHAM. I withdraw it for the purpose of allowing the gentleman to make a few remarks. Mr. BECKNER. I desire to say this: that, as a member of the Committee on Printing, I object very seriously to the matter being referred to that Committee. It was referred to that Committee a few weeks ago, and they dealt with it faithfully and conscientiously. We looked into the difficulties, and thought we understood the situation, and made a report, which was referreddby the Convention to the Commit- tee on Rules, and disposed of there in the most summary manner. The Committee on Printing feels that it has discharged its whole duty about the matter, and borne as much of the burden as it ought to do; and if this Convention is not competent to dis- pose of it, I do not think the Committee on Painting ought to have it put upon its shoulders. I object to any reference to that Committee. Mr. CARROLL. I offer a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: - ‘ Resolved, That the Printer be directed to- reprint the three thousand copies of the Convention Records that are to be published in book form under the former resolution; but before the same is done, each Delegate- may correct his remarks as they now ap- pear. and the Committee on Printing are instructed to eliminate from the Record the- reports that have no place in it. The PRESIDENT. If the Delegate offers it as an independent resolution, it is not in order until the other matter is dis- posed of. Mr. HENDRICK. I trust that the mo- tion of the gentleman from Shelby will not prevail. The Committee on Printing have indicated they do not want this job. They Let us come to a fair, square dead issue upon the proposition as contained in the resolution offered by the Delegate from Allen. Let this Con- vention proceed with the business in hand, and dispose of this matter and settle it. PRINTING. 13 fact that the Committee on Printing has 'no power to act whatever, except to report it to this House. Mr. HENDRICK. Precisely so, and furthermore, every gentleman upon the 'Committee objects to such reference. Mr. BURNAM. 1 move ‘that the original resolution, and all the substitutes :and amendments, be laid on the table. Mr. HENDRICK. I call for the yeas Tuesday,] PETTIT—HENDRICK—BURNAM. [October 28. finally. We have spent more time than Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. g i3 at, A New; of sass-,1... IS ma er 0 e (_mmn 88 on rm _ng.’ Buckner, S. B. Parsons, Rob’t T. -or any other Committee, means that it is Bullitt, W_ G, Petrie, H_ G_ to be dumped back again on the Conven- Burnam, Curtis F. Pettit, Thos. S. tion. It has caused more irritation and Chambers’ G- D- Phelps, Zack . . DeHaven, S. E. Pugh, Sam’l J. expense, and consumed more time of th1s DoriS,.W_ F_ Quicksan, J. E. Convention, than any other matter before Durbin, Charles Smith, H, H, it, and I sincerely hope that the motion to Smith, Scott . . -11 1e , . . wango, . B. refer it to any Committee W1 be voted Forrester’ J‘ G. Trusdell, George 'aown' _ Funk, J. T. Twyman, I. W. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to call the atten- Graham, Samuel Washington, George 'tion of the Delegate from Fleming to the Hanks, ThOS- H. West, J- F- Harris, Geo. C. Whitaker, Emery Hendrick, W. J. Williams, L. P. V. Hines, J. S. Wood, J. M. Hines, Thomas H. Woolfolk, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Young, Bennett H. Holloway, J. W. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—11. Clardy, John D. Mackoy, W. H. Edrington, W. J. English, Sam. E. - Miller, W. H. . Phelps, John L. and nays on that. Mr. WOOD. I second the call. The Reading Clerk proceeded to call the roll, which resulted as follows: YEAS—19. Allen, 0. T. Jonson, Jep. C. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Berkele, Wm. MeHenry, H. D. Blackwell Joseph ' Buchanan Nathan Carroll, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Montgomery, J . F. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. Ramsey, W. R. Cox, H. Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Sachs, Morris A. Forgy, J. M. NAYS—70. Allen, M. K. Jacobs, R. P. Amos, D. C. James, A. D. Askew, J. F. Johnston, P. P. Auxier, A. J. Kennedy, Hanson .Ayres, W. W. Kirwan, E. E. Beckham, J. C. Lassing, L. W. Beckner, W. M. Lewis, W. W. Bennett, B. F. Martin, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. May, John S. Blackburn, James Boles, S. H. McDermott, E. J. - Bourland, H. R. McElroy, W. J. Brents, J. A. Miller, Will. McChord, W. C. Glenn, Dudley A. Spalding, I. A. Goebel, William Straus, F. P. Hopkins, F. A. The PRESIDENT. The motion to lay on the table is lost. Mr. BECKHA M. I renew the motion to refer this whole matter to the Committee on Printing. Mr. JOHNSTON. I ofi'er a substitute for that motion. The Reading Clerk read the substitute, as follows: Resolved, That a special committee of three be appointed to devise and put in operation some practical method of report- ing and printing the proceedings of this Convention, and that they shall have power to dispense with the services of persons now employed, or employ others, as the public service may, in their judgment, re- quire. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is of the opinion that the motion is not in order, as a substitute for a motion for reference sim- ply. Mr. YOUNG. I have a suggestion in the shape of an amendment, which- the Delegate from Allen is willing to accept, 14 PRINTING. Tuesday,] McE LROY—JOHNSTON—HENDRICK [October 28 . as I understand it. It is as follows: “And suppress the publication of the present Record.” Which is to be added to his motion. Mr. MGELROY. I do not know that I am willing to accept that, but I will leave it for the Convention to decide whether they will adopt it. The PRESIDENT. If the Delegate from Fayette were to move to refer the resolutions and amendments to a Special Committee. that would be in order; but his resolution does not dispose of the resolution before the House, and it is not therefore in order as a substitute. Mr. JOHNSTON. I will offer it as a substitute for the resolution offered by the Delegate from Allen. I do it in order to get the sense of the Convention. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is a lit- tle premature. There is one substitute pending, and, as a matter of course, a second substitute is not in order until the first sub- stitute is disposed of. ' Mr. HENDRICK. Upon the motion of the Delegate from Shelby, the substitute, and the original resolution, I move the previous question. The PRESIDENT. The previous ques— tion will only apply to the reference. It cannot apply to the reference and also to the vote upon the original proposition and amendments. Mr. JOHNSTON. Upon that I call for the yeas and nays. It is hardly proper, when gentlemen have talked to their entire satisfaction, to move the previous question. Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a personal explanation. If the Delegate from Fay- ette had any intention of addressing the ‘House upon the resolution, I shall with- draw my motion for the previous question. But he had offered his resolution and taken his seat; and I certainly meant no dis- courtesy to him or any other gentleman. Mr. JOHNSTON. I think there is too much talk about courtesy. I do not think it is any discourtesy to any one to move the previous question; I simply understood it excluded the consideration of my resolu- tion, and for that reason I am opposed to it. The PRESIDEN T. Under the amended rule, the Chair will decide that the gentle- man’s substitute will be in order, provided the other substitute is voted down. Mr. JOHNSTON. I withdraw the call for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDENT. The question now is, shallgthe main question he put? The question being put before the Con- vention, it was declared carried. The PRESIDENT. The main question is now in order. The Delegate from Shelby moves that the resolution and the amend- ments; which include the substitute, be referred to the Committee on Printing and Accounts. The vote being taken, the motion was declared lost. ' The PRESIDENT. The question is on the substitute offered by the Delegate from Allen. Mr. MCHENRY. I move the previous question upon the substitute offered by the Delegate from Allen upon the main ques- tion, which is thegoriginal resolution. as I understand git, from the gentleman from Louisville. The motion of the Delegate from Ohio being seconded, the question was put before the Convention and declared carried. The PRESIDENT. The main question is in order. Mr. MoELROY. I offered a substitute that was amended. I accepted that amend- ment. Is it in order‘? The PRESIDENT. Certainly. It was offered before the previous question was ordered. It is inzorder, and the Secretary will report the amendment. The Reading Clerk reported the amend- ment of Mr. Young, as follows: “And suppress the publication of the present Record.” The question being put upon the adop— PRINTING. 15 Tuesday,] HENDRICK~WOOD——BURNAM. tion of the amendment, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted as follows: Forty-eight in the affirmative and twenty-three in the negative, and the amendment was declared adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the substitute offered by the Delegate from Allen. The Reading Clerk read the substitute, as amended, as follows: Resolved, That hereafter no speeches or incidental remarks made by Delegates during the session of this Convention shall be printed in the Record, and in lieu thereof only the oflicial Journal of its daily pro- ceedings; and that the Committee having the matter in charge settle to this date with the Stenographer and his assistants; and that from this day the Convention proceed without the printed Convention Record, and . that the publication of the present Record be suppressed. Mr. HENDRICK.’ I call for the yeas and nays upon that resolution. Mr. WOOD. I second the call. Mr. BURNAM. I would like for the gentleman to withdraw the amendment. The PRESIDENT. It cannot be with- drawn, because the previous question has been ordered by the House. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll, and during its progress—- Mr. H. H. SMITH. Is a motion to ad— journ now in order? _ The PRESIDENT. Certainly not. The result of the roll-call was as follows ‘ YEAS—GQ. Allen, M. K. James, A. D. Amos, D. C. Johnston, P. P. Applegate, Leslie Kennedy, Hanson Askew, J. F. Lassing, L. W. Auxier, A. J, Lewis, W. W. _ Ayres, W. W. Martin, W. H. Beckner, W. M. May, John S. Bennett, B. F. McDermott, E. J. Berkele, Wm. McElroy, \V. J. Birkhead, B. T. Moore, J. H. Blackwell, Joseph Moore, Laban T. Boles, S. H. Nunn, T. J. Bourland, H. R. O’Hara, R. H. Brents, J. A._ Parsons, Rob’t T. Bronston, C. J. Petrie, H. G. Brown, J. S. _Pettit, Thos. S. Brummal, J. M. Phelps, Zack Buckner, S. B. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Quicksall, J. E. . Doris, W. F. Rodes, Robt. Durbin, Charles Smith, H. H. Farmer, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Field, W. W. Trusdell, George Forgy, J. M. Twyman, I. W. Funk, J. T. Washington, George Hanks, Thos. H. West, J. F. Harris, Geo. C. Williams, L. P. V. Hendrick, W. J. Wood, J. M. Hines, J. S. Woolfolk. J. F. Hogg, S. P. Young. Bennett H. Jacobs, R. P. Mr President Clay mars—24. Allen, C. T. Holloway, J. W. Beckham, J C. Jonson, J ep. C. Blackburn, James Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Kirwan, E. E. Knott, J. Proctor McHenry, H. D. Chambers, G. D. Miller, Will. Coke, J. Guthrie Montgomery, J. F. Cox, H. Muir, J. W. Elmore, T. J. Ramsey, W. R. Forrester, J. G. Sachs, Morris A. Graham, Samuel Swango, G. B. Hines, Thomas H. Whitaker, Emery ABSENT—~14. Buchanan, Nathan Hopkins, F. A. Carroll, John D. Mackoy, W. H. Clardy, John D. McChord, W. C. Edrington,‘W. J. Miller, W. H. English, Sam E. Phelps, John L. Glenn, Dudley A. Spalding, I. A. Goebel, Wm. Straus, F. P. The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion is not yet exhausted. The question now recurs on the adoption of the origin- al resolution as amended by the substitute. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. MCCHORD. I second the call. The result of the roll-call was as follows: YEAS——64. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Kennedy, Hanson Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. Auxier, A. J. Lassing, L. W. Ayres, W. W. Lewis, W. W. Bennett, B. F. Martin, W. H. Berkele,,Wm. May, John S. Birkhead, B. T. McChord, W. C. Blackwell, Joseph 'McElroy, W. J. Boles, S. H. McHenry, H. D. Bourland, H. R. Moore, J. H. [October 28. 16 PRINTING. Tuesday,] HENDRICK—MCCHORD—MCHENRY. [October 28. Brents, J. A. Moore. Laban T. its Journal printed, and I think we are in a Bronston, C. J. Nunn, T. J. bad fiX_ Brown, J. S. O’Hara R. H. Brummal, J. M. Parsons, Robert Mr‘ WOOD’ I second the can‘ Buchanan, Nathan Petrie, H. G. The Clerk thereupon proceeded to call Bufiknel‘, 5- B- Pettit, ThOS- 3- the roll, which resulted as follows: DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, John L. YEAS__58 Doris, \V. F. Phelps, Zack ' Durbin, Charles. Pugh, Sam’l J. Allen, M- K- KsnnedygHanson Elmore, T. J. Quicksall, J. E. Askew, J- F- Kn'llfani h- E- Farmer, H. H. Rodes, Robert Auxler, A- J’ Lasagna, L- W- Field, w. w. Smith, H. H. Arms» W- W- Martm, W- H- Forgy, J_ M_ Smith, W_ Scott Bennett, B. F. May, John S. Funk, J. T. Trusdell, George Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm. C. Harris’ GeO_ 0_ Twyman, I’ W_ Blrkhead, B. T. McElroy, W. J. Hendrick, W_ J_ “Test, J_ F_ Blackwell, Joseph Moore, J -. H. Hines, J- S_ Williams’ L_ P \/_ Boles, S. H. Moore, Laban T. Hines, Thomas H. Wood, J. M. Bourlandi H- R- N’unm T- J— Hogg, S_ P. Woolfolk, J_ F. Brents, J. A. O Hara, R. H. Jacobs, R. P. Young. Bennett H. Brown’ J - 3- PaPSPns, Robert James, A. D. Clay, C. M., Jr, Brummal, J. M. Petrie, H. G. Buchanan, Nathan Pettit, Thos. S. NAYS—QQ. Buckner, S. B. Phelps, John L. Doris, W. F. Phelps. Zack Allen, C-T- Hanks’ Thos- H- Durbin, Charles Pugh, Samuel J. Amos, D- 0- Honowayi J- W- Elmore, T. J. Quicksall. J. E. Beckham, J. C. Jonson, Jep. C. Farmer’ H_ H_ Rodes, Robert Blackburn, James Knott, J. Proctor Field’ W_ W_ Smith, H_ H_ Bullitt, W. G._ Miller, Will. Forgy’ J_ M_ Smith, W_ Scott Burnam, Curtis F. Montgomery, J. F. Funk, J_ T_ Trusdell, George Chambers, G- Mun" J- W- Harris, Geo. C. Twyman, I. W. Coke, J. Guthrie Ramsey, W: R. Hendrick, W_ J_ West, J_ F_ CQX, E. 339115, Mon‘ls A- Hines, J. S. Williams, L. P. V. Forrester, J. G. Swango, G. B. Hogg, S_ R Wood, J_ M_ Graham, Samuel Whltakel‘, Emmy Jacobs, R. P. Woolfolk. J .F. _13. James, A. D. Young, Bennett H. ABSENT _ Johnston, P. P. Mr. President Clay Beckner, W. M. Hopkins, F. A. Carroll, John D. Mackoy, W. H. NAYS-—28~ Clardy, John D. McDermott, E. J. Allen, C. T. Hanks, Thos. H. Edrington, W. J. Miller, W. H. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, Thomas H. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. Beckham, J. C. Holloway, J. W. Glenn, Dudley A. Straus, F. P. Blackburn, James Jonson, J ep. C. Goebel, William Bronston, C. J. Knott, J. Proctor Leave of absence was granted to‘ Messrs. F. &ec‘gi’nf;' 'D_ Edrmgton, W. H. Miller and Clardy. Carroll, John D. Miller, Wm Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to move to re— Chambers’ G- 1?- MQPtgOmQI‘Y, J- F- _ . . 1 . Coke, J. Guthrie Muir, J. W. consider the vote by which this reso ution COX, H. Ramsey’ W_ R. was adopted, and to move '00 lay that 1110- DeHaven, S. E. Sachs, Morris A. tion on the table. Forrester, J. G. Swango, G. B. Mr. McCHORD. I second the motion. Mr. MCHENRY. I arose a moment ago to move to reconsider the vote. The motion is now to lay on the table, and on that I call for the yeas and nays. We are without any printing whatever, under this resolution. The House has refused to have Graham, Samuel Whitaker, Emery ABSENT—14. Amos, D. C. Beckner, W. M. Cllrdy, John D. Edrington, W. J. English, Sam. E. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hopkins, E. A. Mackoy, W. H. McDermott, E. J. Miller, W. H. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Washington, George ADJOURNMENT. 17 'Tuesday,] COX—BURNAM—MAY. [October 28 . Mr. M cHENRY. I move that this Convention do now adjourn sine die. We have no record of any thing. The Journal is not to be printed. The reports have been suppressed, and we are here nothing :and nobody. We had just as well go home and quit. Mr. WOOD. Is that motion debatable? The PRESIDENT. The Chair is under the impression that it ought to be de- batable. Mr. HENDRICK. I move to amend, that when the Convention adjourns, it ad- journ to meet at three o’clock, in pursuance of the order made this morning. Mr. COX. I would like the gentleman to withdraw that motion that I may offer a resolution. Mr. MCHENRY. For that purpose I will withdraw it. Mr. COX. I offer that resolution, and ask that it be considered. I hope that it will be adopted, in order that we might be permitted to go home next Saturday, and when we return home, I trust we will find our families and those of our friends in equally as good order as is this House. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That when this Convention adjourns on Saturday, the first day of No— vember, 1890. it adjourn to meet again on Thursday, November 6th, 1890, at 11 o’clock A. M. Mr. MCHENRY. I move to amend by inserting Monday, November 10, 1890, in- stead of Thursday, November 6, 1890. Mr. BURNAM. Is this a debatable proposition ? The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks it is. Mr. BURNAM. I do not see any ne- cessity for an adjournment of this House. We elect eleven members to Congress on the Tuesday after the first Monday in No- vember, and I think there is no doubt about the election of ten Democratic mem- bers and one Republican. That seems to Q be the expectation, and there is no contest. It does seem to me that we have arrived at a point when we ought to begin to frame and adopt a Constitution. I hope the motion will not prevail. I have the great- est regard for my friend from the county of Carroll, and would dislike to disoblige him in any way by my vote; but it seems to me there is no imperative necessity re- quiring an adjournment of this House —-composed of one hundred voters—to go home and vote in a Congressional election, where, as I have said, there is no contest, and no necessity for our votes. Mr. MAY. I simply desire to say that I do not agree with the distinguished Dele- gate from Madison, for this reason: There are not enough of one and too many of the other to pair off, and I think, therefore, the Delegates ought to have a chance to go home to vote. Mr. COX. The Delegate from Madison can very well afford to object to the motion to adjourn for a few days, when he has had an opportunity of seeing his family on more than one occasion; but the Delegates of this Convention feel that they should take a recess, and by taking that recess, of only a few days, they can visit their fami- lies and friends, and they can cast their votes for their choice for candidates for Congress of the United States. We are accomplishing two purposes in our effort to do so. I have been in this House every day since it first began its labors, and I feel like it would be a pleasure for me to go home for awhile; but I do not desire to go away from here, especially when important matters are before it for consideration. I feel that I would not be doing my full duty were I to be absent when great ques- tions are before this Convention. If we adjourn on Saturday until the following Thursday, we will have an opportunity of going home and meeting our constituents, and realize what they desire. We will come back better prepared to go ahead with our great work, and finally adopt a 18 ADJOURNMENT. Tuesday,] Constitution that will be acceptable to the people. I am opposed to adjourning for a longer time than Thursday, forf the reason that I want this recess to be short. I want the Convention to go to work, and finish its labors as early as possible. If we ad- journ over until Monday, that would bring us that much nearer Christmas; and I do fondly hope that the work of this Conven- tion will be accomplished before next Christmas. Mr. MARTIN I move, as a substitute, that when this Convention adjourns on Friday, that it adjourn to meet on the fol- lowing Thursday. This will give the Delegates time to reach their homes before Sunday. Mr. DEHAVEN. I rise simply for the purpose of moving the previous question. A good deal of solicitude has been ex- pressed about the reputation of the individ- ual members of this Convention, and I feel very much, if our proceedings of to- day are to be taken as a standard for future reputations, that they will sufi'er; and I desire to go to work, and with that view I move the previous question upon these resolutions and amendments. The motion being seconded, was put to the House and carried. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Harrison. The Reading Clerk reported the amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. The Chair misap- prehended the status of the question; and the vote is first on the amendment of- fered by the Delegate from Ohio, which is to strike out Thursday, the day of assem- bling after adjournment, and insert in lieu thereof Monday, November 10. The question being taken on the adop- tion of said amendment, it was declared rejected. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment of the Del- egate from Harrison, which is, that when MARTIN—DEHAVEN—J ONSON. [October 28 . this Convention adjourils on Friday, Octo- ber 31, it adjourn to meet on Thursday, November 6th. The question being put before the Con~ vention, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted thirty-six in the affirm-- ative and thirty-four in the negative, and the amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The question is on’ the adoption of the resolution as amended. The Reading Clerk read the resolution as‘ amended, as follows: Resolved, That when this Convention ad- journs on Friday, the 31st day of October, 1890, it adjourn to meet again on Thursday, November 6th, at 11 o’clock A. M. Mr. J ONSON. I want to offer an amend- ment by striking out one day and inserting, another. Is that in order noiv? The PRESIDENT. It is not, because- the previous question has been ordered by the House. Mr. BRONSTON. and nays. Mr. BLACKBURN. I second the call- The roll-call resulted as follows: I call for the yeas vans—48. Allen, M. K. Lassing, L. W. Auxier, A. J. Martin, W. H. Ayres, W. W. May, John S. Beckham, J. C. McElnoy, W. J. Bennett, B. F. McHenry, H. D. Berkele, Wm. Miller, Will. Blackwell, Joseph Montgomery, J. F. Boles, S. H. Moore. J. H. Brents, J. A. Moore, Laban T. Buchanan, Nathan Muir, J. W. Buckner, S. B. Nunn, T. J .. Bullitt, W. G. Parsons, Robert Carroll, John D. Phelps, John L- Cox, H. Phelips, Zack Doris, W. F. Quicksall, J. E. Forgy, J. M. Rodes, Rob’t Funk, J. T. Smith, W. Scott Harris, Geo. C. Swango, G. B. Hines, J. S. Trusdell, George Hogg, S. P. Twyman, I. W. Jacobs, R. P. Washington, George- James, A. D. West, J. F. Jonson, J ep. C. Wood, J. M. Johnston, P. P. Young, Bennett H.. ‘SAYS—38. Allen, C. T. Graham, Samuel 5 BILL OF RIGHTS. 19 Tuesday,] M cHExRitL—KivoTT—KENNEDY. [October 28 . Applegate, Leslie T. Hanks, Thos. H. Askew, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Beckner, W. M. Hines, Thomas H. Birkhead, Benj. Kennedy, Hanson Blackburn, James Kirwan, E. E. Bourland, H. R. _ Knott, J. Proctor Bronston, C. J. Lewis, W. W. Brown, J. S. McChord, Wm. C. Brummal, J. M. O’Hara, R. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Petrie, H. G. Chambers, G. D. Pettit, Thos. S. Coke, J. Guthrie Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Ramsey, W. R. Durbin, Charles Smith, H. H. Elmore, T. J. Whitaker, Emery ’ Farmer, H. H. Williams, L. P. V. Field, W. W. Woolfolk, J. F. Forrester. J. G, Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—I4. Hopkins, F. A. Mackoy, W. H. McDermott, E. J. Miller, W. H. ‘Sachs, Morris A. . Amos. D. C. Clardy, John D. Edrington, W. J. English, Sam. E, Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Spalding, I. A. Holloway, J. W. Straus, F. P. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move that the Con- vention resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of taking into further consideration the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, together with the amendments. Communication from the Auditor. Tiie PRESIDENT. Before the Chair puts that motion, it will lay before the Con- vention the following communication from the Auditor. ‘The Reading Clerk proceeded to read the communication. Mr. MCHENRY. That is a long letter, giving statistics. I move that it be referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. KNOTT. I want to know whether the other Delegates of this Convention may not have a right to hear that report, besides the Committee on Circuit Courts. I think it ought to be printed. Mr. MCHENRY. I accept the amend- ment of the gentleman, and am willing it should be printed. The question being put on said motion, it was declared carried. Preamble and Bill of Rig/tie. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion of the Delegate from Oldham, that this Convention resolve itself‘ into Com- mittee of the Whole for the purpose of further considering the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, together with the amendments. The question being put on said motion, it was declared carried. The Convention thereupon resolved it- self into COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, and the President requested Mr. Young to take the Chair. The CHAIRMAN. The last work of the Committee on yesterday afternoon was the adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Allen. The question now recurs on the substitute offered by the Delegate from Nicholas. I Mr. KNOTT. I would like to have the proposition as it now stands read. The Reading Clerk read the same, as follows: No man or set of_ men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, except as shall be provided forv in this Constitution, and no law shall be passed by the General Assembly making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities. The substitute of the Delegate from Nicholas (Mr. Kennedy) was read as follows: That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and that no grant of separate or exclusive emoluments, privi- leges or exemptions shall be made to any man or set of men, but in consideration of public services; and every grant of a fran- chise, privilege or exemption shall remain subject to revocation, alteration, or amend- 'ment. lVInKENNEDY. I spoke with refer- ence to this section several days ago, and the question has been so thoroughly dis- cussed, and the Delegates are so familiar with the question, that I do not desire to occupy the time allotted to me; and simply will submit it to the consideration of the Convention without any discussion. The question being put before the Con- 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] CARROLL—RODES—KNOTT. [October 28 , Q ; vention on the adoption of said amend- ment, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted 9 in the afiirmative and 31 in the negative, and the substitute was lost. Mr. CARROLL. I offer an amendment, as follows: “Amend the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights by striking therefrom section 2.” The CHAIRMAN. The Chair con- siders that amendment premature. The report has not been adopted, and there is a substitute to the section pending, Mr. CARROLL. I will not insist upon the amendment now. The CHAIRMAN. The next question is on the substitute proposed by the Dele- gate from Morgan. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows No person or collection of persons are entitled to, or shall be granted, separate, ex- clusive privileges from the community, and none shall be granted emolments except in consideration of services rendered as may be provided in this Constitution. Mr. RODES. I merely wish to call the attention of the Convention to the fact that the section now stands as amended by the motion of the gentleman from Allen county, and by the amendment offered by the gentleman from Christian county, who is not here: “No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emol- uments or privileges from the community, except as provided in this Constitution.” Then the latter part of section 18 was transferred to the section under considera- tion. The part transferred reads: “ Nor any law making any irrevocable grant,” etc. It will be understood by the Dele- gates how the section, as amended, stands. Mr. KNOTT. In order that everybody may understand it, I ask that the resolu- tion be correctly reported by the Secretary. I concur with the gentleman from War- ren, that that is exactly the status of it. The Reading Clerk read the section, as amended, as follows: No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, except as shall be provided for in this Constitution; and no law shall be passed by the General Assembly making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities. Mr. QUICKSALL. I think that covers all my amendment, and I will, therefore, withdraw it. Mr. WASHINGTON. I wish to with- draw my amendment. That suits me. The substitute of the Delegate from Crit- tenden was read, as follows : That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate privileges from the community, except in consideration of public services, and in the granting thereof there shall not be granted any exoneration or exemption from the just burdens of the Government, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution. 0 Mr. NUNN. At the time I offered this substitute, that part of section 18 of the Committee’s report had not been attached to this second section. I want that part of the eighteenth section, in regard to the granting of irrevocable privileges and franchises, to remain at the foot of the eighteenth section. The amendment of the Delegate from Christian has only transfer- red this fight to another section. When we come to the other departments in this Con- stitution, in fixing and saying what special privileges may or may not be granted, the fight will come up again. It had as well be settled here as at any other place. In fixing what special privileges may be granted to any man or set of men, that fight will come ‘up again, as I have stated, and this Con- vention, in particularizing what privileges may be granted, may leave out something that is very beneficial to the people. This is a progressive age. Say that in 1849 the same language had been used in the first section of the present Bill of Rights, and they had undertaken to grant special priv- ileges in another portion of the Constitu- tion, and particularize what special BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 ‘tion. may occur in the next forty years, what improvements and developments may take place, we know not; and when we undertake to particularize, we cannot men- tion those things that have yet to be discovered and brought before the world. I say we had as well settle this matter right here, and‘ my amendment will settle it, in my judgment. Let these privileges be granted in consideration of public services, and then say that all these immunities and privileges shall bear their just proportion of the burdens‘ of the State Government. Let them all do it, except as otherwise pro- vided in the Constitution, and then name what shall be exempt from taxation. That, it seems to me, would be an easy matter. I have left out of my amendment the two words “(public emoluments.” It seems to me that that ought to have no place in this second section of the Bill of Rights. That, as I understand it, applies to salaries. In the present Constitution, it is said that the Governor shall be allowed a salary fixed by law, which shall not be increased or diminished during his term of ofiice. So it is with the Judges of the various Courts, and all other officials under the Constitu- Their salaries are fixed and deter- mined. They did not depend in 1849 on the word “ emoluments ” in the first section of the Bill of Rights as fixing these sala- ries, and there is no necessity for it now. I say leave that out. Declare that “spe- cial privileges and immunities may be granted in consideration of public services,” and make them all bear alike their propor- tion of the just burdens of this government. Exempt church property,- public school property, and property of charitable insti- tutions, and any other property that this Convention may see proper to exempt from taxation, but there stop. vHere the gavel fell. Tuesday,] NUNN-v-DEHAVEN. [October 28. privileges and immunities may be Mr. DEHAVEN. Is it in order to offer granted, The electric light was not a substitute for the amendment ‘2 I do not invented then, and I believe that exactly-know the status of the question. gas was not used. I say that what The CHAIRMAN‘ You can Offer an amendment to the substitute. Mr. DEHAVEN. I offer this by way of an amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. DeHaven, which is as fol- lows: Add, in the substitute of the gentleman from Crittenden, after the word “immunity,” in the report of the Committeea the follow- ing: “But in no case shall the privileges so granted extend to or include an exemption from State taxation, except as. may be pro- vided in'this Constitution.” Mr. DEHAVEN. I think it will be im- proper for this Convention to exclude en- tirely the idea that special privileges may be granted in consideration of public ser- vices; but I am very clear upon the propo- sition that nothing ought to be exempted from State taxation except as we may here- after provide in this Constitution. Now, I am myself, and I have no doubt a majority of the Convention are, in favor of exempt- ing from taxation churches, some sorts of schools, charitable institutions and things of that sort; yet, wherever special privileges are granted to city or town, it does not occur to me that because they are granted in consideration of public services they ought to be exempt from State taxation, and thereby increase the taxes on the balance of the property in the State. I hope the amendment will be adopted. Mr. NUNN. I wo‘uld like to ask the gentleman a question. Your amendment comes in after the word “immunities.” Mr. DEHAVEN. In the report of the Committee, as amended, which makes it read: “ No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in con- sideration of public services,” they have taken a, portion of section 18 and added to that section, “Nor shall any law making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, 22 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] franchises or immunities be passed by the General Assembly.” Mr. NUN N . I make the point that it is not an amendment, nor germane to the substitute I offered. I would like to have mine acted upon. Mr. RODES. I wish to say to my friend, that I apprehend he did not keep up with the progress of events. Those words, “ in consideration of public services,” have been erased by order of the Committee‘ They were voted out upon a motion of the gentleman i,from Christian county, who is not now here. He moved the following words as a substitute therein, “except so far as may be ordered by this Constitution,” “except it shall be provided for in this Constitution.” That is the way it reads now. So it isn’t any thing at all. There isn’t any exemption, immunity or privi- lege. Mr. DEHAVEN. I will withdraw my amendment. The CHAIRMAN. The amendment of the gentleman from Oldham is withdrawn, and the question recurs on the original substitute. Mr. L. T. MOORE. How will it read as amended? The CHAIRMAN. The amendment has been withdrawn. Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire to offer ,an amendment to the substitute. The CHAIRMAN. Report the amend- ment of the gentleman from Pendleton. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Applegate, which is as fol- 0 lows: Amend the substitute by striking there- from all of said substitute after the word “ services ” in the fourth line thereof. Mr. APPLEGATE. My reason for that is, I think all the rest of that substitute be- longs properly to that part of the Consti- tution which refers to revenue and taxation or general provisions. I don’t think it is a part of the Bill of Rights at all. And the question being taken upon the NUNN—RODESJ—DEHAVEN. [October 28 . ‘j adoption of said amendment, it was de- cided in the negative. And the question being also taken on the substitute offered by Mr. Nunn, it was de- cided in the negative. The Reading Clerk read the substitute offered by Mr. Buckner. which is as fol- lows: Strike out the second section and insert the following: “That no privilege, immu- nity, exoneration or exemption shall ever be granted to any man or set of men which which shall not be as freely and fully ex- ercised and enjoyed by all others under similar circumstances and on like condi- tions. That no public emolument shall ever be allowed to any person, except in consideration of public services, the per- formance of which shall be required by law, or for which the Chief Executive Magistrate, or some other officer of the Commonwealth, shall be legally authorized to contract.” Mr. BUCKNER. This matter has been so fully discussed that I suppose it will hardly be necessary for me to say any thing more; the objections to it have been clearly stated, and I think the matter is understood. I do not care to discuss the question any further. The CHAIRMAN. Does any other gentleman desire to be heard on the substi- tute of the gentleman from Hart? And the vote being taken on the adop- tion thereof, it was decided in the nega-ié tive. , Mr. KNOTT. I desire to give notice that I shall offer this amendment in the House, and demand the yeas and nays thereon. The reading Clerk read the ‘amendment offered by Mr. Martin, which is as follows: No separate, exclusive public emolument or privileges shall be granted to any man or set of men, except as shall hereafter be provided for in this Constitution. Mr. MARTIN. I was not here yester- day, and do not know exactly how the question stands; but from what I can gather, it is about at that stage. There BILL OF RIGHTS. 23 "Tuesday,] MARTIN—H EDRICK—MONTGOM ER Y. . [October 28 . have been many objections made to the section as it now stands under the old Con- :stitution. The other propositions refer to the different reports that may come in hereafter. It seems to me, when the re- '.port on railroads is made, if any exemp- tions are required that we desire to be given ‘to railroads, that then is the time to say so. If, when the report on revenue and taxa- ‘tion comes up, any property is desired to be exempted from taxation, then we can say so; and if there is any thing left out, the Committee on General Provisions can report as to that. Therefore, I am in favor ‘of the amendment, because I have been hearing it said by lawyers, on this side and on that, that it was a source of much evil. I do not know which side to take. It is a well-known fact that, in my county, there was a distinguished lawyer and jurist, who did not know a ham from a shoulder, ex- cept by the taste. I don’t know which one of the lawyers to take as authority on this question. The CHAIRMAN. You withdraw the amendment? Mr. MARTIN. No, sir; I am in favor ‘of it. And the vote being taken upon the adop- tion of said amendment, it was decided in the negative. The Reading Clerk read the amendmet offered by Mr. Montgomery, as follows : No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community but in consideration of services to the Common- wealth. Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a parlia- mentary inquiry. After the vote upon the amendment of the Delegate from Hart, the :amendment of Mr. Kennedy was next. Was that withdrawn? The CHAIRMAN. voted upon. a _ Mr. MONTGOMERY. I have lived in Kentucky all my life, and mixed with the ,people to some extent, yet, never tillI came That has been upon the floor of this Convention, did I hear any serious complaints about the Bill of Rights. It seems now that a great many of the members of this Convention want to attribute all the evils that the Gov— ernment is subject to, to the first section of the Bill of Rights. A great many have un- dertaken, judging from the amendments offered, to regulate the Government en- tirely by the first section of the Bill of Rights, which is the second section of the report of the Committee. I do not share this panicky feeling about this particular section. It is a simple declaration of a principle of government, that all men are equal and entitled to equal privileges. I understand that that is all there is in that section. I don’t regard it as having been the active agent in bringing about all the evils which have been talked about here. The only evil that I attribute to that section is, that it doesn’t prohibit those things, just like the rest of the Con- stitution does not prohibit them. I am not one of those who believe that a government is made alone for protection. I think gov- ernments have other functions besides that of protecting the weak against the strong. I believe that government is made, in addi- tion to that purpose, for the purpose of ad- vancing the arts and sciences and educating the people; and I believe government ought to retain some power to do things of that sort, or to assist in things of that kind. I think the object, and only object, ever intended by this provision of the Con- stitution was to allow the government to promote education and the arts and sciences; and I think the State of Kentucky ought to retain that power, and that these other evils that have been complained of, these things oi‘ incorporation and inequality in taxation, and things of that sort, can be remedied in some other place, and ought to be remedied. I believe it is conceded in this Convention that they will be remedied. Therefore, I say that an amendment to the first section of the Bill 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] MONTGOMERY—BULLITT. [October 28. of Rights as it now stands, or the second section of the report of the Committee, is not the place to remedy the evils we are complaining of. I don’t regard that it has ever been construed as having authorized any of these things, but sim- ply has not prevented them, like other sections of the Constitution have not prevented them. Therefore, I have only to add to the language of the present section the words “services to the Commonwealth.” It can be easily understood what services to the Commonwealth are. There is a dif- ference between services to the Common- wealth and services to the public. Services to the Commonwealth I construe to be services to the whole Commonwealth of Kentucky—something that benefits the Commonwealth as a State, or as a whole com— munity—while services to the public might apply to a city or county, or some civil division that was very small. It is not as comprehensive, in my opinion, as the word “Commonwealth,” which embraces the whole people. Therefore, 1 have put in the word “ Commonwealth ” in place of the word “public,” in the original clause. And the vote being taken upon the adop- tion of said amendment, it was decided in the negative. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Bullitt, which is as follows: No separate, exclusive emoluments, fran- chise or privilege shall be granted, except upon condition that the same be subject to amendment or repeal by general law, and at all times be taxed equally with persons. A failure or refusal to comply with any part of the duties prescribed in a charter or grant of a franchise shall subject the whole grant to forfeiture by appropriate proceed- ings. The franchises of a corporation shall not be sold or mortgaged; but the property connected therewith may be mortgaged to secure bonds not exceeding an amount equal to the value of the corporate prop- erty at the time. Mr. BULLITT. This section. which is section one of the old Bill of Rights, and section two of the report of the Com- mittee, seems to have agitated the minds of a great many of the Delegates, and I must. confess that it has given me deep concern. I have thought over this matter with great care and deliberation, hoping to be able to discover, or to get somebody else to dis- cover, the key that would unlock the diffi- culty. I have not, I must confess, been able to meet the emergency to the entire’ satisfaction even of myself, but I believe- that the solution of the difiiculty rests in requiring all grants to be subject to repeal or amendment; not by special law, because- by special ‘law some large and potent corporation might desire to crush out the- weaker ones; but the only way that we should repeal or amend corporate rights that have been granted should be by a general law. Now, by a general law, let them all be repealable. If, by a general law, capitalists will be induced or per- suaded to come into the State, being satis- fied, by reason of the fact that you can not repeal one without repealing all, that their rights will be protected, that the State will not legislate as against its own in- terests, and therefore will not legis- late against the interests of the capitalists. We can not .get along without granting the right to exclusive privileges and emoluments? Every cor- poration—a water-works, or a gas company, or a turnpike. or a ferry, or a tavern—all of these and others require special rights, and none should have special rights unless they perform a special service to the Com- monwealth; or, as the language of the present Bill of Rights says, but in consid~ eration of public service. Now, all men ought to be equal. We declare that all men are equal and entitled to equal privi- leges, but we add to that declaration what is contained in the first section of the old Bill of Rights. That is, that persons who perform a public service may have separate privileges. Now, put these separate privis leges under the control of the Legislature of the State, or the powers of the State, and with that I believe that we will have BILL OF RIGHTS.‘ 25 Tuesday,] ALLEN—SMITH—KNOTT. [October 28 . succeeded in doing the best that we can do. Corporations are valuable servants to the welfare of the people, but are relentless masters, and if the State will hold control of them, they are invaluable to the growth and prosperity of the people. The people demand them. Mr. RODES. I wish to remark to my friend that the first clause in his amend- ment is already provided for, and the last two I consider very properly belong to the Committee on Corporations and Railroads. And the vote being taken on the adop- tion of said amendment, it was decided in the negative. The CHAIRMAN. The next amend- ment is that proposed by the Delegate from Caldwell. ' Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I beg leave to withdraw that. The Reading Clerk read the next amend- ment, being that presented by Mr. H. H. Smith, as follows : Strike out section 2 and insert in lieu thereof: That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and that no grant of separate or exclusive emoluments, privi- leges or exemptions shall be made to any man or set of men, but in consideration of public services—a public service mean- ing the performance of a service benefiting the people of the whole State, or an insti- tution in its nature charitable. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I merely offered that to get a place in the line, and ask that it be withdrawn and this substituted in its stead. It is one that has the sanction of Judge Hines, and I ask leave to call it up in the Convention. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the request of the Delegate will be granted. ' The Reading Clerk read the substitute offered by Mr. Smith, as follows: That all men, when they form a social ' compact, are equal, and that no grant of separate or exclusive emoluments, privi- leges or exemptions shall be made to any man or set of men, but in consideration of public services to the people of the Com- monwealth; and every grant of a fran- chise, privilegeor exemption shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amend- ment: Provided, ho'wever, That the Gen- eral Assembly may exempt .from taxation public buildings, churches used for religious worship, burying-grounds, charitable insti- tutions, and public and private schools for the education of children. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair was wrong; but he thinks, if the ‘Delegate of- fers the substitute in Committee of the Whole, some action should be taken, and then the Delegate can call for the yeas and I nays in the Convention. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I withdraw it, and ask leave to offer it in the Convention. Mr. KNOTT. I think the gentleman from Hardin can offer any amendment he pleases, as an original proposition. He cer- tainly has just as much right to offer it here as in the Convention. The CHAIRMAN. There is no use going into Committee of the Whole, if everybody is going to offer amendments. Mr. K_NOTT. If it is adopted, it goes with the report of the Committee of the Whole. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman de- sires that no action at all be taken on it. He merely wishes to offer it in order to call it up in the House. Mr. KNOTT. stand. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I simply ask that it be reported, and submit it instead of one I had previously offered and called up in the House. If it _is not necessary for it to be acted upon now, I will withdraw it and offer it in the House. Mr. HENDRICK. I object. I object to the withdrawal of the resolution of the gentleman from Hardin. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I ask unanimous. consent to withdraw it. i - The CHAIRMAN. Unanimous consent is given. Mr. MCHENRY. It is objected to. The CHAIRMAN. I heard no objec- tion. I did not ‘so under- as ' BILL or RIGHTS. _jection. 'Tuesday,] MOORE—HENDRICK~—KNOTT. [October 28 . Mr. L, T. MOORE. The Delegate from ‘ Fleming objected. .1 Mr. HEN DRICK. I withdrew my oh- I made the objection because I thought the Delegate from Marion could be heard. Mr. KNOTT. I only desire to state that he can offer that amendment now as an original proposition, and then claim the privilege of having it voted upon. If he withdraws it, and it comes back into the House, it will probably be too late then for it. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I would like to have it re-reported and voted upon. The CHAIRMAN. Report the amend- ment of the Delegate from Hardin. The Reading Clerk again read the sub- stitute offered by Mr. H. H. Smith. And the vote being taken on the adoption thereof, it was decided in the negative. Mr. HENDRICK. If it is proper before the vote is taken, I would like to offer an amendment. The CHAIRMAN. eThe Chair thinks it is too late. This is an original resolu- tion offered by the gentleman from Hardin, and we have already voted upon it. I did not see the Delegate from Fleming. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Marshall. The Reading Clerk started to read an amendment credited to Mr. Graham. Mr. GRAHAM. I withdrew that and offered one in lieu of it. That I wish to be read. The READING CLERK. I don’t find any other amendment. Mr. TWYMAN. I think the reason is that it was not reported. It was sent to the Secretary’s table, however, on yester- ‘day. The CHAIRMAN. If the amendment or substitute cannot be found, and the gen- tleman cannot renew it, we will have to go on with the next. Mr. GRAHAM. Can’t I defer it until after dinner and re-write it then? The CHAIRMAN. If you'desire. Are there any more amendments to this section ‘? We will pass the substitute of the Delegate from Marshall until we" get through with the other amendments to this section. Report the next amendment, Mr. Secre- retary. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Lassing, which is the first section of the present Bill of Rights. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I wish to'ofi'er an amendment to that. Strike out the word “public ” before the word “services,” and after the word “services” put the words “ to the Commonwealth.” The CHAIRMAN. Please write it out and send it to the Clerk’s desk. Report the amendment of the Delegate from Adair. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Montgomery, as above. Mr. MoELROY. It occurs to me that has already been stricken out, and this is a motion to strike out something that does not exist. Mr. MONTGOMERY. As amended, the section will read: “That all freemen, when . they form a social compact, are equal, and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate public emol- uments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of services to the Com- monwealth.” Mr. BLACKBURN. Would it be in order to offer an amendment to the amend- ment? ' The CHAIRMAN. It would be out of order at this time. The question now re- curs upon the amendment ofl'ered by the Delegate from Adair. And the vote being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative. The CHAIRMAN. The question is ‘ upon the substitute offered by the Delegate from Boone. Mr. LASSING. I offered section one of the present Bill of Rights in lieu of BILL OF RIGHTS. 27 Tuesday,] LASSING. [October 28 , section two, as reported by the Committee -on Bill of Rights, and I suppose it carries the amendment made by the distinguished Chairman from Warren with it Be that as it may, I say to this Convention that when at home, in Boone county, I consider myself, and am considered there, as a fairly clear-headed man. I believe that I am able to distinguish and recognize tweedle- dum from tweedledee, but there have been so many amendments, substitutions, and .amendments to substitutions here, that I confess to you, gentlemen of the Conven- tion, that I have become so befuddled that I hardly know what to do under the cir- cumstances. I offered section one of the old Bill of Rights, from the fact that it has existed since 1850, and, in the main, had existed in the preceding Constitution. It had been construed by the Courts of this Common- wealth, everybody seemed to acquiesce in it, and I could not see, nor am I able to see, any better principle, in the way of a sub- stitute or otherwise, for incorporation into the Bill of Rights than that. Gentlemen apprehend that some danger in the future may befall our people in consequence of the words “that no man, or set of men, are en- titled to exclusive, separate public emolu- ments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services.” Some gentlemen want to eliminate entirely that portion of the Bill of Rights; others wish to substitute this, that and the other in lieu thereof. This apprehension of ‘danger reminds me very much of a young man in my county who had made a horse- trade. He had a splendid animal ; he had the nostrils of the horse as described in the book of Job; his outline was good; he was perfect in lung and form, apparently. The young man asked his uncle, who seemed to ‘be a wiseacre in horseology, to look at his horse, and give his opinion in regard thereto. The old gentleman walked around and around the horse, and viewed all his parts and proportions, and, in a wise manner. shaking his head, says he: “My son, I can see nothing wrong with that horse at pres- ent, but there is something the matter with him which will be developed at some future period of time.” So it is, in my concep- tion, with this section of the Bill of Rights. I can conceive nothing Wrong in it; it has been construed by the Courts, and the ob- jections some gentlemen have made in re- gard to exemptions from taxation are not true in the main, as I conceive it. The Court of Appeals lately passed an opinion on a gas or water case in Louisville, which ought to dispel such notions from the minds of the members of this Convention. I do hope that you will retain this section of the old Bill of Rights, without the dotting of an “i ” or the crossing of a “t.” Gen- tlemen want to revert to the Spartan ages of the world, when iron was used as a coin metal and circulating medium. They pro- pose to fence around the great Common- wealth of Kentucky with a Chinese wall, as it were, for the purpose of keeping out capital for the development of our great agricultural and mineral resources. Now, if I understand what my people sent me here to do, and what I believe the constituencies of most of the gentlemen sent them here to do, was to be liberal in our dealings with corporations, and not re- gard them as creatures which the Legisla- ture or the people of the State of Ken- tucky have no right to respect. I believe that corporations should be subject to the same fines and penalties suffered by the individual, and accorded the same rights and privileges before the law as are accorded to the individual. Gen- tlemen have said that charters were all, and should be, subject to revocation. I don’t believe in their theory. I don’t believe any man or association of men would invest their means in a corporate enterprise in the State of Kentucky here- after if such a provision was ingrafted into our Constitution. I know that I would not. I believe that there is not a gentle- .‘28 BILL OF RIGHTS Tuesday,] PETRIE—BLACKBURN. [October 28 . man present who would do so. Corpora- tions are as sensitive to, and able to see wherein their rights consist, as any individ- ual member on this floor. Mr. PETRIE. I am gratified that We have come to something that some of us can understand. I know how to sympa- thize with the gentleman from Boone in his troubles and difficulties about these various amendments. We have got one, presented in plain English, that has been construed many years by the people of this Commonwealth. I appreciate what he says about the various amendments and substi- tutes that have come so thick and so fast, and with such frequency that the gentle- man from Boone says they have befuddled him, and I am very much in the same fix. I feel very much like an old negro man in my county once did. He belonged to a farmer who was a preacher, and that preacher, like some of the Delegates in this Convention, had a great fondness, a great admiration, for old things; so he stuck to the old Virginia wagons, with crooked beds. you know, and painted blue, and so crooked that they wouldn’t hold a load. And this old man, whose name was Sam, was a good, faithful old servant, and did his best. He tried to understand things (he was not very bright), and as the two ends of the wagon were very much alike, he was in the habit of taking off the wrong gate; he would take off the head-gate when he shouuld have taken off the tail- gate. The old man, being a preacher, couldn’t swear, so he called the old darkey and took him to the wagon, and took with him a large piece of chalk. He said: “ Now, Sam, I want to teach you so you won’t be making any more mistakes,” and upon the front gate he made a large letter “B.” He said: “ Do you see that letter?” Sam says: “I see it.” “Do you know what that means?” “ Not exactly.” “That means ‘Before.’ Don’t you ever forget that.” Then he went to the other gate and made another letter “ B.” “Understand that? " he says. “ No, marse, I don’t know exactly what that means." “ That means ‘Behind.’ I hope there will be no more mistakes about that.” The old darkey said: “That may be plain to you; but these ‘ B’s’ kind 0’ ’fuses me.” So I am con- fused by these numerous amendments so nearly alike. Now, the one offered by the gentleman from Boone is one which I could vote for, and if it had any merit over the bill reported by the Committee as now amended, I would most certainly vote for it. I can do it without any sacrifice of judgment or conscience. I cannot see that this has any advantage over the second sec- tion of the bill reported by the Committee, and, therefore, I will be compelled reluc- tantly to vote against it. Mr. BLACKBURN. Is it in order to offer an amendment to the substitute‘? The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it is. The Reading Clerk read the amend- ment offered by Mr. Blackburn, which is as follows: “ Amend section two of the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights by substitut- ing the word ‘State’ for the word ‘Com- monwealth ’ in the second line thereof, and by adding to the said section the fol- lowing: ‘To the State, but municipalities may exempt from corporate taxation, cor- porations wholly within their limits.’ ” The CHAIRMAN. That is an amend- ment to the original report of the Commit- tee, and not to the substitute under consid- eration. Mr. BLACKBURN. I understand that the gentleman is offering the first section of the present Bill of Rights. My amend- ment is to that section, because that is the report of the Committee on Bill of _Rights. If you will look at the report of the Com- mittee, you will see that it was reported to us just as it was in the original Bill of Rights. The READING CLERK. The substi- tute as proposed by the Delegate from Boone is the first section of the old Bill of Rights. The proposed amendment is to- BILL OF RIGHTS. 29 Tusday,] BLACKBURN. [October 28 . substitute the word “State” for the word “ Commonwealth ” in the second line, and by adding to said section the following: “ To the State, but municipalities may ex- ~empt from corporate taxation corporations wholly within their limits.” Mr. BLACKBURN. I understood the substitute offered by the Delegate from Boone was a substitute for the report of the Committee. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate is correct. It is in order. Mr. BLACKBURN. My purpose to explain away any confusion that may arise, as I tried to state to the Convention the other day, but failed to make myself un- derstood. It is, first, for us to understand who it is we are talking about; who it is that is to be granted separate public emolu- ments and privileges, and who are to be benefited by them. It occurs to me that, certainly, no man or set of men is entitled to separate emoluments or privileges from the entire State because of a service he has rendered to some locality or portion of that State; and for that reason I suggest, in the latter clause of that amendment, that municipalities may exempt from municipal taxation corporations entirely within their limits. I take it that every Delegate in the Convention recognizes the fact that municipalities require laws somewhat dif- ferent from those which are applicable to the entire State; and, therefore, I offer that amendment in order to bring that idea before us: that, before any man or set of men can ask for exclusive privileges or rights from the entire State of Kentucky, he should render some services to the entire ‘State of Kentucky. If he wants exoneration from a municipality or from a large city, he may have it, if they choose to grant it. For instance, if a city wants to exempt their water company or gas company, she may have the right to do it by get- ting her charter amended by the Leg- islature. That is a matter of con- tract. If that gas or water company, which has been so often alluded to in the last few days, renders services to the city of Louisville equal to the amount of taxes to be paid to the city of Louisville,I see no harm in the city entering into that sort of a contract with that company, for what is gathered by one hand is paid out by this privilege by the other. That is a matter for the people of the city of Louisville to determine for themselves. But can it be claimed that because a water or gas company renders services to Louisville, Covington, Newport, or Lexington, or any other municipality, that, therefore, they shall come to the Leg- islature, and by any means, I care not what, ask and obtain exoneration or exemption from State or county taxes? It is most unfair in my opinion, and for that reason I offer that amendment to that section that we are so confused about. I say it ought to mean by the people of Kentucky—the entire State of Kentucky—but a county or city may exempt from taxation because of services rendered to them. In that case, I don’t see that that city or town would have the right to object; but if they are exempted from State and county taxation, I say that it is nothing but fair that they should render the service to the State or county that obtained the exemption. That obvi- ates the trouble the Delegate from Marion has to services let out by contract. If the fugitive, a murderer, or aman charged with any other crime, flees from the State, and the Governor offers a reward for his capturge, or sends a man after him to the State to which he has fled, then he can give him pay for his services. Why? Because he is rendering services to the Commonwealth—in bringing back the violator of the law into Court for trial. Other instances of the same character occur. Therefore, I think if you strike out the word “Commonwealth,” and substitute the word “State,” and add at the close of the section, "but in consideration of public services to the State; but municipalities may, if they choose, exempt from taxation 30 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] MONTGOMERY—RODES—BULLITT [October 28 . corporations entirely within their limits,” it occurs to me that a great deal of trouble would be obviated. Mr. lMONTGOMERY. I would like to_ offer a substitute. The CHAIRMAN. It is out of order. It will be considered after this is voted upon. Mr. RODES. In answer to the gentle— man from Boone, I will take the liberty of saying to this Convention that no one can afford to be unjust. to corporations. I don’t suppose the Convention means to be unjust to them. I think it will deal out justice all around. At least those are my sentiments, and I propose to be governed by them. Now, as to the status of these sections that we are in. The Committee reported the original first section of the Bill of Rights, and made it the first part of it. The latter part of the old first section has been em- bodied in the present section. That has been amended by the Delegate from Allen ' and by the Delegate from Christian. Now, the Delegate from Adair offers a substitute -to that which the Committee really report, though it is provided in the first and second sections. He proposes that substitute for the second section Don’t you see how that tangles matters? Now, the gen- tleman from Woodford comes in and offers an amendment to that part of the substi- tute. I suggest to him that the best way to change that phraseology would be to wait until we get into the Convention, and substitute “State” for “Commonwealth,” or ofi'er that as an amendment to the original section of the report by the Com- mittee, which is either the second section or the first, I forget which, as offered by the Delegate from Boone. It looks like we are going over and over this thing in a circle. We are spending a good deal of time over this one thing, which occurs to me to have been voted upon. The CHAIRMAN. The question now recurs upon the amendment offered by the Delegate from Woodford to the substitute of the Delegate from Boone. , And the vote being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative. The CHAIRMAN. The question now recurs upon the substitute offered by the Delegate from Boone. Mr. BULLITT. I want to amend his substitute. The. CHAIRMAN. An amendment would be in order. The question now is upon the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from McCracken. The amendment reads: Amend by adding "Subject to amend- ment or repeal by general law.” Mr. BULLITT. It seems to me that if you make the first section of the old Bill of Rights read that all grants shall be subject to amendment or repeal, that that puts in the power of the State the right and ability to control as to taxation and every other future grant, and I think that if that had been added, and if we had had the ex- cellent work of Judge Cooley upon Con- stitutional Limitations before our last Constitution had been adopted, it would have been put just in those words. Judge Cooley says the only way to get rid of the effects of the Dartmouth College case is for the State to provide that these charters shall be granted subject to amendment or repeal by the State. Now, I admit that to say a corporation may be repealed specially might deter capital from coming into the State; but if it says it can be repealed only by general law, there is no danger of deter- ring capital from taking hold of our natural resources and developing them. But whilst we desire that capital shall take hold and develop our resources, we want to be able to control the management of these corpo- rations, and by putting them under subjection to the laws and the govern- ment of the State, seems to me just what our constituents want us to do Leave the corporations with power to de-. velop the resources of the State, but at the BILL OF‘ RIGHTS. 31 Tuesday,] BRoNs'roN—RoDE's—BULLIrT. [October 28 . same time hold them subject to the control of the State; and if we effect that, I am satisfied the people of the State would be ' thankful for the action of this Convention. I therefore offer that amendment—that it shall be subject to amendment or repeal, just in the language used by Judge Cooley. That gives the State power of control, and does away with the effect of the Dartmouth College case. I believe that amendment ought to go into the Constitution some- where or somehow, and just here is the proper place. in my judgment, for it to be. The CHAIRMAN. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate from McCracken. And the vote being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative. The CHAIR MA-N. The question will now recur upon the substitute as amended. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to have it reported as amended. The Reading Clerk read the substitute as amended, which is as follows: That all‘ freemen, when they form a so- cial compact, are equal; and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, sep- arate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services, which shall be subject to amendment or repeal by general law. Mr. RODES. In regard to the amend- ment offered by the gentleman from Mc- Cracken, we have got now, in the report by the Committee, this provision. Mr. BRONSTON. I object. The CHAIRMAN. If there is objec- tion, the Chair thinks you are out of order. Mr. RODES. Why? I am responding to him (Mr. Bullitt) now. ‘ The CHAIRMAN. That amendment has already been voted upon. ’ Mr. RODES. It is still part of the original Bill. I mean, his amendment has been incorporated into the substitute.- DELEGATES. Leave! Leave! Mr. RODES. I simply wanted to say that we say in our report: “All men are by naturejree, and equal,_and have certain inherent and inalienable rights.” That is a part of the section offered by the gentle- man from Boone. It is already in the re- port of the Committee, and the residue is in section 2. That has been amended by striking out the words “but in considera- tion of public services.” I say nothing of that kind is in there now. Mr. BULLITT. And when that is- stricken out, don’t you leave it barren? Mr. RODES. You do take away from the Legislature all power in that regard. It transfers the matter to the Constitution. Mr. BULLITT. It leaves it absolutely barren of vitality. ,Mr. RODES. No, sir; the language is simply transposed. What I want to say is this: That question comes up directly. We have got these things all transposed. I don’t know which to take. The balance is last part of section 18, referring to special privileges, which is attached the second section; so you have the counterpart of each other in the original section two of the report of the Committee, and I don’t see the necessity now. The question now comes, up Whether that original section of the Bill of Rights shall be put in as a sub- stitute for all we have done. The CHAIRMAN. The question now recurs upon the substitute of the Delegate from Boone as amended. And the question being taken thereon, it was decided in the negative. Mr. BECKHAM. If it is necessary, I desire to give notice that I will re-ofi'er in the Convention the substitute that has just been voted down. Mr. PETTIT. I rise to a parliamentary inquiry: If it can be offered in Conven- tion, or whether any thing can be offered, except what is reported as having been done by the'Committee itself ‘2 Mr. HENDRICK. It _ is now within two minutes of the time of adjournment. I believe we have a session at three o’clock. I move that the Committee rise and report 32 PRINTING. Tuesday,] YOUNG—DEHAVEN——JOHNSTON. [October 28 , progress, and ask leave to sit again at 3 o’clock. And the question being taken upon said motion, it was decided in the afiirmative. THE CONVENTION. Thereupon Mr. Clay resumed the Chair. Mr. YOUNG. The Committee has been in session, and has had under consideration the subject of the report of ‘the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. It re- ports progress, and asks leave to sit again at 3 o’clock. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the report of the Committee. Mr. MCHENRY. I move that we take a recess until 3 o’clock. . The PRESIDENT. That has alfiready‘ been fixed upon. The Convention thereupon took a recess. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention was called to order by the President (Mr. Clay) at 3 o’clock. The Convention Printing. Mr. DEHAVEN. I desire to offer a res- olution. The Reading Clerk read the [resolution offered by Mr. DeHaven, as follows: Resolved, That the matter of editing and printing the daily proceedings of the de- bates of this body he referred to a special Committee of ten Delegates, with instruc- tions to report what they deem advisable in relation thereto at 9.30 A. M.; the Presi- dent of the Convention to be, er ofiicz'o, Chairman. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the adoption of the resolution. Mr. JOHNSTON. I think that matter was settled by a vote of this Convention this morning; and now it is being re- vamped and redressed, in defiance of a vote of this Convention. Now we to-day deter- mined to dispense with the services of the Reporter; it was so ordered; and I make the point that this question canhot fairly come up now. It was voted upon and de- termined adversely by nearly three-fourths of the Convention, and it cannot be brought up a few hours afterwards. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will hold that the matter is in order, as it brings the question up in another form. Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to lay the resolution on the table, and call for the yeas and nays on the proposition. Mr. WOOD. I second the call for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDENT. It has been moved and seconded that the resolution be laid upon the table, and upon that the Delegate from Fayette, seconded by the Delegate from Taylor, calls the yeas and nays. Mr. DEHAVEN. I beg the indulgence of the Convention in order to read the contract under which this man is proceeding. Mr. WOOD. Is not that out of order? DELEGATES. Leave! Mr. DEHAVEN. I do not desire to make a speech at all. On the 18th of Oc- tober this resolutian was passed by this body: “ That the Stenographer be allowed thirty-five dollars per day for editing, proof-reading, stationery, etc., in afull for all such work, and that he be paid for the same number of days that the Delegates to this Convention are paid.” N ow if we dis- charge him, ought we not pay him for the whole tinie? 1 would like for gentlemen to look at that proposition, and, with their consent, I would like to make some little explanation. Mr. BECKHAM. I move that the Delegate from Oldham be allowed to ex- plain his resolution. The PRESIDENT. Is there objection ? The Chair hears none, and the gentleman will proceed. Mr. DEHAVEN. The only object I have in view in offering that resolution was in order to prevent a very gross injustice being done to this ofiicer. Now, 1 am not on either one of the Committees who have charge of this thing, and of course I have no personal knowledge as to whose fault it is. According to the resolution I have heard, we have made an unconditiogal con- Leave l PRIN TING. 33 'Tuesday,;[ BECKNER—HENDRICK—JOHNSTON. [October 28 . tract with this man to pay him thirty-five dollars a day for the same number of days that the Delegates are paid, and now to summarily discharge him, as was done this morning, I think is inconsiderate. Are we not morally if not legally bound to pay him for the number of days the Delegates sit in this House? I think a body like this ought to regard itself as much bound by moral obligations as an ‘individual would bya legal obligation; and I infer, further, from the Chairman of the Committee on Printing, that this thing was under discussion at the time our Stenog- rapher was employed, and that he refused to accept that compensation except upon the idea that he was to be retained during the sessions of this Convention, and that he was unwilling to make that contract with the Committee on Printing unless he should have the whole job. Now, if we ‘summarily dispense with his services, I think we do him an injustice, and that, too, without a hearing. We should not de- cide summarily without giving some op- portunity to the oflicer to be heard; that he has so violated his contract with the Convention as that we are exonerated from the performance of our obligations under it. We cannot condemn a man without a hearing, and I think that the right thing for us to do in order to set ourselves right about the thing is to pass that resolution submitting it to this Special Committee; let them investigate this thing thoroughly and capably, and report to us in the morn- ing what we ought to do under all circum- stances. Mr. BECKNER. It seems to me that it would be not only just but proper, not only to the Stenographer but to the Con- vention, to have this Committee appointed to look into the facts and report what would be a proper action for the Convention to take. A very able lawyer has just ad- dressed the Convention, and his opinion is certainly entitled to weight enough to carry this conviction, that a contract with the Stenographer can reasonably be con- strued so that the man is entitled to com- pensation during the sitting of the Con- vention. That construction has been put upon it by a number of most excel- lent lawyers, and I thlnk it would be wise and reasonable to have this Committee, such a Committee as the President of this Convention would ap- point, fair men, sensible men, who want to do what is right, and let them report what action would be best in the premises, and What the facts are. I shall certainly vote for the resolution, and oppose laying it on the table. Mr. HENDRICK. Is debate in order upon this? The PRESIDENT. It is not, except by unanimous consent. Mr. JOHNSTON. I withdraw my mo- tion to lay on the table, in order to give gentlemen an opportunity to speak. Mr. HEN DRICK. I shall only offer a suggestion. I do not desire to consume the time of the Convention. I think already more time has been consumed than ought to have been. I thought this matter was finally disposed of this morning. We adopted a resolution—we took the only method known to parliamentary practice to clinch that business, a motion to recon- sider and lay that motion on the table. Now, here we come again at this business. We are making speeches. The Stenogra- pher is here. This is his last day, according to that resolution. Perhaps the effect of the Stenographer's presence is yet felt in the Convention. But the proposition is that we take up now a matter that was settled this morning. I trust that it won’t be done, but that gentlemen will be permitted to proceed with their business here, with- out the consciousness that what they say will be reported and scattered upon the wings of the wind and be known of all men. I thought that we concluded that this morning. Let us have no child’s play. If we conclude upon one thing in the morning, and then pro- 34 PRINTING. Tuesday,] BURNAM. [October 28. ceed to change in the afternoon, I think we ought to have the report of a compe- tent chemist upon the quality of our food for dinner. It seems to have a remarkable effect upon this body. What we eat for breakfast don’t produce the same effect as what we eat for dinner; and there may be something in what the Convention drinks, although I understand that it drinks noth- ing but pure cold water. I appeal to the Convention to stand by what it declared this morning was its deliberate conviction, that the proceedings of this Convention should go on without any Stenographer here to report—without any chance of hav- ing our speeches misprinted. I see no use in it. Some of the most distinguished men of the State have been uttering speeches upon this floor worthy to be heard in any assembly, and they have been absolutely mutilated and torn, until they and others are unable to recognize them. I make no complaint in any way, shape or form. It is nothing to me individually; but it is a great deal to me as a representative of the people upon this floor—a great deal to me, considering the dignity and prestige of the gentlemen who have uttered their senti- ments on this floor, to have them reported correctly; but if we are to be reported as we have been reported, I appeal to you to stand by your action of this morning, and let us proceed here, uttering our sentiments without the fear of having them mis- printed, edited improperly, or without any hope of any of us living in the Records of this Convention. Mr. BURNAM. I was one of those this morning who voted for the proposition to have an Editor elected. I opposed all these movements, and think that it would be unjust to leave this Record where it now stands. I entirely concur with the gentleman from Oldham county that we are under a moral obligation to comply to the very letter of that resolution we have adopted to pay this man thirty-five dollars a day for every day that this Convention re- mains in session. Superadded to that is this: From the facts made known in the Com- mittee on Rules, I think this action of this House would be very unjust to the Printer. The statement was made by him that, in anticipation of printing this Record accord- ing to the style this House had agreed upon, he had, out of his own private purse, sent to the city of Cincinnati, and ex- pended a large amount of money in addi- tional type, press and stands with which to‘ carry on this printing; and when the Con- vention is over, that which he bought will not be worth ten cents on the dollar. I go further, and say that it would leave a very great wrong done many modest gentlemen on this floor. Now, the complaint has been made here that errors in the published speeches have been made in this Record. One gentleman has, in a very honorable and manly tone, said that he came here to make a record. There are those who desire to be heard, and who desire that their constituents shall know what they say upon this floor when we come to discuss- other propositions that will come before the House in the future; and I say that, after this Record has gone out, it will be unjust to those gentlemen who expect to speak in the future not to have their remarks printed. More than that. the amount of money that has been already spent in the publica- tion of this Record, down to this time, is more than one-half of what it will cost at the close of the term. You have deter- mined already, by a vote which has already been passed, to eliminate all these reports that come in, and I am sure that we can even more simplify it by having some one competent to do it, as I believe. I am sure the House will, on the full recognition of its duty, select some gentleman capable of doing this. For these reasons I think that it would be just, that it would be right for this House to reconsider what we have done. I do not want to reflect on anybody, but I PRINTING. 35 Tuesday,] WOOD. [October 28. think this result this morning was brought about by two agencies, conflicting, it may be, but concurring in the result. There were those who opposed this expenditure of money for the employment of this Editor. There were those who desired to have no speeches at all in this paper with a view to economy, and by the concurring votes of gentlemen whose minds were operated on by different feelings, this result was brought about. Standing here, as I did this morning, ready to vote for a proposi- tion to employ this man to do this work, which our common sense shows should be done; having voted against all these propo- sitions which have resulted in great wrong, not only to the Printer and Stenographer, but to the modest gentlemen of this House, I shall vote with great cordiality for the resolution of the gentleman from Oldham. Mr. WOOD. I have no personal inter— est in this matter. I have made no speeches during this Convention, and I have none before me to make. What little record I make, I want to make by way of votes—— cool, calculating, considerate votes—and I do not want to be placed beside that class of men who are willing to do injury to any body_ It is not my way of looking into business matters. I do not want to do any injustice to the distinguished Stenographer, who has undertaken and done well his work. I have no fault to find and no objections to urge, but it does seem to me that it is child’s play. A sovereign Convention—a Con- vention of one hundred men, representing two millions of people—come here, and after debating the question to a considera- ble extent, do a thing, and in two hours turn around and undo it. I do not think that looks business-like, and that is one reason why I am opposed to the resolution that has been introduced by the Delegate from Oldham. His resolution sounds very well, but it is virtually undoing the very thing that it took this Convention three hours to do this morning. I do not want any of the Delegates to think that I do not place a proper estimation upon the value of these speeches that have been made.’ I must frankly say that I have never been entertained in all my life as well as I have been during this Convention. It has been a school to me, and I certainly appreciate the speeches that have been made, because they have been able, logical and pointed. I must say further, that my constituents are sending to me every day for some of the copies of those speeches, and some of my Republican friends in my counties have been writing to me to please send them out a number of copies of the speech made by the Delegate from Madison. But that is not making a Constitution for the people of Kentucky. I think our time should be consumed in something akin to the business which brought us together. We have met in council to make a Consti- tution, and I am in favor of doing it; and I want every man who has any thing to say, or any light to throw, upon any subject under discussion by the Convention, to present it—if ‘it takes him five minutes or one hour, it matters not. Perhaps it will be time well spent; but it seems like the printing part of this machinery has not been at all satisfactory. It seems like oh- jections are urged to the Printer or Ste-i nographer, when I think possibly both have done their duty. I regard them as accomplished and competent men, and I think they have done their work well; but then every day objections to their work are made on this floor, and it has consumed too much time; it breeds too much confusion, and keeps us in a furor. So far as I am concerned, I would be glad to have every line that is written, and every word that is spoken, printed, and let it go out ,to our constituents; but then it seems to me that we cannot get along in the channel we have been moving. Forty-odd days have come and gone, and we are here yet upon the Bill of Rights. It seems to me we should get at that work the people are ask- ing at our hands. Other branches-and i 36 - PRINTING. the same identical question. Tuesday,] 1‘ other parts of the Constitution require to be amended and modified, and the people :are anxiously waiting to see if we are not going to take hold of that, and give them ‘the relief they so much desire. I have heard no general complaints, so far as the Bill of Rights is concerned, about the rspeeches'we have made; and when they are made, they are _a benefit to us; but .are they to the people at home? Does it pay them for us 'to' waste time this way? Although I know speeches have been made in this body ‘which are‘ a credit vto us not only in the State, but throughout ‘the country, it seems there is dissatisfac- tion about the progress we are making in our work. There is trouble. rsomebody comes in here and urges a com- Every day plaint, and as fast as we adjust one trouble another one arises, and it does seem to me that the time should come when we should put this thing upon some permanent basis, and dispose of this trouble which is re- iterated- and repeated every day. That is the objection I have to it. I thought this matter was perfectly settled this morning. That is the reason I oppose the resolution. I thought ‘it was irrevocably fixed. I thought every step had been taken to 'makeit final, and yet here we are upon Now, if we can’t get along without having this con- fusion about the printing part of the Con- vention, let us abolish that part and go on with the work that we were sent here to perform. It does seem to me that we have had enough 'upon this trouble, and that it is high time we were now getting down to this work. I don’t want the distinguished Stenographer to lose one solitary cent by our rescinding the contract _ made with him. So far ‘as that is concerned, I ‘am ‘opposed :to getting something .for noth- thing.‘ I, would be willing to" consent to a most liberal i compromise-rather than have the work “breed discontent ‘and? con- fusion in onr’ranks during. business “hours; That is ‘where thetr’ouble- comes in. If the WOOD—KNOTT. [October 28. Delegates are going to be satisfied with the reports of their able speeches, I have no ob- jection to going on; but it does seem to me that the people of the State demand at our hands that we stop this confusion about the print- ing of the speeches in the Convention, and let us go along and do the work that the people of the State demand at our hands. Mr. KNOTT. I quite concur in the opinion of my distinguished friend from Madison, that we inconsiclerately did a great wrongto the Reporter of- this body; but in my judgment we have done ourselves an in H- nitely greater wrong. We have been here for anumber of days discussing the Bill of Rights. Complaint has been made that we consume so much time. I think the event proves that we might well devote a great deal more time to that very important doc- ument. In the Bill of Rights, as reported by the Committee and adopted by our fathers in our former Constitutions, there is a provision prohibiting the passage of Bills of Attainder. The Constitution of the United States says that no State shall pass, any ex post facto law, Bill of Attainder, or a law impairing the obligation of contracts. Have we violated that inhibition in the Federal Constitution ‘? What is a Bill of Attainder as defined by the Supreme Court of the United States? Read the cases Ex parte Garland and Ea- pa'rte Cummins, and you will find there the definition to be substantially as we all know it: A legislative condemnation without trial; whether it reaches to corrup- tion of blood, or confiscation or forfeiture of estate or not, it is a condemnation, a depriva- tion of an individual of his rights by legislative action and not by due process of law. I think nobody will controvert the further proposition, that there is here a subsisting contract. Here is an agreement that we will give thirty-five dollars a day, for every day during the time we’ sit here, to the Stenographerof this body; 7 It re‘- qnired two to makehthat contract; It-re- quires two" tonirescind it-Iunless byfi due PRINTING. 37 Tuesday,] KNOTT—WASHINGTON. [October 28. process of law, unless before some constitu- tionally organized court there shall be a judgment that it has been violated. Now, if we, in our haste and inconsiderate action this morning, did not come as near passing a Bill of Attainder as that achievement was ever approximated in the country, I do not know where the other cases are. Thatis the unfortunate predicament which we, in the . heat of passion or the excitemout of de- bate, placed ourselves to-day before the country—raising our voices against the en- actment of any legislative condemnation, crying out against Bills of Attainder, and ourselves the first to violate that great prin- ciple. I say we have done ourselves a wrong. We have done ourselves an injus- tice, and notwithstanding scarce two hours have elapsed since we perpetrated it, we ought to correct it. We ought to rescind and exscind. I don’t think it ought to ap- pear on the Record at all. It is an injus- tice to our descendants. It is a matter that I have no personal interest in except that we ought, when we are here legislating upon this grave subject, let the world know that,we understand it is of importance enough to be adopted. Those are my views about it, and I therefore heartily concur with my friend from Oldham in his resolution.‘ I hope it will pass, and I hope it will be passed without one solitary dissenting vote. Mr. WASHINGTON. Somehow, or somehow else, I feel a good deal like the old darkey did when he reached up after the turkey, and some one out of the shadows caught him by the hand and said, “Come wid me, Sambo.” I feel like I had done something mean. I think a whirlwind must have swept through this room this morning—a regular spell-binder, and I plead guilty to being one of its victims. It seems to me that during the movement of the cyclone not only myself but a good many other gentlemen on this floor took counsel more of our personal inclination than of our sense of justice. When I speak of personal inclination, I mean rather a disinclination upon my part to appear in print. I care nothing at all about being handed down to posterity through the medium of speeches; but when I came to reflect upon the action of the Convention this morning, and espec- ially when I heard that contract read (which I had forgotten all about, if I ever knew any thing about it), I felt as though we had been guilty of a gross injustice to those who are doing the reporting and printing of this Convention. These young men have left their homes; they have come here to do our work for us; they have, perhaps, sacrificed better opportuni- ties than they have here, and now ‘we are in the attitude of breaking the contract that we have made with them to do the reporting for this Convention. I am opposed to doing any thing of the kind. It is not only anomalous that the debates of this Con- vention should not be printed (for I do not believe I ever heard of a Constitutional Convention the debates of which were not printed), but posterity may desire to know something about the reason which animat- ed us in the adoption of this Constitution. It is also well known, in addition to that, that it is always admissible for the courts to look to contemporaneous opinion for the purpose of ascertaining the true intent and meaning of constitutional enactments. As I said before, I plead guilty of having cast my vote this morning somewhat in- considerately. I believe it operates an injustice to some gentleman. Now the gentleman from Fleming, aided by his ' co- adjutor from Taylor, says, “ Don’t let us act like children; let us stand by what we have done.” Which is the manlier course of conduct, which the nobler line of con- duct, to stand by the right or adhere to the wrong, simply becahse we have done the wrong? It seems to me far nobler and more courageous, when we have done a wrong, to undo it as speedily as possible. I ss PRINTING. , Tuesday,] HENDRICK—APPLEGATE. [October 28. believe in the old rule, that it is never too late to do the right thing unless the power to do it is gone, and I do not see that we have done any thing here that precludes us from a re-opening of this question. The Chairman has already said that this reso- lution is in order, because it brought the whole question up in a new shape. That resolution I shall very cheerfully vote for. Mr. HENDRICK. I am very willing to concur in the legal opinion of the Dele- gate from Oldham, and in the moral senti- ments expressed by the Delegates from Marion and Newport, but it does not alter in any sense my opinion with respect to the action of the Convention this morning. I am also willing to confess, with the Dele- gate from Newport, that I had never be- fore heard of that contract, nor did I know that such a contract was in existence. I am willing to confess, in addition, that that contract holds us as indicated by the Dele- gate from Oldham; but let us stand, if you please, in the attitude of a party to that contract violating its provisions. It is better, ten times better, for this Convention, in a money sense, in a moral sense, in every sense in which we can do it, that we pay the Public Printer and Stenographer of this Convention whatever we ought to pay them for violating the contract we have made with them, than that five months more should be consumed in the deliberations of this Convention by reason of the report of the debates being made. I thought the Convention acted deliberately. I thought they knew what they were talking about; but, so far as I am concerned individually, the matter of this contract makes no dif- ference in my action this morning, except that I wish here to record my solemn con- viction, that with that resolution existing this Convention should execute it. Pay them for their work; that is no reason why we should continue them here. We can settle with them, we can do the right thing. They are willing to accept a settlement, I have no doubt, and when once settled, the great purpose and object of the gentle nen, as I understand it, who voted this morning was to expedite the business of this Conven- tion, and the suggestion was made by Dele- gates upon this fioor as to the hopes of the gentlemen who have not spoken. That can- not apply to the number who voted for this resolution, who have not yet had the opportunity of speaking. They are willing to forego the opportunity; willing that the State’s business should be expedited; will- ing that we should proceed with the busi- ness of this Convention. We are willing that the speeches which have been so badly reported or so badly printed, I will not say reported, shall remain to the gentlemen who were fortunate enough to deliver them. But don’t let us take up the time of this Convention here day after day, hour after hour, in the discussion of these matters. It belittles the work of this Convention, and if we will but proceed to vote, our record shall be known by our actions and not by words. That is my position. You have dispensed with the services of the Stenog- rapher and Printer, and have decided that our proceedings shall be exclusively printed in Journals. Then if that is a fact, no wrong is done the Stenographer and Public Printer for the expenditure by them. They can be repaid, and this Convention can proceed to work without the intervention of Stenographer or Printer. So I am will- ing to stand upon that as my record upon this matter. Mr. APPLEGATE. I know of no better maxim than “ To thine own self be true; it follows, then, thou cans’t not be false to any man.” This Convention ought to be true to itself in this matter; true to the principles of honor; and if the proposition of the gentleman from Fleming is that we continue these oifieials at the enormous expense at which they are kept while rendering no service to the Convention, I say that we are not true to ourselves or to our constituency. Mr. HENDRICK. I made no such PRINTING. 39 ‘— 'Tuesday,] APPLEGATE, [October 28. proposition. My suggestion was to settle with the gentlemen on the same basis that any other parties would settle a contract whenever one or the other became dissatis- fied. Mr. APPLEGATE. That is perfectly indefinite. It takes two men to make a contract, and two parties to modify it. I suppose the gentleman would hold us to .the contract at the rate of thirty-five dollars a day if we were to settle with him. s The Public Printer has his contract. He will settle at the end of the term of this Convention by taking exactly what .that contract gives him, and I don’t sup- pose we can force him to take any less. I .am willing to answer to my constituency for every act, word and deed I am guilty ‘of in this Convention, and I am willing that they know it from the published reports of this Convention. We have it from the highest authority that “men love darkness because their deeds are evil.” If we shut out from the public 'our proceedings here, we at once .arouse in them a suspicion as to our conduct here. First, we have committed a flagrant outrage upon rights of the indi- vidual citizen if we violate a contract with them. In the next place we have taken from the public the means of knowing what we say or what we do. Our con- stituency have a right to know the means and the arguments that are used here for the passage of any part of the new Consti- tution. I do not know how other gentle- men feel, but as for me, I did not exactly know just what ought to be in this Consti- .tution before I came here, and I thought it well to hear the suggestions of the other gentlemen that the people chose to repre- sent them on this matter, and after we had discussed these questions with one another, we would then be able to come to a conclu- sion as to what should be clone. I say the people of the State are entitled to these ‘discussions just the same as these represent- atives here. If we are going to pay for it ultimately, if we are going to be just (and whatever we are, we ought to be just), why not let the people have it? I do not propose to make any speech that I want to shut out from the public, and I trust there is no other gentleman who wants to do that; and upon the question of settling upon equit- able terms, I say that that is an argument that cannot be consistent, because we can- not force them to settle upon any other terms. If that is a contract (and it seems to be conceded by the gentleman who is urging that proposition that it is a con- tract), they would have to be consulted as to what they will take, and I suppose that they will take no less than what they can force us to give them; and if they can force us to give them according the terms of the contract, why not let our constituency have the benefit of it, and let them know our views and the measures we are advocating here, and the reasons that have been urged why we should support the propositions coming before this Convention ‘? It cer- tainly will not hurt any one here to pass the resolution that is offered by the gentle- man from Oldham. We certainly cannot claim that we are infallible; that we can do no error; and the argument that we did it this morning, and we ought to doit this even- ing, is more applicable, because on the 18th day of October that contract. was entered into. We entered into it, and why should we violate it? I suppose we were as much in good faith, and took as much advice on the subject when we entered into the con- tract, as we had this morning when we voted hastily, with our hands tied, and with the previous question called. The proposition first before us this morning was not to dismiss the Stenographer, but to appoint an Editor, and when they found they could not rule, they were determined to ruin. I am, for one, opposed to such prin- ciples. I do not know whether these mo- tives will continue to actuate these gentle- men or not; but I say this, that when they proposed the motion for the appointment 40- PRINTING. Tuesday,] HENDRICK—APPLEGATE—MCH ENRY, [October 28 .. of an Editor, and found it would not carry, then ‘it was that they tabled these motions and suppressed debate, and, under the en- thusiasm of the moment, carried the prop- osition through. Mr. HEN DRICK. Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt him a moment? As a matter of fact, I appeal to the Journal of this House, and to every Delegate present this morning, that there was no suppres— sion of debate; but the previous question was withdrawn more than once for the purpose of allowing gentlemen this morn- ing free discussion. Mr. APPLEGATE. I stated those things were pressed through under the pre- vious question, and I am willing to leave it to the Journal, and if I am mistaken I abide the consequences of my mistake; and I again say that the purpose was to increase the expenses of the House; and when they could not increase the expense, they attempted to blot out the whole sys- tem under which we have been operating. Mr. MCHEN RY. I want to say a few words in favor of the resolution. This House will be in this condition, if we have no ofiicial Reporters: We will be reported here by newspaper men who may be prej u- diced. Reports have gone out from some of these letter-writers which have seriously prejudiced gentlemen on this floor; and no gentleman will be safe unless we had an oflicial Reporter to take down what we say, and to which we can appeal. Otherwise we can be reported in just such manner as pleases the gentlemen, who are here by the courtesy of the House—who are not responsible, however, to the House for the reports they make, and published’ in the Courier-Journal, the Louisville Times, the Post, and the Louisville Commercial, and other papers. I make no reflection upon these gentlemen. I think they are clever men; but it would put chvery Delegate in the power of any one of ‘these gentlemen to write him down in a ,7 I , ‘hvay that he can never recover from, because there is no ofi‘icial record here to. appeal to. I beg pardon to differ with my friend from Fleming, when he says the matter did not go through under the press of pub- lic excitement for the moment, and under- the pressure virtually of the previous ques-- tion. I voted for this resolution, and I did it deliberately, because I wanted to make a motion to-morrow morning to appeal from Philip drunk to Philip sober, and get the House to reconsider its _action on that sub’ ject; but the gentleman being younger and more active than myself, made the mo-‘ tion to reconsider, and, under the excite- ment, it went on the table; and I stand on the record as having voted for a thing that I detest and consider wrong. I voted for- it because I wanted 'to move to reconsider, and I did not get the floor to move that re- consideration. This is not a finality. When you lay any thing on the table, a two-thirds. vote can take it up off the table at any time; and I did intend, until i heard the motion of the gentleman from Oldham, to. move to‘ take that resolution off of the table; and I considered that, by to-morrow morning, two-thirds of this House would agree with me that it ought to be done. We ought. to rescind our action this morning. I do not want to stand here recorded as hav- ing done a wrong to any one. I want to be considered as having been in earnest when I made the motion to adjourn sine die, as there was no record of our proceedings, except such as gentlemen of the press- would see proper to make for us, and pub- lish in their newspapers. For the first time in this Convention some gentleman has alluded in a partisan fashion to Demo- crats and Republicans. hear the word Democrat or Republican used in this Convention. There has been no partisan vote whatever. We ‘have: about twenty Republicans here, who are gentlemen of high character; and have as much at heart the welfare of the Common-_ wealth of Kentucky as the eighty Demo-r crats here; and yet those gentlemen are in I did not want to. PRINTING. "4L Tuesday,] J ACOBS—WHITAKER—M ARTIN. [October 28 . the pcwer of partisan men, to put in their mouths and make them say things that will probably ruin them politically, and we stand here and say that that thing is to go on. The gentleman says we are facilitating the action of this Convention by doing away with these Reporters. I do not see why. We are not facilitating the action of the Convention. I voted cheerfully for the resolution offered by the Delegate from Fleming, which was adopted; but then I do not see why my friend should assume that his mode is the only way by which we can get at a correct report. If the Com- mittee is appointed which is suggested by my friend from Oldham, to be se- lected by the President, who himself will- be at the head of it, they can devise some means by ‘which we will get correct reports, and it would no doubt be satisfactory to the gentleman who advocated the original resolution, and also satisfactory to us. Although I voted for it, I think the mis- takes were not so grievous as represented in the eloquent and amusing speeches of my friends from Fleming and Louisville. Posterity, when they come to read these reports, will see that these errors are typo- graphical errors, and intelligent men will see the substance of the speeches that we have made; and I would rather, for these Records to go on without any sort of correc- tion than to stop them entirely. Mr. JACOBS. I voted for the resolu- tion of the gentleman from Fleming under a misapprehension. I did not know of the existence of this contract. The matter as it now stands before the Convention is a motion from the gentleman from Oldham for the appointment of a committee to consider the whole subject. The Delegate from Fleming admits that there has been a violation of that contract that we entered into with the Stenographer. That being so, I do not understand that by the appoint- ment of this Committee we are committed to a continuance of the Stenographer, but we have the privilege of either continuing W the office or settling with him, and for" the reasons assigned by the Delegate from Fleming, that there has beena violation of this contract, it is now becoming, it is just, right, it is proper that this Conven- tion should appoint some Committee to‘ take the whole matter in charge, so that- they may either recommend a continuance- of this office, or, if their opinion is that- the office shall not be continued, to report some equitable settlement with the Sten-~ ograper. That seems to me to be the whole question now involved in th1s mo- tion, and the discussion as to whether we‘ shall have a Stenographer, or whether we shall accept an equitable settlement with him, comes up on the report of the Com- mittee. Mr. WHITAKER. It seems that the- Delegates are troubled very much over the- expense we are incurring here, and that our constituents will find fault with us. I want- to say this: it has cost us about seven hun- dred dollars to—day to violate a contract, and it looks to me that that is as much as the Editor proposed this morning to look over our speeches and correct them would cost for four monthsv at least. We have spent a whole day wrangling over this mat- ter, and I would like to have this resolution passed and this Committee appointed, that. we may not have to pass another day on this subject and expend seven or eight hundred dollars more. Mr. MARTIN. If it is childish, when you have done wrong in the morning to make reparation in the afternoon, I am one- of the children. And if this Convention has acted wrong this morning, I do not- want the sun to go down on us to-night until it has made reparation. Therefore, I shall vote for the motion of the Delegate‘ from Oldham. Mr. BECKHAM. To my mind, there- are two reasons why this resolution ought to . prevail, either one of which, I think, ought to induce every gentleman on the floor to» support it. The first of these reasons has- 4'2 PRINTING. Tuesday,] BECKHAM—HENDRICK. [October 28 been alluded to by the Delegate who offered the resolution, that here is a contract made with the Stenographer. I am willing to state to the Convention, and I think every lawyer here will agree with me, that if the gentleman whom we have employed under .this writing should go out of our hall to- night and not return to it again, and obtain leave of the Legislature hereafter to sue the State of Kentucky under this contract, he could unquestionably recover against it. What sort of attitude would .that put us in as Delegates to this Conven- tion? I believe that the Delegate from Fleming himself agreed that that would be .the case. Has there been by anybody, the Printer or by the Stenographer, such a violation of the bargain that we have made as to put us upon such terms as that? I say that the fact that we have made the contract is one reason, and an all-sufficient reason, why we should support the resolu- tion now before the Convention. There is another reason for it that has not yet been adverted to, and that is, that the debates of this Convention ought to be printed. I have no doubt that what we do here will, a part of it at any rate, ‘be somewhat obscure. There will be obscurity about some sections of the Constitution that we promulgate to the people of the State. It is a rule that every one is familiar with, that where there is obscurity about a Constitution or the law, that the debates of the Convention are referred to by the people, by the Legisla- lature, by the Executive, by the Courts, in order to ascertain what the Constitution does mean. Therefore, I regard it as a matter of, I was about to say supreme, importance that the debates of the Con- vention, the opinions expressed here in discussing the various provisions of the Constitution we are about to make, be published, because they are of most valua- ble aid to the Courts and to all departments of the government in determining what they do mean by the Constitution. Mr. HENDRICK. I have already de- tained the Convention three times longer than I intended. I simply rise for the purpose of responding to some remarks made by the Delegate from Pendleton and the Delegate from Ohio. The Delegate from Pendleton was pleased to say the mover of this resolution, if he could not rule, was disposed to ruin; and the Delegate from Ohio said if the Delegate from Flem- ing could not have his own way, he would have none. I want the justice done to me to say that, in the very outset of these pro- ceedings, I was opposed to the employment of a Stenographer in this Convention; and I said this morning deliberately, and I say it now—not in a spirit of animosity, not in a spirit of malice, nor in a spirit of resent- ment—that if the reports of this Conven- tion are to, be made as they have been made, I would infinitely prefer that no re- port at all be made; and it was the concur- rence of other gentlemen in this House with me upon that proposition which induced me to offer the resolution as an amendment to the resolution of the Delegate from Al- len dispensing with the services of the Stenographer. In response to my friend from Boyle, I want to say that my original proposition was precisely the same as that now made by the Delegate from Oldham, except that mine had reference to a smaller Committee than that by the Delegate from Oldham; and that in this whole matter, so far from being actuated by such a spirit as has been imputed to me by the Dele- gate from Pendleton and the Delegate from Ohio, I have been actuated by no other purpose than that of serving what seemed to me to be the very highest inter- ests of the Convention. I believed it then; I believe it now; and I sincerely say now, as I said this morning, that I verily believe this Convention could very well afford to pay these Stenographers every dollar we are compelled to pay them under the con- tract, and dispense with their services. Mr. J ACOBS. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. Does he not think PRINTING. 48 Tuesday,] HENDRICK—JACOBS—RAMSEY, [October 28. the fact suggested by him is a very good reason why this Committee should be ap- pointed, and this matter considered by them ‘? Mr. HENDRICK. The Committee ought to be appointed, except it is abso- lutely doing one thing one hour and an- other thing at another hour. Mr. JACOBS. It is not to be pre- sumed that the Committee is going to re- port in favor of the continuance of the Stenographer. Mr. HENDRICK. I say that the prop- osition was made this morning to this Con- vention that a Committee be appointed to take the whole matter under consideration. They refused to do that. They deliberately decided that they would not continue the employment of a Stenographer. If it is desired to appoint a Committee, I have no desire to act the part of an obstructionist; but I say this, there was good reason exist- ing in this Convention this morning for its action, and there is good reason now for standing by that action. Mr. RAMSEY. I think it is very clear, from what has been already said by gentle- men upon the fioor of this House, that we desire the debates of this Convention to be printed; that we want the people of the State to know what we are doing and what is said here. Then, if we desire these de- bates, it’seems to me it is a very humiliat- ing confession to make that the members of this Convention cannot devise some way by which we can secure those debates printed correctly. Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, and other States of this Union, the Congress of the United States, have their debates reported and printed cor— rectly, and if we desire these debates printed, why is it we cannot devise some means by which they can be printed? It seems to me it is mere child’s play, at the outset of this Convention, to come here and say we want these debates; it is im- portant that we should have them; and employ men to do this work, and then turn around and say we will have no debates at all—we will have no proceedings of this Con- vention simply because we cannot have them correctly. If we want the debates, let us take measures to secure means by which we can get them and have them cor- rect. It seems to me that the appointment of this Committee will determine who is to blame, and determine what methods should be adopted in order that we may not stop entirely these proceedings, and continue to publish the proceedings of this Convention as has been already begun. The people of the State want to see them. They write for the Records, and they ask that they be sent to them, and they are taking an interest in this matter; and if other States have printed their debates as we have already begun, it seems to me that we ought to keep it up. It is an humiliat- ing confession to admit that we cannot de- vise some means by which we can secure the debates printed correctly. In addition to that, I was one of those who voted against the proceedings taken this morn- ing, because I believed it to be unjust to the Stenographer and to the Printer to condemn them, when a Committee had not actually investigated the matter and re- ported; that they were not altogether to blame in the matter; but some Dele'gates took it upon themselves that they were to a certain extent to blame. I am in favor of the resolution of the Delegate from Oldham to let this Committee take the matter and investigate the whole thing, and report back to the Convention what is best to do. Mr. FUNK. What we did this morn-- ing was the action, I take it, of men who allowed their better judgments to run away with them. (Laughter.) I have no apology to make. I voted against a recon- sideration of the employment of an Editor; but when the motion had carried to recon- sider it, I was not in favor of sending broadcast three thousand bound proceed- ings of this Convention, when I under- 44 PRINTING. Tuesday,] FUNK—MUIR—JOHNSTON. [October 28. stood from a gentleman of this Convention that he had discovered thirteen hundred mistakes up to the present time. If it is worth doing at all, it is worth doing well. If we cannot do it right, let us not do it at all. It was on that principle that I voted to do away with the Stenographer of this Convention. Now, as regards this con- tract, there is no scare in that for me. What does this contract say‘? What is to be done in consideration of this thirty-five dollars per day '? Editing, proof-reading, 850. According to these gentlemen them- selves, the Stenographer has neglected his duty, and it was they themselves that brought this matter and placed it in the shape in which we find it; and now it seems to me that they are trying to get out of it in some way or another. Let us be responsible for what we do. Let us be honest with ourselves and with one an- other. According to the reading of this contract, it indicates to me that we can employ this Editor to look over these speeches and revise them, without one cent’s additional cost to this Convention; and why? It is paid out of that thirty- five dollars to the Reporter, and it is part of What he is paid for. If it is necessary to employ some one else, why surely he cannot draw pay for doing that which he does not do. That is the ques- tion. Let us refer this to a ‘Com- mittee. Let the Committee report. Let us have these reports, but, above all things, let us send them out in a way that they will be understood. These are my sentiments. I voted with the angry crowd this morning most of the time. I believed then I was right, and under the circum- stances I believe so still. With the gentle- man from the county of Harrison I say, if we do wrong in the morning, let us right it in the afternoon. Remarks have been made in regard to sending out these re- ports by the newspapers. I want to say this: I do not know that you all appreciate the circulation of these newspapers like I do, but I have never known or read fuller reports of the proceedings of this Conven- tion than have been sent out by the news- papers represented in this hall. It is some- thing we should feel proud of, and ‘we should extend them our hearty thanks for it. They have circulated the reports in much better form than we have paid forty cents per thousand ems for sending out at the expense of the State. Mr. MUIR. We are supposed to be one hundred representative men, sent from all quarters of the State, for the purpose of law-making, and we find ourselves just now in the attitude of law-breaking— breaking contracts. I take it we will not adjourn and go home to our constituency and have them bring the accusation against us that we are violators of the law instead of law-makers. Mr. JOHNSTON. If half the charges made by the critics of this work are true, and nobody has disputed any one of them, then no amount of money, no expenditure, will justify a continuance of this state of case. The action this morning was the legitimate result of those speeches and criticisms, which were unquestioned by any member on this floor. It was not hasty action. It was intelligent action. As intel- ligent, sensible men we could not have done any thing else, and to rescind that action in the face of those criticisms undenied would be on the Record an absurdity. You can do it, perhaps will do it ; but I take it that you did exactly what you should have done with the information before you when you dispensed with the further services of the Reporters and Printers this morning, and I take it that nothing has happened since to change your judgments in that matter Certainly nothing has happened to change. mine. The idea of a contract binding you to continue in an absurd and ridiculous attitude before the people of this State, and your respect for the contract inducing you to remain in that attitudeflthat will not do. If the showing made here this PRINTING. 45 'Tuesday,] ' Graham, Samuel J oHNs'rox—McELRoY—MooRE. [October 28. morning is true, and it has not been denied, then you are bound to adhere to your ac- tion this morning; and, therefore, I renew my motion to lay the matter on the table. The PRESIDENT. The motion to lay on the table is not debatable. Mr. JOHNSTON. I call for the yeas and nays on the motion. Mr. MCELROY. I second the call. The Clerk thereupon proceeded to call the roll, and it resulted as follows: YEAS——23. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Askew, J. F. Lassing, L. W. Ayres, W. W. McElroy, W. J. Berkele, Wm. Pettit,‘ Thos. S. Birkhead, B. T. Bourland, H. R. Phelps, Zack Quieksall, J. E. Bronston, C. J. Twyman, I. W. Brumal, J. M. West, J. F, Field, W. W. Wood, J. M. Hendrick, W. J. Woolfolk, J. F. Hines, J. S. Young, Bennett H. James, A. D. NAYS—63. Allen, C. T. Holloway, J. W. Applegate, Leslie T. Jacobs, R. P. Auxier, A. J Jonson, J ep. C. Beckham, J. C. Kennedy, Hanson, Beckner, W. M. Kirwan, E. E. Bennett, B. F. Knott, J. Proctor Blackburn, James Lewis, W. W. Blackwell, Joseph Martin, W. H. Boles, S. H. May, John S. Brents, J. A. McChord, Wm. C. Brown, J. S. MeHenry, H. D. Buchanan, Nathan Miller, Will. Buckner, S. B. Montgomery, J. F. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, J. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Moore, Laban T. 'Carroll, John D. Muir, J. W. Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J. Coke, J. Guthrie O’Hara, R. H. Cox, H. Parsons, Rob’t T. DeHaven, S. E. Petrie, H. G. Doris, W. F. Phelps, John L. Durbin, Charles Pugh, Sam’l J. Elmore, T. J. Ramsey, W. R. Farmer, H. H. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. G. Smith, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Smith, W. Scott Funk, J. T. Swango, G. B. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Mr. President Clay. Hanks, Thomas H. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. Hogg, S. P. ABSENT—14. Mackoy, W. H. McDermott, E. J. Miller, W. H. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Amos, D. C. Clardy, John D, Edrington, W. J. English, Sam. E. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Straus, F. P. Hopkins, F. A. Trusdell, George Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move the pre- vious question. The motion being seconded, was put to the House and carried, and the previous question was ordered. The question being put on the adoption of the resolution, it was declared carried. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will ap— point under the resolution, the following gentlemen: Messrs. DeHaven, L. . Moore, MeHenry, Young, Kennedy, Knott, Petrie, Elmore. Hendrick, Askew. Mr. BECKN ER. I offer a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution, as follows: No member of this body shall be eligible to an office of profit or honor during a period of five years after the adjournment of this Convention. The resolution was referred to the Com- mittee on General Provisions. Mr. J ONSON. I have a communication from the Farmers and Laborers’ Union of McLean county, and ask that it be refer- red to the Committee on Corporations. Leave of absence was granted to the Delegate from Warren. Mr. COX. I have a petition from sun- dry citizens from Carroll county in regard to taxing property in a town, which is not inclosed or used for town purposes, and desire the same referred to the Committee on Municipalities. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move that the Con- vention do now resolve itself into Commit- tee of the Whole for further consideration of the report of the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights. Mr. PETTIT. Pending that motion, I move to amend by the following— Mr. J ONSON. In view of the fact that a Special Committee has been appointed with directions from this House to report their action as early as 9 o’clock in the morning, and it is important that they should meet, I move that we adjourn. The PRESIDENT. That motion has precedence. The question being put on said motion, it was carried. The Convention thereupon adjourned. ionvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1.] FRANKFORT, OCTOBER 29, 1890. [Ne 42 Wednesday,] VVooLFoLK—JoNsoN—PHELPs. [October 29. The Convention was called to order by ‘the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Father Young. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings 'was read, corrected and approved. Mr. WOOLFOLK. I have a commu- nication from the Farmers and Laborers’ Union of my county, which I desire to now have read and submit it for reference. The communication was read. The PRESIDENT. What reference does the gentleman suggest? Mr. WOOLFOLK. The subject-matter would indicate several Committees; but I think it ought to go the Legislative Com- mittee. The PRESIDENT. The reference is made to that Committee. Reports from Standing Committees are in order. Re- ports from Special Committees, motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. "tion. Mr. JONSON. There was a Special Committee raised on yesterday to report on :a certain subject this morning at 9 o’clock- The PRESIDENT. The instructions were to report at 9:30 o’clock. However. if the Committee is ready, the Convention will hear them now. Mr. DEHAVEN. The Special Commit- tee to whom was referred the resolution passed on yesterday have had the same under consideration. We were in session considering the matter until after 11 ‘o’clock last night, and were unable to per- fect any thing quite satisfactory to our- .selves. We ask of the Convention to give I offer a resolu- us time until to—morrow at half-past nine o’clock to enable us to perfect our work. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec— tion? The Chair hears none, and the leave is granted. The resolution of Mr. J. L. Phelps was read, and is as follows : WHEREAS, Much of the time of the State Legislature has been wasted, and much of the people’s money squandered by the same or similar bills being introduced in both Houses of the Legislature at the same time; therefore, Resolved, That all bills shall originate in the Lower House of the General Assembly, but the Senate shall have the right to pro- pose and pass amendments as heretofore. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to offer a resolution. The resolution reads as follows: Resolved, That no leave of absence be granted any member, unless when such leave is asked the reason shall be given for the same, and the Convention shall pass upon the question whether it is reasonable or not. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate offer that as a standing rule ‘? Mr. MOORE. Yes, sir. change any rule, though. The PRESIDENT. But it is a new rule, and will have to lie over one day. Mr. APPLEGATE. I offer a resolu- tion. The resolution reads as follows: It does not Be it resolved, That the respective Com- mittees having under consideration the following subjects be requested to report upon same on or before November 10, 1890, viz: 1. The provision prohibiting local and special legislation. 2. A provision limiting the power of 2 RESOLUTIONS. Wednesday,] APPLEGATE—J ONSON—PETTIT. counties, districts and municipalities to tax themselves. 3. A provision enabling the Legislature to adopt a ballot system of voting. That the Convention, when it meets on November 6, 1890, w1ll take up the report of the Committee on Revision, and pro- ceed with same from day to day until same is disposed of, and in like manner will dis- pose of the report of the other Committees on the subjects named in the resolution in the order in which same are reported, and the report of no other Committee shall be considered by the Convention after No- vember 10th, other than the ones named in this resolution, until all of said reports named herein are disposed of. ‘ Mr. APPLEGATE. I suppose that that resolution will have to lie over one day. My purpose is to test the sense of the Convention upon what I believe to be the main features the people of Kentucky want changed in the Constitution. First, to limit the Legislature in passing local and special laws. Second, to prevent counties and municipalities from voting an unlimited tax upon themselves. Third, to have this Convention determine whether or not the Legislature should be permitted to adopt the Australian ballot system. Fourth, to determine whether or not it is expedient to determine whether we shall have an open clause. I believe, when these four ques- tiens are settled, we have practically set- tled the questions the people of Kentucky are interested in; and it is for the pur- pose of having this determined, that we may look forward to an early adjourn- ment, that I offer the resolution. I be- lieve a great many questions that are coming up would be disposed of if these four questions were settled. I hope the Convention will consider that resolution carefully when it is put on its passage. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is of the opinion that thatis not intended as a stand- ing rule or to change any rule. and that it can be put on its passage now, but it requires a two-thirds vote to carry it. Mr. J ONSON. I do not think that res- olution ought to prevail. I am opposed to all cast-iron rules and gag-laws. We have under consideration now the report of an important Committee. There is no sort of intimation that we are going to get through with it before next Friday ; and to stop now in the midst of what we have been oper- atin g upon for three or four weeks, and take- up something else, it seems to me not only would not contribute to getting on with business, but would actually retard busi- ness. Mr. PETTIT. I move that that he referred to the Committee on Rules. A vote being taken on the motion. it was declared carried. Mr. QUICKSALL. I have a com~ niunication from Morgan county in regard to the indebtedness of that county, which I ask to be referred to the Special Committee, of which the Delegate from Anderson is Chairman. The PRESIDENT. The reference will be made. Mr. JONSON. Some days ago I offered an amendment to the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. I do not find that that amendment has been' printed. I ask to be allowed to ofl'er a sub- stitute for that amendment this morning. I am afraid it has been mislaid. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous consent the gentleman will be accorded that privilege. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I desire to offer a resolution to expunge from the Record all the action on yesterday relating to the printing and short-hand matter, and ask immediate action upon it. The PRESIIDENT. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings has already been approved, and the Chair holds that the res- olution is not in order. The only way to get at the Journal would be by motion to reconsider. Mr. PETTIT. I have a resolution con-- cerning the exemption of property from Itis the same resolution I offered I ask that it taxation. in Committee the other day. [October 29.- RESOLUTIONS. Wednesday,] TVVYMAN—MOORE—PETTIT. ‘ [October 29 go to the Committee on Revenue and Tax- ation without reading. Mr. TWYMAN. I offer a resolution. The resolution reads as follows: Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the State Treasurer, within ten days after the first day of January and July of each year, to publish a statement, under oath, in some newspaper published at the seat of govern- ment, showing the condition of the Treasury on said days; and it shall be the duty of the Governor, at such times as he may deem proper, to go to the Treasury, without giving notice to the Treasurer, and verify the cash balance as shown by the books, and to publish the fact that he has done so. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move we resolve ourselves into Committee of the Whole on the Special Order. Mr. PETTIT. And pending that, I move that all debate be closed at half-past 10 o’clock on the second section of the Bill under consideration in Committee of the Whole, and that the vote then be taken on the amendments pending and the section as amended. ' The PRESIDENT. The question will be first on the instruction. ' Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to ask unanimous consent, before that is put be- fore the House, to withdraw the report of the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion? The Chair hears none, and the per- mission is granted. Mr. BECKN ER. Does not that change the rule adopted the other day ‘? The PRESIDENT. It does not change any rule. It is a temporary matter with reference to this particular subject, and I think it is in order for the Convention to regulate matter in the consideration of the Committee of the Whole. The question will be on the resolution of the Delegate from Daveiss, which the Secretary will re- port. The resolution of Mr. Pettit reads as fol- lows: That all debate be closed at 10:30 o’clock this morning on the second section of the Bill under consideration in the Committee of the Whole. and that the vote be then taken on the amendments pending and on the section as amended. Mr. JONSON. I believe that we have a rule, which has been adopted heretofore, guaranteeing to every Delegate the right to five minutes’ speech upon any amendment he has offered. This certainly would be a modification and change of that rule, and under the rule of the Convention it cer- tainly ought to lie over. Mr. PETTIT. The Delegate from Mc- Lean is certainly mistaken in this. This is simply the control by the Convention of the time of debate for the Committee. There is no gag-law intended, for here, for three or four or five days, we have been upon this report. We have been upon this section, it seems to me, long enough for everybody to have been heard, and we ought to arrive at some method by which to close debate on this section. I will state to the Delegate from McLean, if he desires to further amend, I have no wish to cut off any one here. The PRESIDENT. Does not the reso- lution suspend the rule which allows five ‘ minutes’ debate on each paragraph or each amendment offered ? _ Mr. PETTIT. I think not. It "is the regular parliamentary proceeding that I presume is familiar to the President. The Convention has the power to limit debate or to control the action in Committee. This does not change that rule at all. ' Mr. KN OTT. My recollection of par- liamentary proceedings differs widely from that of the gentleman from Daveiss. My recollection of the proceedings in this mat-' ter is this: that every member has a right to make a five minutes’ speech upon the amendment proposed by him, and somebody has a right to reply for five minutes. Then another amendment may be made, and on that two speeches of five minutes each, and so on ‘ ad iafinifmn. Before we 'go into 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] PETTIT—GRAHAM. [October 29. Committee of the Whole the Convention can limit general discussion, but it cannot limit these five-minute debates without tak- ing some action on the resolution providing for them The PRESIDENT. The Convention has a right to suspend a rule. If the reso- lution changed a rule. it would have to lay ever one day; if it suspended a rule, it would require two-thirds majority to pass it. Mr. PETTIT. I simply want to call the attention of the'Delegate from Marion, as well as the President, to the fact that this gives the right of a five minutes’ de- bate on all amendments that may be intro— duced up to the time specified, and at that time it cuts off all further debate; and the gentleman from Marion will bear me wit- ness that this is the usual method of pro. ceeding. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that the resolution does not change any of the standing rules, but is a suspension of the rules. It is in order; but it will re- quire a two-thirds vote to carry it. The resolution was rejected. Preamble and Bill of Rights. The motion of the Delegate from Boyd was agreed to, and the Convention resolved itself into COMMITTEE OF THE .WHOLE For the further consideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, Mr. Young in the Chair. Various amendments were sent to the Clerk’s desk by the Delegates. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- port the next amendment. Amendment of the Delegate from Mar- shall county. Amend by substituting the following: That no man or set of men shall be enti- tled to exclusive, separate privileges from the community, and that no public emolu- ment shall he allowed or granted to any man or set of men, except to pay the em- ployes of the State for services actually and previously rendered; but the General Assembly shall grant charters, franchises and immunities under general laws, subject, however, to amendment, modification and revocation when deemed prudent, wise and just by the General Assembly. All prop- erty shall be equally and uniformly taxed for State, county and municipal purposes, ex- cept property used exclusively for free school purposes, property used entirely for Christian devotional services, church- houses in which to worship God, and all institutions used strictly and wholly for charitable purposes. The CHAIRMAN. Upon that the Del- egate will have five minutes. Mr. GRAHAM. I ofi'er that in lieu of the section of the Committee’s report, which embodies the amendment of the Delegate from Allen. In this amendment, accepted by that Committee, it only re- moves the settlement of the question indef- initely. “Except as shall be provided for in this Constitution” does not give us any light upon what will be in the Constitution. It does not itemize it. What I want this Convention to decide upon is, that no im- munity shall be granted except for services actually rendered, and that all property therein defined shall pay taxes, and that each and every one in this House shall know whether he wants those items con- tained in the amendment or not. Instead of leaving it to some other part of the Constitution, we will vote upon it now. We may disagree as much on that as upon the last part of the second clause. In this section of the Committee’s report it says “except as shall be provided for in the Constitution.” When We come to make propositions or suggestions as to just what we shall have, we may divide upon it. Here I set forth the propositions in detail, what I think we ought to have. In my judgment, this Constitution should leave the privileges to be modified under general laws; leave it to the Courts to say whether or not the object of the grantor has been complied with, so that the State will hold the power and right to correct all error; and then, that no public emolument shall be granted to any person except for BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Wednesday,] services actually rendered, and further, that all property except free school, church prop- erty, and property used only for charitable institutions, shall be taxed for State. county and municipal purposes. If they think in their wisdom this amendment of mine is right, they can vote for it; if not, I can’t help it. ” . Mr. KNOTT. I call the gentleman’s attention to one inadvertent omission. I think he used the word “ Christian” in exempting church property in his amend- ment. Is that so? _ Mr. GRAHAM. Yes, sir. Mr. KNOTT. Then I would suggest, that there is a large religious class who would not be exempted under that. Our Jewish friends have the, same rights as Christians, and their church property ought to be exempted as well as that of the Christian. I would put them all on an equality. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I think the Con- vention decided to leave the whole question of taxation to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation; and for that reason I think the gentleman’s amendment is in opportune. The question being taken, the amend- ment was not agreed to. The amendment of the Delegate from Pendleton was then read, and is as follows: Amend section 2 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights by striking out the word “public” in the second line. Mr. APPLEGATE. There have been some amendments adopted to that section already, and I do not care to urge this amendment in the shape it is. Therefore, I withdraw it for the present. The amendment proposed by the Dele- gate from McCracken was read, and is as follows: Amend section 1 of the old Bill of Rights ’by adding the following words thereto: “ Which shall be subject to regulation, amendment or repeal by law,” and as so amended, to be adopted as a substitute for the second section of the report of the Com- mittee. KNOT'l‘———GRAHAM———ALLEN. [October 29. Mr. BULLITT. Ihave no desire to figure conspicuously in the Convention. My sole object is to get a Constitution that will subserve the interests and will of the people. Section 2 of the report of the Committee, as it now stands, is this: “No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, except as shall be provided for in this Constitution; and no law shall be passed by the General Assem- bly making anyirrevocable grant or special privileges, franchises or immunity.” WVe simply say by that amendment that there may be a provision in some other part of the Constitution relating to this subject. That is all that is said—that some other pro- vision in some other part of the Constitu- tion may be made. ‘Ve know that without going through with these platitudes'lthat are presented in this second section. We know we can provide for the subject in some other part of the Constitution, and we do not need to be told of it; and that is all that is in this section. For that reason I desire to present this as. a substitute,.because there is nothing there. It has been plain that this has been the Pandora’s Box in which all the evils to theipeople have been cen- tered. Now the Legislature has limited powers. That is the Pandora’s Box. of the Legislature; but the limita- tions are not sufiicient. For the pur- pose of making the limitations sufficient, I 111']- ‘ have offered to add these words at the con- clusion: “ which shall be subject to regula- tion, amendment or repeal by law.” When we have added those words to it we have added the words that Judge Cooley, one of the ablest jurists of the United States, who has written upon the subject of Constitu- tional Limitations, says it appears to him to be the only words that are sufficient to retain the control of corporations to the State. The decision of the >Dartmouth College case takes the control out of the power of the State. New, putting these This is a limitation on the powers _ 6 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] words in the Constitution, Judge Cooley says, will give to the States the pow- er to control it; and, therefore, I de- sire to have those words added. I believe the people want protection in this line. I do not believe we want to stifle or cripple corporations while subserving the will of the people. But whilst we do not desire to cripple them, we do desire to control them. And if those words, as Judge Cooley says, will enable us to do that, I, for that reason, am anxious to have those words in the Constitution. There is no better place in the Constitution to put those words than right there, and when they are put there, I feel satisfied that we can go before the people, and tell them that here are words that have re- ceived the sanction of the ablest jurists of the country, and have received the inter- pretation of the highest courts in the country, and we, therefore, know they are protected. You put in words that have been interpreted, that have not been passed upon by able jurists, and we cannot say to the people that we know how the courts will interpret them; but if we give them these words, we can say to them that we know how they will affect the rights of the people, and, therefore, I hope that those words will be added to that section, and that that section be adopted in lieu of the section as reported by the Committee. The question being taken upon the sub- stitute of the gentleman from McCracken, it was rejected. The amendment of the Delegate from ’ Henry to this section was read, and is as follows: Amend by striking therefrom section Mr. CARROLL. It seems to me that there are but two satisfactory ways of deal- ing with this troublesome question; one is to let it stand as it was in the present Consti- tution and as reported by the Committee; the other is to eliminate it entirely, and limit the Legislative Department in other parts of the Constitution. BULLITT—CARROLL—RODES. ~ section ought to be eliminated. This section is admitted to have been productive of vicious legislation, but it has been construed by the Court so often that the evils fostered by it are pretty well understood. So far as I am understood, I would much rather leave it as it now stands than to amend it apd leave the amendment open. to the construction of the courts, which might make the matter worse than it now is. I do not believe that any man or set of men are entitled to any exclusive privileges. I believe it to be a fact well grounded in our polity, that under the law all men are equal. If that is a fact, this If the object is to permit certain persons to have certain exclusive privileges, the whole section ought to remain. If the intention is to deprive the Legislative Depart- ment of the right to grant exclusive privi- leges to certain persons, that section ought to be eliminated and another section substi- tuted under the head of the Legislative Department, prohibiting it from granting to any person any exclusive privileges. If it be a fact that all men, when they form a social compact, are equal, then it is plain that no man is entitled to any exclu- sive privileges. If it be a fact that all men, when they form a social compact, are not equal, then this section ought to be permit- ted to remain in order that those who are superior can be rewarded for their superior- ity. But I desire to make this further suggestion, if it not presumptuous in me, and that is, when gentlemen attempt to amend this section of the Bill of Rights, they are experlmenting with a very danger- ous agency. They are putting in ‘words and sections that have never received judicial construction, and that when Acon- strued, as they will be by the courts of this State, may 'be given a meaning entirely foreign to that intended by their authors- I trust gentlemen, before they vote for this section as amended, will carefully consider that proposition. Mr. RODES. I merely rise to call [October 29 . , BILL OF RIGHTS. 7 Wednesday] CARROLL—RODES—HARRIS. [October 29 . attention to and keep before the House con- stantly what has been done. The gentle- man from Allen moved to amend the report of the Committee by striking out the words " but in consideration of public services,” and the House deliberately voted that those words should be stricken out. Mr. CARROLL. Will you permit me a question‘? Mr. RODES. Certainly. Mr. CARROLL. The word “ public” is not in the amendment before the word -“ emolument.” Mr. RODES. Yes, sir. Mr. CARROLL. The gentleman cer- tainly knows that in the case of Common- wealth against Whipps, the Court of Ap- peals held that the grant to Whipps was not given in consideration of public ser- vices, and that part of the section did not " apply; that it was not a public service, but that the word “public” did not apply to -‘ privileges.” Mr. RODES. The first part does not :apply in this case. The first part of it has been striken out on motion of the Delegate from Allen, who accepted an amendment of the Delegate from Christian county to add “except as provided in this Constitu- tion;" and the section now stands that way, except that the latter part of the sixteenth section has been added. That is the law of 1856. The law of 1856 has been in exist- eence thirty-four years, and the “provided in this Constitution” will come up when we reach that. I said the Legislature ought to have some discretion; but the Convention did not agree with me, and took the discre- tionary power away. As you disagreed with me, I beg leave to say this section - now presents it in as good a shape as you can get it. Mr. HARRIS I have a substitute which I wish to offer for ‘section 2 as it now appears, and if the Convention will allow me, I will re 1d it here and comment upon it: ‘That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and that no man, or set of men, is entitled of right to any privileges or immunities denied to others under like circumstances, or upon like conditions; but in consideration of public services, the State may grant emolument to its servants and may also grant special and exclusive privi- leges in the performance of governmental duties required by law, but not so as to dis- criminate against or injure the rights of others. If I understand the parliamentary status of the section as it now reads, the whole difficulty in this section has been trans- ferred to another part of the Constitution. The great difficulty has been in giving the Legislature discretionary power without going too far; to give it some discretionary power, but at the same time to hedge it around with language that will make it just and right. Now, I want to call the attention of the Convention to the phrase- ology of this substitute. Take it up pro- vision by provision. “That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal.” That is a proposition that no one upon this floor will dispute. “That no man, or set of men, is entitled of right to any privileges or immunities denied to others under like cir- cumstances or upon like conditions.” That is a truism no gentleman will dispute. “But in consideration of public services the State may grant emoluments to its ser- vants." That is another proposition that is so plain and evidently proper that no gen- tleman on this floor will dispute it. Now under the section as it stands, the idea of public services having been stricken out altogether, the Legislature could not con- fer upon aSherifi’ the right to bear arms without conferring it upon all other citizens. I say the Legislature ought to have a dis- cretionary power, but that ought to be lim- ited by such phraseology as will prevent injustice to anybody. Therefore, I have provided that the State may grant emolu- ments to its servants, and may also grant special and exclusive privileges to those in the performance of governmental duties required by law. but not so as to discrimi- BILL OF‘RIGHTS. Wednesday,] APPLEGATE—HARRIS—CARROLL. [October 29 . nate against or injure the rights of others. Mr. APPLEGATE. Will the gentle- man permit me a question ‘? Mr. HARRIS. Certainly. Mr. APPLEGATE. How can the Leg- islature exempt or exonerate a certain class of people from militia or jury service under that section? Mr. HARRIS. There was nothing said about exemption. The idea of exempting property from taxation is intended. Mr. APPLEGATE. Would not that be aprivileged class that is not provided for? Mr. HARRIS. No. sir; that is em- braced under the first idea. “All men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and no man or set of men is entitled of right to any privileges or immunities de- nied to others under like circumstances or upon like conditions; but in consideration of public services the State may grant emoluments to its servants, and may also grant special and exclusive privileges to those in the performance of governmental duties required by law, but not so as to dis- criminate against or injure the rights of others.” That is the language I have used so as to hedge the power of the Legislature in and prevent wrong. If any gentleman can make it broader or better than that, I am perfectly willing for him to do so. Mr. CARROLL. That last section says: “No man, or set of men, is entitled of right to any privileges or Immunities denied to others under like circumstances or upon like conditions.” Suppose the Legislature granted a man or set of men special ex- clusive privileges. Would that be denying them to anybody else? Mr. HARRIS. They can’t do it unless they are performing a governmental duty required by law. Mr. CARROLL. The third section may contain that, but that section does not. Mr. HARRIS. The first part of the section lays down the true rule of gov- ernment, that all men are equal, and no At man is of right entitled to any privileges- That is a truism laid down. In order to- give the Legislature some discretionary power, which I think they ought to have,. I state, “ the State may grant emoluments to its servants.” We all admit that, and may also grant special and exclusive priv~ ileges to those in the performance of gov» ernmental duties required by law, but not so as to discriminate against or injure the rights of others. Mr. CARROLL. The point I am try- ing to make is this: If a separate or exclusive privilege is granted to one man, can it be said it has been denied to another man until he has applied for it‘? Your language is, that no privilege or emolu- ment shall be granted to one man that is- denied to others under like circumstances or like conditions. Mr. HARRIS. I don’t say " denied to others.” I say this: That no man, or set of men, is entitled of right to any privileges or immunities denied to others under like’ circumstances or like conditions. Mr. CARROLL. I understand that. Mr. HARRIS. That is a general propo- sition of law that is correct; but in order to provide that the Legislature may have some discretion in granting privileges, which I think they ought to _have, I under-— take to hedge it around by saying it must be in the performance of governmental duties required by law, but not so as to discriminate or interfere with the rights of ' others. Here the gavel fell. Mr. RODES. The first part of the gen— tleman’s proposition has been stated fully in the first section. The first part of sec~ tion 2 already says that no man or set of‘ men are entitled to separate exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the comm uni-- ty, but in consideration of public services. The whole question, therefore, depends- upon the use of those words. This (3011» vention shall hereafter settle that matter in the Corporation Department. BILL‘ OF RIGHTS. ' 9 Wednesday,] M CHENRY—BRONSTON—MONTGOMEBY. [October 29 . A vote being taken upon the adoption of the amendment, same was declared to have been rejected. The CHAIRMAN. The question now is upon the adoption of the second section of the report of the Committee on Pream- ble and Bill of Rights as amended. A vote being taken, the same was de— clared to have been adopted; Sections 5 and 6 of said report were, by unanimous consent, passed, because of the absence of the Delegate of the Seventh District of Louisville. Section 8 of the Committee’s report was read, as follows: “In prosecutions for the publication of papers investigating the official conduct of officers or persons in a public capacity, or where the matter pub- lished is proper for public information, the > truth thereof may be given in evidence; and in all indictments or trials for libel, the jury shall have a right, both in civil and criminal cases, to determine the facts, under the direction of the Court as to the law, as in other cases; and it shall be a sufficient defense in any case that the mat- ter published was true, and was published ' with good intent.” . The Delegate from Fayette county offered an amendment to said section, which reads as follows: Amend by adding, “provided the intent must be gathered from the publication, and not from extraneous sources.” Mr. MCHEN RY. I understood the gentleman from Louisville only asked that we pass sections five and six until last Mon- day. This is Wednesday. We have been see-sawing back and forth, and I hope we will take this thing up in order and get rid of it. The CHAIRMAN. It has already been passed by unanimous consent. Mr. McHENRY. ‘I have nothing to say then, for unanimous consent, of course, carries every thing. Mr." BRONSTON. You were looking at me, Mr. Chairman. I am not. the Delegate from Fayette. The CHAIRMAN. Does any: other Delegate desire to be heard upon the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Fayette? No other Delegate desiring to speak, a vote was taken upon the adoption of the said amendment, and the same was declared to have been rejected. The CHAIRMAN. Please report the next amendment. ' The next amendment, that of the Dele- gate from Adair, was reported, as follows : Strike from section 8 all that part thereof after the word “true,” in the eighth line of said section. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I don’t know of any means of judging what a man means except by what he does. I do not know of any legal means of determining whether a man, when he does a thing, does it with good intent or not. If a man publishes a thing, I do not know of any means of judging whether he did it with good or bad intent, except from the substance of what he published. If a man tells the truth, I think it is fair to presume he told the truth with good intention; if a man publishes a falsehood, the presumption is he published it with a bad intention. Every man is presumed in criminal and in civil proceed- ings to have intended the natural conse- quences of what he says or does. That is the presumption always indulged. Sup- pose you were to institute a civil suit against a man for libel under this section, ' and he would plead that it is true, and that it was published with good intent. It would be a very easy matter for him to prove the truth of it if it was true, but how he would go about proving his intentions, I cannot conceive. I do not know of any Way of judging as to what his intentions were except by what he did and said, and attaching to what he said the natural con- sequences of it. I think, in addition to that, while there might be hardships arise from a man telling the truth from in- formation, as all our pends on the truth of what we hear information de- ‘ 10 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] Romans 1; and read, and all our transactions in life have to be based upon the truth or falsity of what we hear that a man on all occasions ought to be allowed to tell the truth, that it can be presumed that the truth will do no harm, and the truth ought to, under all circumstances, be allowed to be published, whether it damages anybody or not. Some one has suggested that a man might be a candidate for oflice, and be ruined by another man maliciously publishing the truth about him. I think that when a man is a candidate for an office, the people of the Commonwealth have a right to know the truth about that man, whether it occurred yesterday or fifty years ago, because they have a right to judge the man by every thing he has done. Therefore, I don’t think there should be any Constitutional inhibition upon telling the truth on all occasions, and, therefore, I propose to strike out that part of this section which says the intention shall be good. Mr. RODES. This will cut a very im- portant figure in this law, and I think, in the interest of good order and justice and fairness, it should stand just as it is. Juries are to judge of intent like they do of malice. I disagree with the gentleman on that. The common sense of this Conven- tion will teach them that the truth ought not at all times be told. The vote being taken on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Adair, the same was declared to have been rejected. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the next amendment. The amendment of the Delegate from Larue was then read. Mr. TWYMAN. I withdraw ‘that amendment, as it has just been voted on. The amendment of the Delegate from Harlan was read, as follows: ’ Amend section eight by striking out all after the word “ cases ” in the seventh line. Mr. FORRESTER. I only want to say, TWYMAX—FORRESTER. [October 29 . that in prosecutions for libel, matter pub- lished in newspapers, I am willing that the truth shall be given to the jury; but this says in all indictments or trials for libel the jury shall have a right, iniboth civil and criminal cases, to determine the facts under the direction of the Court as to _the law as in other cases. Now, what does published mean? If a man goes out on the street and utters some libelous matter, it is pub- lished. It has not only reference to publi- cation by newspaper men, but to what is spoken. I am willing that the truth of that be given in defense, but I am unwilling to go on and say what effect the truth shall have. It puts the man who utters the libel to hunting up an ofl’ense; he must under- take to prove that it is true. The intent should be judged from the words uttered and the circumstances under which he said it. The vote being taken upon the amend- ment of the Delegate from Harlan, the same was declared to be rejected. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer a substitute for the report of the Committee, section 10 of the old Bill of Rights. I merely desire to ofl'er it for the purpose of being heard on it hereafter. Mr. RODES. I wish to call the atten- tion of the Convention especially to this matter. The change made in this section. as differentiated from the old Bill of Rights, is about this: “The juryr shall have a right, both in civil and criminal cases, to determine the facts. under the direction of the Court as to the la w. as in other cases; and it shall be a sufficient offense in any case that the matter published was true and was published with good intent.” Now, the present Constitution provides: That printing presses shall be free to every person 'who undertakes to examine the proceedings of the General Assembly, or any branch of government, and no law shall ever be made to restrain the right thereof. The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the in- valuable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, write, and print on any BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 Wednesday,] _.___,__q RODEé—BRONSTON—BECKHAM. [October 29‘. subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty. Under the present Constitution, as you will observe, the jury shall have the right 'to determine the law and fact, under the direction of the Court, as in other cases. The question comes up as to whether that language ought to be changed, and whether the jury shall have the right v"to determine the law and facts or not. Cooley, in his works. says he supposes the jury would be governed on the trial by the Court, and I take it that that is the meaning of our Code of Practice. Sections 225 and 235 of the Code have been the law for thirty- .six years. The Court shall, on the motion of either party, and before any argument to the jury, instruct the jury on the law applica- ble to the case, which shall always be given in writing. SEO. 23-3. All questions of law arising during the trial shall be decided by the court, and the jury shall be bound to take the decisions of the Court on points of law as the law of the case. Now, section 10 of the present Constitu- tion says: “The jury shall 'have the right to determine the law and facts as in other cases.” But the Code of Practice seems to restrict that to instructions of the Court Now the question is, as the law is at pres- ent, that the jury are bound by the direc_ tions of the Court; why say the juries are to determine the law and facts as in other cases when they mean to say that the jury are to determine the facts and the law un- der the direction of the Court? Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to know if there has ever arisen any difliculty in your practice in construing that‘? Mr. RODES. I have never had any myself. , Mr. BRONSTON. Do you know of any difficulty in Kentucky as to that? Mr. RODES. 1 do not. Mr. BECKHAM. 1 would like t0 ask a the gentleman if it is not intended by the report of the Committee to take from the juries and lodge with the Court a power the juries are supposed to have under the law ? Mr. RODES. I propose by this Mr. BECKHAM. And I would also ask the gentleman if the juries in this State have abused the power they now have‘? Mr. RODES. In answer to the gentle- man from Lexington and the gentleman from Shelby, I may say I am not aware that this question has ever been presented to the Court of Appeals; but ‘if they mean to say that the jury shall have the right to de— termine the law without regard to the direc- tion of the Court, why not say so? If they mean to say the jury shall be governed by the direction of the Court, it is easy to say so. We have simply put in this section 8 the law as we understand it and as it ought to be. ' Mr. BRONSTON. In the statement just made, you meant a simple declaration of law. I will ask you if it is the law of Kentucky to-day that the defendantj is required to show a want of malice where the truth has been shown ? Mr. RODES. I don’t think that ques- tion arises here. Mr. BRONSTON. Do they your report, require, not only in the civil but also in criminal cases, that both the good intent and the truth shall be proven ‘? Mr. BODIES. I don’t give that con- struction to it. Mr. BRONSTON. Don’t you provide “in all indictments or trials for libel, the jury shall have a right, both in civil and criminal cases, to determine the facts,” and don’t you then provide, making it applica- ble to both civil and criminal cases, “it shall be a suflicient offense in any case that the matter published is true, and was published with good intent?” If that be the case, have you not contended, and don’t you now contend, that the mere truth is not always sufficient? Is it the law, as you are declaring it, that in a civil action, where suit is brought for damages, the not, in 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wedn esday,] RODES—BRONSTON—BECKNER. [October 29 , defendant not only must prove the truth, but also prove the absence of malice by showing good intent‘? Mr. RODES. I don’t think the language bears the construction the gentleman from Lexington gives it. It simply means, no matter what the case is, if there was truth and good intention, the defendant goes free, leaving the law to be expounded as to the want of malice, etc, Here the gavel fell. Mr. BRONSTON. I move the gentle- man‘s time be extended. By unanimous consent this was done. Mr. RODES. I only take it because the time allotted to me was taken up byquestion s. The first question presented is, do you mean to say the jury shall have control of the law and the facts, although the Court may direct them‘? If you do, let it stand as the gentleman suggests; but if you mean to say that the jury shall be controlled by the Court as to the law, take our suggestion and our language. But there is another suggestion to be made by way of explanation. You will see by this that all cases are put on an equality. I heard Roger Hanson, sitting in that seat in 1853, raise this question before, the Legislature, and make as powerful a speech as could be made. He made it, though, specially as to criminal cases, and he made as powerful an appeal as could possibly be made. He contended that the jury should have control of the law as well as the facts. The Legislature differed with him, and this has been the law ever since. If this is the law as to murder cases and all such cases, why not make it applicable to libel? Why make a different law in cases of libel from any other cases‘? If a man is sued for libel, and the case comes up, let him stand on the same platform that everybody else stands on. I understood the gentleman to say the other day that he regarded libel as more important than any thing else, because a man’s character’s was involved, and, in that sense, he made the question paramount to all others. In my opinion, a libel case has no claim which is superior or paramount to any other case. No logical reason can be given why such a case should be regarded as superior. Mr. BECKN ER. Don’t the Committee add to the burden imposed on a defendant, to show that what he spoke or wrote was true, to show also that he did it with good intent ? Mr. RODES. I don’t think we changed the law. This clause is inserted in behalf of a man‘ who spoke with good intent. We provide that in any case, if he proves the truth and good intent, he shall go clear. Mr. BECKNER. When a man is sued for damages you make it that the defendant must plead not only the truth, but also good. intent. Mr. RODES. I don’t think it goes that far. We simply say the truth may he pleaded, and the truth and good intent shall acquit the man. And how are you going to prove intent? How do you prove malice ‘? Mr. BRONSTON. It seems to me that you require the defendant to prove the truth and good intent when the truth should be suflicient. Mr. APPLEGATE. Do you hold that it is the law in criminal libel now that the truth is a suflicient defense‘? Mr. BRONSTON. No. If the Con- vention will pardon me, I would like to correct an impression which seems to have been made upon the distinguished Chair- man of the Committee. I did state, in the few remarks I had the honor to make be- fore this Convention, that I regarded libel as worse than murder, and I stated there was difl‘iculty always surrounding a person libeled in protecting himself from the libeler that don’t obtain in prosecutions for murder. I will not consume time on that, but I do want to call the attention of the Com‘mittee to one or two things. In the first place, it is not fair for me to make this assumption before this intelligent body, BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘ 13 Wednesday,] BRONSTON—APPLEGATE. [October 29 . that unless some reason can be given from practice and experience as to why a change should be made in so important a provision :as this, we should not hesitate to retain .it. I asked the distinguished Delegate, who is Chairman of the Committee, if in his long, lucrative and successful practice there had ever arisen any difficulty on the ,part of the Court in construing this question, and he said no. I asked him again had there ‘ever been any complaint on the part of the citizens at large or on the part of the press? He answered this in the negative. Now let me call your attention to the first important ‘change the Committee undertakes to make. In the first place, the section of the old Bill -of Rights is confined exclusively to criminal prosecutions for libel. It has nothing to do with civil action. I assume that there is not a lawyer on this floor who does not ‘understand that the general jurisprudence of Kentucky has settled the question that in a civil action for libel, when the defend- ant pleads and proves the truth, it is in- cumbent on the plaintiff to prove malice. The burden is then shifted from the defendant. But the Committee changes that entirely by saying it shall be a good defense that the matter was true and pub- lished with good intent. It must be both. So when a defendant came to make his defense in a civil action he could not acquit himself by simply proving the truth, but must also prove the absence of malice. I ask you the simple question if you are pro- posing to change the law‘ thus radically, give us a reason for it. The old Constitu- tion applied it to criminal cases. Mr. APPLEGATE. Under the law as it now stands, if a man is indicted for libel, is the truthfulness of it a complete defense? Cannot a defendant be convicted notwith- standing he proves the truth ? Mr. BRONSTON. Yes, sir, that is true. The present Constitution says the jury shall have the right to determine the law and facts. I understand the Chairman to say that there is some confusion about that; that you can’t tell whether the jury shall deter- mine the law and the facts, or whether the jury shall determine the facts and the Court the law. If you will pardon the presump- tion on my part, I will venture to explain. It is perfectly clear. No difficulty has arisen in my practice as Prosecuting At- torney. I think the Courts of Kentucky or anywhere else have a right to apply the facts to the law, and determine whether the jury can take the case. Under this section of the Committee’s report the Court cannot do it. They have no right to say these words are libelous and these are not. The Courts must define the law, and then allow I the jury to determine whethep or not the words spoken constitute a libel. In other words, it takes the power away from the Court by primary instruction to say that those words are libelous and those are not, and that this or that man must be convicted. There is great reason for that. I cited you a case the other day. Suppose it is the Court itself that is libeled, and the Court wants to protect itself, and the man who is criticising the Court happens to be poor and without friends. The Court, if it has the power as in other cases to determine the law, can say, “under the law these words are libelous, and, therefore, you must be punished.” The very purpose of the law is to allow the whole question to be deter- mined by twelve men as to whether or not the law has been violated. The Court 'can give the definition, and the jury from the definition determine whether or not the law has been violated. Now, as to the question asked by the gentleman from Pendleton, of course, under an indictment for libel, the truth cannot be given as a defense. It is only in litigation. The jury take the whole case, and if they come to the conclusion that the defendant spoke the truth maliciously, they can punish him. That is the law to-day, and why should it not remain? This matter has come specially within my eonsidem_ tion, and I will say that the press on the 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] BRONsTON—YOUNG-—RODES. [October 29, one hand will be damaged by the change because they will have to assume an ad- ditional burden, and the citizen on the other hand will be damaged by the change, because you open a wide field for the Courts to determine what is meant by good intent. Under the law, as it is to-day, both press and public seem to be satisfied. The Chairman here resigned the Chair to the Delegate from Ohio county. Mr. YOUNG. It seems to me that this is a subject vital to the liberty of speech and liberty of the press. We must remem- her that in the interpretation of this Con- stitution we will neither have the ability nor the learning of the Delegate from Warren to explain what is meant. When the Courts come to interpret, they are going to take what you said and not what you mean. What we mean must be de- termined by the words we use. If the gentlemen do not intend to apply this language to civil and criminal cases. why do they add at the end “that it shall be a suflicient defense in any case,” showing they did intend to apply it to all sorts of cases? As far as I am concerned, I believe the’ section of the old Bill of Rights should be substituted any- how, or if this is adopted, the “ published with good intent” should be stricken out. I am well aware that many cases could arise in which the publication of the truth would work wrong, but there are more cases where greater wrong will arise if you at- tempt to muzzle the press. Suppose the man who wrote the article is dead, how can you prove the intent? It may be abso- lutely impossible to do it, and the only safe rule, in my judgment, is to allow a man to plead the truth and stand or fall by it. If the re are circumstances in which the publi- cation of the truth is injurious, let the man bear that misfortune. We would have a thousand times more difficulty and a thousand times more trials if you placed this additional burden upon the press or the man to prove good intent. We have had a law under which we have gotten along well. There has been no objection or complaint about it. This introduces a dan- gerous element, which will put the press or the State in such a condition that they will be afraid to tell the truth because it may be difficult for them to prove the good intent. Now the truth goes in mitigation; but if the press or the man has to satisfy the jury as to his good intent, you impose a burden no one is willing to assume, and you in fact destroy the liberty of the press. Mr. RODES. The gentleman from Louisville seems to think it is imposing on the press an additional burden. I may be mistaken, but I speak in the presence of so many lawyers I will be corrected if I am; but I say the language used in this eighth section does not change the law. You have the right now to plead the truth. What is the efl'ect of that truth‘? The presumption is he speaks the truth with good intent, unless something else is shown. We have simply said, no matter what the state of case, if you prove good intent, it will clear you; it is a shield in all events. The gen‘ tleman inquired. suppose the man who wrote the article is dead, how are you going to prove any thing? I don’t understand how you get such a case. If a man dies, such a cause of action dies with it. Mr. YOUNG. Suppose the reporter who wrote the article for a newspaper is dead? Mr. RODES. It is good intent on the part of the paper, and not on the part of the reporter. The supposition don’t apply. I can explain about the difference between this and other cases. A libel case is differ- ent from any thing else in the world. There is nothing else like it. Mr. YOUNG resumed the Chair. Mr..BRONSTON. You do admit that under the old Bill of Rights the jury had the power, as I stated? Mr. RODES. The language is that way, but Cooley says the jury would be governed by the court. If Cooley is right BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 15' Wednesday,] BROXSTON—RODES—PHELPS. [October 29. that they are governed by the law as an- nounced by the court, why not say so. You say the jury shall determine the law and facts as in other cases. Who was to determine in the other cases? Mr. BRONSTON. That is not the lan- guage. That section says the jury shall have a right, in both criminal and civil cases, to determine the facts under the direction of the Court as to the law, as in other cases. Has not the Court got to de- termine the law and the jury the facts ?_j Mr. RODES. I may have a word wrong; but it is all before the Committee, and they understand it. He asked the dis- tinct question, why put it in the Constitu- tion that the jury can determine it at all? I can explain historically how that hap- pened. I tried to show in the first speech I made how Mr. Fox happened to pass his law. It was the most difiicult thing in the world to arrange it so that a jury could bringin a verdict of guilty or not guilty, without regard to what the Court said. The Courts were in the habit of saying what were or what were not libel, and of requiring the jury to pass on distinctly and categorically the questions of fact. To se- cure some liberty for the people he got that law passed, which you all know about. In the same year the Fox law was passed we passed a Constitution for the State of Ken- tucky. Look at the Bill of Rights of Vir- ginia in 1776. They haven’t got this sec- tion we have in section 10. They haven’t got it at all, if I recollect right. That was an advance made by Kentucky, which was the first State in the Union to make the ad- vance; but they didn’t advance fully up to the importance of the matter and look it face to face. They put it just this way, that the jury under the directions of the Court shall determine the law and the facts as in other cases. If you examine it closely you cannot find another case exactly like the libel case. In murder and all other felony cases, and in civil cases, from the highest to the lowest, the jury determine the facts under the direction of the Court when he expounds the law. That is what this says. A vote being taken, the substitute of the Delegate from Lexington was adopted. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire to offer an amendment. “Strike out after the word ‘all’ the words ‘indictments for,’ and insert the words ‘cases of.’ ” It seems to me that the objection to section 10 of the old Bill of Rights is, that thelanguage only applies in cases of indictment. By striking out the words “indictments for” it will read: “And in all cases of libel,” instead of “all indictments for libel,” and that would make it apply to criminal and civil cases. I would prefer to adopt section 8 of the Committee’s report, if it were not for these objectionable words, “ and was pub- lished ‘with good intent.” Just what weight a jury would give those words when expounded by lawyers cannot be foreseen. Mr. BRONSTON. If the amendment ofi'ered by the Delegate should prevail, it would strike out the very essence of the section. This is only intended to apply to criminal prosecutions, and not to civil cases. The amendment, on'a vote, was lost. Mr. NUN N. I desire to offer an amend- ment to the substitute of the gentleman from Lexington. The amendment reads: Amend by adding, “and it shall be a sufficient defense in any case that the mat— ter published was true and was published with good intent.” A vote being taken upon the amendment, it was declared to have been lost. A vote being taken on the substitute of the Delegate from Lexington, the same was adopted. Mr. APPLEGATE. I suggest that the Delegate from Louisville is now present, and desires to be heard on sections 5 and 6, and I move that we go back to those sec- tions. ' The CHAIRMAN. There being no 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] MCDERMOTT. [October 29. objection, we will go back to those sec- tions. Section 5 was read, and is as follows: All elections shall be free and equal. The amendment of Mr. McDermott was read, and is as follows: Resolved, That section 5 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights be stricken out. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment ofl'ered by the ‘Delegate from the Fifth Louisville District. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I am very grate- ful to the members of the Convention for their indulgence in delaying this matter until I could be heard. As I said on a for- mer occasion nearly all I care to say on this subject, and as I have a very bad cold, I shall be very brief. All I desire to say is this: This sentence, as it appears in the present Bill of Rights, is general and vague, and may be easily distorted hereafter by Courts to destroy useful legislation by the General Assembly. The old phrase may mean almost any thing you please. You give to the Courts almost absolute discre- tion over your election laws; and the Leg- islature never will know when it is passing an act whether or not it will be in conflict with this section of your Bill-of Rights. What the gentleman from Warren said as to another matter I say as to this: If you know what you mean, say it; if you do not know, then do not say any thing at all. I sug- gested sometime ago, as an amendment, that you put in the Bill of Rights merely that language which the Courts of Illi- nois, Pennsylvania and Kentucky have said the present section means, name- ly: “That all elections shall be free from intimidation, and that all legal votes shall be of equal weight.” If that be the meaning of your words, why not ex- press your meaning clearly? Of course, in the English Declaration of Right, the phrase meant something. The followers of William and Mary meant simply that the King should not put troops around the polls. But in this State there is no danger that the Governor will surround our polls with soldlers, and the words “free and are full of doubtful You should speak in clear tones. You should not leave needless problems to the equal” meanings. Courts. This thing of Judges making law has become, to some extent in these United States, a nuisance; and I think you should in your Constitution state your meaning with such clearness that the Courts can state with absolute certainty of any sec- tion: fhis is the meaning. Do not have your Judges divided on this subject as they were in Illinois and Pennsylvania. Al- though our Court of Appeals decided that a registration law for the City of Louisville is not contrary to this provision of the Bill of Rights, yet several of your ablest Judges have said that that decision was erroneous, and it may yet be reversed. Another section of the old Constitution might be used to define the meaning attempted to be expressed in this section: “The privilege of free suffrage shall be supported by laws regulating elections, and prohibiting, under adequate penalties, all undue influence thereon, from power, bribery, tufmult or other improper prac- tices.” That is in a section of the present Constitution. That language has stood the test as much as this language-under dis- cussion. The larger phrase is just as good, and it is much more explicit and much more easily understood. Vague expression causes confusion of thought. Such lanf guage accomplishes nothing, or gives to the Courts absolute power to legislate upon any matter that comes up hereafter. The Committee on Elections will report a sec- tion to embody all provisions on the subject of election, and you can, if you choose to follow some of the other States, put that old language in the other section. I simply stand here for fair elections and for lan- guage that cannot be distorted hereafter. My first motion was to strike out the section and to insert this; “All elec__ BILL OF RIGHTS. 1'7 l-undue W’ednesday] Ronrzs— M CDERMOTT—BURNAM. [October 29 . tions shall be free from intimidations, Courl" to be unconstitutiohah but which the and an legal Votes shall have equal Court of Appeals decided constitutional. weight.” will offer as a substi- Mr. RODES. I do not say that lawyers tute (in order that you may vote for _your choice) that you strike out the old phrase and insert this language taken from .another part of the Constitution: “The privilege of free suffrage shall be sup- _ported by laws regulating elections, and ‘prohibiting under adequate penalties all influence thereon from power, bribery, tumult or other improper prac- ‘tices.’’ Mr. RODES. According to the gentle- man’s substitute that he has offered, you take a half dozen lines or words to ex- plain what has been explained here in one. We have had this particular clause in all three Constitutions. We have never had any difficulty about its explanation hither- to. We certainly know the meaning of the word “free.” We know what the word “equal” means. It means that no- ‘body shall have any paramount superiority or claim at the poll against any other 'man. You cannot make it clearer. The 'more we dabble with it the muddier we make it. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Your meaning may be clear, but a great Judge like Judge Sharswood differs from you. Mr. RODES. I only say we have had .as great Judges as Judge Sharswood, and we have had them to pass on all manner of laws, and we have had as good lawyers in ‘the State of Kentucky as Sharswood, and we have never found any difiiculty with it. The gentleman from Lexington the other day asked, “ Did you ever hear of any difficulty about it, or did you ever know of any difficulty or controversy about it ? ” I .say there has been done. Mr. McDERMOTT. Do you say there has been no difiiculty? There has been a ‘case brought to the Court of Appeals in- volving the registration law of the city‘of Louisville, which was declared by the lower have agreed on it, but we have had no dif- ficulties. We have had those cases coming here from the Court of Appeals, and we had difficulties in that sense; but in the sense of determining the law and settling it, we have had no difliculties. A vote being taken on the amendment of Mr. McDermott, it was rejected. The CHAIRMAN. ‘The question is on the amendment of the Delegate from the Fifth District of Louisville, to strike out the section and insert the words, “all elections shall be free from intimidation, and all legal votes shall have equal weight.” Mr. DEHAVEN. I call for a division of the question. Mr. BURNAM. The word “equal,” in its application here, is a good deal broader than the gentleman proposes. Now, there is involved in the word, according to my idea, the idea also of uniformity. I think that elections ought to be held not one day in one county, and two days or three days in another county. They ought to be equal in that sense. They ought not to be during certain hours in one county and different hours in another. They ought to be equal in that respect. I think that some one remarked in the Constitutional Convention of 1849, John W. Stevenson, I believe, who was afterwards Governor of the State and Senator in Congress, that in the Commonwealth of Virginia elections were held in some counties for two or three days, and in others limited to one. I think that these words, “that all elections shall be free from intimidation from the power of military force,” would be covered by that single word; and every other diffi- culty growing out of what I have said about the lack of uniformity will be all embraced by the word “equal,” so far from desiring a large number of words in the Bill of Rights the fewer and the sim- pler, the better. 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] Mr. MCDERMOTT. I will say another word on this subject. We have here two of the most distinguished lawyers in this House differing on the meaning of the lan- guage in question, and both of them are supporting it on the ground that the mean- ing is clear. I am perfectly willing to admit that the lawyers of Kentucky are all equal to Judge Sharswood. I am willing to admit that every thing in Kentucky is as good as any thing elsewhere-that every thing here is, in fact, better than elsewhere; that the mud is muddier, that the air is purer, and the mountains higher; and no man shall outstrlp me in extravagant praise of this State, its lawyers and Judges, its horses and women; but, with all that, every lawyer in this House knows that when two great lawyers of this body differ in the same minute about the same lan- guage in the Constitution, it is not as plain as they would have you believe. The gen- tleman from Warren says this language is perfectly plain; that it does not mean uni- formity. The gentleman from Madison helps him out, and says it does mean uni- formity, and the meaning is perfectly plain. Mr. RODES. I did not say it was uni- form. It embraces more than that. III‘. MCDERMOTT. You do think it means uniformity? Mr. RODES. Yes, and I think it means more than that. Mr. MCDERMOTT. The Supreme Court of this State has decided that it did not mean uniformity. Mr. RODES. I say it does not mean uniform—it means that, and means more than that. Mr. MCDERMOTT. He says, at any rate, it means that much. The Supreme Court of this State has said it did not mean that much. The Supreme Court, in Mc- Clelland vs. Commonwealth, decided that “equal” does not mean “uniform;” that Louisville might have a registration law even when the rest of the State did not RonEs—McDEaMo'rr. [October 29 . have it. The gentleman from Madison held that equal does mean uniform, and the Supreme Courts of Pennsylvania, Illi- nois and Kentucky differ from him. You have here two distinguished gentlemen on this floor difi‘ering on this subject. gentlemen of the Convention, if you know what you mean, say it; and if you do not know exactly what you mean, do not say any thing. The distinguished gentlemen pre- ceding me differ from each other, or they differ from the highest Court of the State. New, Within a few weeks I have heard one of ' the judges of your highest Court question that very case of McClelland vs. Common- wealth. Here you have a source of trouble. and you have not the moral courage to march up and say what you mean. You declare in the Bill of Rights in favor of things you cannot agree upon. It only shows confusion of thought and a lack of confidence in your judgment. I may be wrong, and my constituents may have made a mistake in sending me here, but one thing is certain, unless you convincex my judgment you cannot get my vote, and if you cannot give me a reason you cannot get my support for a principle or provision, though it is in three Constitutions of the State. In the debates of the last Constitu- tional Convention, when this subject was up, some one said: “ Why use that language about free and equal elections?” and one of the distinguished gentlemen arose and said the phrase was in the last Constitu- tion. That was enough for his colleagues. You borrowed thGflNOI‘dS “all elections shall be free” from the English people, and in taking it from them you spoiled it. They knew what they meant, and you do‘ not seem to know, and yet you repeat it_ The gentleman asks: “Have we had any trouble?” I know there was trouble on this subject when Louisville’s registration law was under fire. And don’t you know, from the language used by the gentleman from Madison, that if he had been on the bench he would have decided that the’ BILL OF RIGHTS - 19 Wedn esday,] MCDERMOT'l‘~——RODES-—PHELPS. [October 29 , registration law of Louisville was uncon- stitutional? March up fairly to this ques- tion. Say what you mean, and I will vote for it if it is any thing reasonable; and if you do not know what you mean, you cannot get me to vote for it simply because the Delegates of three other Constitutional Conventions have used it. Mr. RODES. One word: As to my differing with my friend from Madison, I don’t understand that I do. Perhaps the superior sagacity of the gentleman from Louisville enabled him to find out that I did, but I am not aware that I differed from him. The gentleman from Madison said the word “equal” was a broad word, and meant a great deal; meant fairness, freedom from intimidation, and every thing else that would secure Mr. McDERMOTT. I beg the gentle- man’s pardon. I afterward conceded that he did not differ from the gentleman from Madison, but said that both of the gentle- men difi’ered from the Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Mr. RODES. I have not read that opinion, and do not know any thing about it; but I think it is very common for the bar of Kentucky to differ with the Court of Appeals. The decisions of the Court of Appeals are not always final, for they over- rule them themselves very frequently; neither do I know what the registration law of Louisville is, or how far this word may be applicable to it. I do say, how- ever, that we have had this in three con- secutive Constitutions of the State of Kentucky, and have had it for a long time, and there has been no particular difiiculty about it. I do not say that litigation may not have arisen about it, or that Courts may not be called upon to determine it, but it has a common sense, plain meaning; and whether we differ from the gentleman, or whether we have moral courage to stand up and face it or not, or whether we know our duties or not, or whether our constituents understand us or not, I think we are on an equality with the young gentleman from Louisville, and ii is not for him to call us to an account before his judgment bar to know what we shall do. The question being put on the adoption of the substitute of Mr. McDermott, the same was declared lost. Mr. McDERMOTT. I have another motion, and will not detain the Convention more than a moment. I will only say this: Under section twelve every man is guaranteed the right of trial by jury in criminal cases, and this section six, there- fore, is not necessary to secure a trial by jury in criminal cases. It is, therefore‘, only applicable to civil cases, and I am willing to leave it to the Legislature to regulate trials by jury just as I leave to them other questions of practice. The reasons that existed for the trial by jury in the old despotic governments do not exist here— The CHAIRMAN. You are not argu- ing the question before the House. Mr. McDERMOTT. I beg pardon. I was acting under a misapprehension. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the adoption of the fifth section, as reported by the Committee. A vote being taken thereon, the section was adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Report the sixth section. The section was read, and is as follows: The ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, subject to such modifications as may be authorized by this Constitution. Mr. ZACK PHELPS._ I offer an amendment to said section by adding thereto the following : In all civil cases pending in courts. The said amendment was afterwards withdrawn, there being other amendments in advance of it. The amendment offered by the Delegate from the county of Crittenden (Mr. N unn) to said section was read, and is as follows: Strike out the words “ancient mode,’ 20 . BILL OF RIGHTS. Ivednesdayg] NUNN—BULLITT—WASHINGTON. [October 29 , after the word “ the,” in the'first line, and insert in lieu thereof the word “right;” and also the first three words in the second line, namely, “the right thereof,” so that said section will read as follows: “The right of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and remain inviolate, subject to such modi- fications as may be authorized by this Constitution.” Mr. NUNN. As I said on another occa- sion, I do not see any necessity for these two words, “ancient mode,” in the Bill of Rights. Reserve the sacred right of trial by “jury, and that is enough, and in the other departments, in the judicial depart- ments of this Constitution, say a man who . is being tried for his life or liberty shall have a jury of twelve n.en. and leave it to the Legislature in all other cases to say as to the number of jurors, or as to whether there shall be a unanimous verdict or not. That is all I desire to say. Mr. BULLITT. The only judicial in- terpretation that I know of the language used in that section comes from Massachu- setts. There, upon deliberate consideration by the Supreme Court, they held that the right to be convicted by two juries—first by the grand jury and second the trial jury —was what was meant by the ancient mode of trial by jury. That is one of the rights that no man shall be convicted of a crime or a felony without the trial of two juries; or without two trials, one by the grand jury and the other by the trial jury, and I think we ought to retain that in our Constitu- tion. If it means that, and if the Court so held in that case, and you will find it in ‘Vharton’s Reports, that is the meaning of he ancient mode of trial by jury. There are other things connected with it, it is true; but to strike out and to destroy the r‘ght of, a man to be indicted by a grand jury before he can be convicted by a trial jury, I am opposed to. A vote being taken upon the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Crit- tenden, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted thirty-six in the af- firmative and thirty-four in the negative, and the amendment was declared adopted. Mr. WASHINGTON. I wish to say the substitute adopted is perfectly satisfac- tory to me. It is almost identical with my own amendment, which I therefore with- draw. I voted for the amendment just of- fered. A vote being taken on the adoption of the section as amended, the same was de- clared adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Report the next section. The section was read, and is as follows: The people shall be secured in their per- sons, houses, papers and possessions from unreasonable search and seizure, and no warrant shall issue to search any place or seize any person or things without de- scribing them as nearly as may be, nor without probable cause supported by oath or aflirmation . The amendment of the Delegate from Barren was read, as follows: Strike out the Word “unreasonable,” in line two of said section, and add after “ seiz- ure” these words: “Except by warrant of law.” Mr. TWYMAN. I have an amend- ment, as follows: Amend section 9 of the Bill of Rights, as reported by the Committee, by adding after the word “ afiirmation,” the following words, viz: “Of some person competent to testify as a witness.” Mr. BRONSTON. I would merely suggest that if these words are added to the report of the Committee—and I regard the report of the Com- mittee as unexceptionable to this section --it would lead to confusion as to what is meant by the words, “person competent to testify as a witness.” Under the section as it now is, of course if a man is not compe- tent to testify, he would not be competent to make an oath or affirmation. Therefore, the words mean all they could mean if these additional words were added. Mr. TWYMAN. I simply wish to say BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Wednesday,] ALLEN—PUGH—MUIR. [October 29 . on the amendment that this matter was up for discussion a few days ago in which this objection was made to the addition of these words: that a person who had been con- victed and disqualified to testify as a wit- ness might be prohibited from making an affirmation to procure a search warrant; and I take it for granted that none of us would be willing that a man should go be- fore an officer or magistrate and make an afiidavit and procure a search warrant to have our houses searched who would not be a competent witness to testify in a Court to identify the property when it was taken from the house; and I think he should be a qualified person to testify as a witness in a Court before he is permitted to make any affirmation or oath to procure that warrant that would thus cast a reflection upon some- body’s good name. Consequently, I think there should be some qualification. Your statute makes no qu ihtication. This sec- tion stands alone, and y > 1 look to this sec- tion alone for the authority to procure a search warrant, and it should certainly‘ define who shall make this afl'irmation or oath. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I would suggest to the Delegate from Larue that one difficulty is, that by his amendment the question of the competency of a witness would fre- quently have to be decided upon by persons who do not know much about the law on the'subject, and I suggest that the word unreasonable carries a very large meaning, “the people shall be secured in their per- sons, houses, papers and possessions from unreasonable search and seizure;‘’ and I take it for granted that when any one is applied to for a search warrant, that word would attract attention, and unless the application was supported by good reason in addition to the oath or aflirmation, the oflicer would refuse to grant it. . Mr. TWY MAN. I do not understand that when a man applies to an officer to make an aflidavit, the oflicer sits in a judicial capacity to decide whether he is a competent witness or not. He issues the warrant simply upon the sworn statement of the man. What I desire here is that he shall be a qualified person, and that he shall judicially decide the question then whether he is a competent witness or not. A vote being taken on the adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Barren, it was declared rejected. A vote being taken upon the adoption of the amendment of the gentleman from Larue, it was declared rejected. Mr. PUGH. I offer an amendment: Amend by striking the letter “d” from the word “ secured" in the first line of said section, so as to make it read: “ The people shall be secure in their persons, houses,” &c. This is supposed to be a solemn declara- tion of inherent rights. This is the warrant of authorityin regard to that right. It is sup- posed to grant that authority; but the lan- guage used here presupposes something yet to be done in order to secure that right. it says: “The people shall be secured.” How secured, or what is to secure it‘? That is simply an interpolation of a provision in the old Bill, and, in my judgment, is not proper in a simple declaration of right, and should not be adopted; and that inter: polation should not prevail here, but we should adhere to the declaration of right as given in the old Bill. Mr. MUIR. It is conceded by the Com- mittee that it is just a misprint of the let- ter “d.” A vote being taken on the amendment of Mr. Pugh, the same was declared adopted. A vote then being taken on the adoption of said report of the Committee as amend- ed, the said section was adopted. , The CHAIRMAN. Report the next section. . The section was read, and is as follows: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused hath a right—first, to be heard by himself and counsel; second, to demand the nature and the cause of the accusation against him; third, to meet the witnesses face to face; 22 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] BRONSTON~MCCBORD—AUXIER. [October 29 . fourth, to have compulsory process for ob- taining witnesses in his favor; fifth, in prosecutions by indictment or information, to have a speedy public trial in the county wherein the alleged offense was committed, by an impartial jury thereof, on which trial he shall not be compelled to testify against himself, nor shall he be deprived of his life, liberty or property, except by the judgment of his peers or by the law of the land: Provided, That in cases of trial by jury, the General Assembly may author- ize the Court to cause a jury to be sum- moned and empaneled to try the case from any adjacent county or counties, or from other counties conveniently near the place of trial, whenever the Court may be satis- fied thata fair and impartial jury cannot be procured in the county where the trial is had, and make an order to that effect: Prvided further, The General Assembly may provide by law for a change of venue in favor of the defendant in such prosecu- tions. Mr. BRONSTON. With the permission of the Committee, I would like to ask that the section be considered by a division of the question, taking each as we come to it. Mr. MCCHORD offered the following amendment : Amend the fifth subsection of section 10 of the report of the Committee on Pream- ble and Bill of Rights by adding thereto the following words, namely: “And in favor of the Commonwealth in counties in a state of insurrection.” In pursuance of the motion made for a division of the question, the same was di- vided as follows: Subsection 1 is as follows: “To be heard by himself and counsel.” Subsection 2 is as follows: “To demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him.” Subsection 3 is as follows: “To meet the witnesses face to face.” Subsection 4 is as follows: “ To have cem- pulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.” Subsection 5 is as follows: “ In prosecu- tions by indictment or information, to have a speedy public trial in the county wherein the alleged offense was committed, by an impartial jury thereof; on. which trial he shall not be compelled to testify against himself; nor shall he be deprived of his life, liberty or property, except by the judgment of his peers or by the law of the land: Provided, That in cases of trial by jury, the General Assembly may authorize the Court to cause a jury to be summoned and empaneled to try the case, from any adjacent county or counties, or from other counties conveniently near the place of trial, whenever the Court may be satisfied that a fair and impartial jury cannot be procured in the county where the trial is had, and make an order to that effect: Provided further, The General Assembly may pro- vide by law for a change of venue in favor of the defendant in such prosecutions.” The amendment of the Delegate from Pike to said fifth subsection was read, and is as follows: Amend by adding after the word “ de- fendant,” in the fourteenth line, the words “ also to the Commonwealth.” Mr. AUXIER. I have never been able to discover any reason why the Common- wealth should not be entitled to a change of venue, as well as the defendant. There are certain counties in this Commonwealth where a defendant cannot possibly be brought to an impartial trial. His relation- ship, his influence, and connection in some counties place him at such an advantage that justice cannot in those counties be obtained; and I think it is perfectly legiti- mate and sufiicient that under the super- vision of the Court, at the request of the Commonwealth’s Attorney, a change of venue should be ordered in favor of the Commonwealth. While I do not like to sin- gle out any one particular county and men- tion any one instance, yet the very fact that the Legislature, without any amendment to the ‘Jonstitution, passed a law authorizing a change of venue in favor of the Com- monwealth, by which certain prosecutions were transferred from Perry county down into Clark, has settled a difficulty and a BILL OF RIGHTS. 23 Wednesday,] CARROLL— A UXIER-MBRONSTON. [October 29. war that has been waged in that country so long. The feuds are now at an end, because those parties can be indicted and brought to a county where they can be brought to justice. The interests of the people, when prosecutions are instituted in favor of the Commonwealth for the sup- pression of lawlessness, and for the preven- tion of crime, demand that the Common- wealth have such a right. - Mr. CARROLL. MayI ask the gen- tleman a question? Do you think that the law under which these people were brought from Perry county into Clark for the pur- pose of being tried is Constitutional? Mr. AUXIER. I do not think it is, and it is for that very reason that I pro- pose this amendment, to have this clause inserted in the Constitution. The very fact that it is doubtful whether such legis- lative acts are Constitutional shows the necessity of incorporating a provision of this kind in the Constitution, and that forever puts an end to the question. The "Constitution itself, of course, will be Con- stitutional. We want to stop, as I say, this lawlessness, and the only way we can possibly do it is to put the Commonwealth ‘on an equal footing with the defendant. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to answer a question, if the Delegate from Pike will permit me, propounded by the Delegate from Henry. It was certainly the intention of the.framers of the old ‘Constitution to give the Commonwealth the right to a change of venue, because, on page 13, section 38, this provision is made: “ The General Assembly shall not change the venue of any criminal or penal prose- cution, but shall provide for the same by general law.” Mr. AUXIER. I thank you for your suggestion, and I yield to you the balance ' ‘of my time. ‘* Mr. BRONSTON. I am very much obliged to the gentleman, but I did not in- tend to take up his time. I felt that he was arguing the question with great abil- ity, basing it upon practical experience, but I was very much impressed with the pointed question of the Delegate from Henry county, and it was a matter that I had considered privately and ofiicially, in- asmuch as the cases just referred to were changed to my district. Unquestionably it was the intention of the framers of this present Constitution, in the first place, to prevent the Legislature from changing the venue of any particular case, criminal or civil, and also to invest in the Legislature the power by general law to regulate changes of venue in both criminal and civil proceedings. that provision of the Constitution I fear very much that they overlooked or forgot the limitation that was imposed in this sec- tion now under consideration; and I have very grave doubt as to the constitutionality of the law passed by the General Assembly changing the venue in the case referred to, although that certainly was within the pur- view of the Constitution. Mr. KNOTT. May I ask my friend a question ? Ought we not, therefore, make it plain, as suggested by my friend from Pike ‘? Mr. BRONSTON. That was the very reason I was supporting the proposition of the Delegate from Pike. Mr. HOGG. I wish to make only a few remarks, and shall direct myself to noticing the statements made in reference to the change of venue in favor of the Common- wealth from one county to another. In this case which the gentleman refers to, where change of venue was ordered from Perry county to Clark county, these people- suf- fered many inconveniencies therefrom. Those were men who had not a dollar in the world, and who had to sell their clothes to pay their witnesses to go to Clark. Those men are without friends, without money, unable to pay ~witnesses. They may be guilty, but that is not the thing. I am speaking of the injustice 'of sending those men from their homes to another But when they framed 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] AUXIER—HOGG—CARROLL. [October 29 - county to be tried. It is over a hundred miles from Perry county to Clark, and they are sent that long distance. I do not care whether they are guilty or innocent; that does not enter into the matter. The Com- monwealth’s Attorney or County Attorney may file his statement and have them sent far away from the county to be tried. Mr. AUXIER. Can those prosecutions be carried on properly and consistently in the county of Perry with the public senti- - ment which there exists ‘? Mr. HOGG. They can. There are thipty or forty men engaged in it, and the balance of the county is law—abiding. The county wants assistance to put it down, and they are anxious and willing to do it. It is true the Judges have been scared, and they and the Commonwealth’s Attorney have not prosecuted them properly ; but if you send the Judges and Prosecuting Attorney there, they will try these men and put them in the Penitentiary. A vote being taken on the adoption of the amendment, and a division being called for, resulted as follows: 49 in the afiirma- tive and 26 in the negative; so the amend- ment was adopted. Mr. QUICKSALL. I have an amend- ment, which is as follows: “Amend by striking out private property in the twelfth line, and all the two following lines." The CHAIRMAN. The Chair suggests that that is inconsistent with the amend- ment just adopted by the House. Mr. BRONSTON. I want to call the attention of the Committee to what that provision means. That simply means that he proposes to deny a change of venue either to the Commonwealth or the defend- ant, and, of course, a mere statement of it is sufiieient. This body does not want to provide that the defendant shall not have a right to a change of venue if he cannot have a fair trial in his county. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Morgan is not in order. The next amend- ment is the one offered by the Delegate from Clinton. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend section 10 and subsection I) there- to by adding, after “himself,” in line 4, the- following: “But if he introduces himself as a witness, he may be questioned on all matters about which he testifies". Mr. BRENTS. In 1849, when the pres— ent Constitution was made, the accused was denied the privilege of testifying for him- self. Since then the Legislature of Ken’ tucky has made it competent for the accused to testify in his own behalf. I think it is nothing but just and right to the community, if the accused places himself on the witness stand to testify in his own behalf, that he should be cross-examined upon all matters about which he testified. It has been con’ sidered that under the provision, as reported by the Committee, that that would neces- sarily follow; but it may not follow, and we ought to make every thing clear and plain, so that there would be no misunder- standing. If my amendment should be adopted, it will read thus: In prosecutions by indictment or infor- mation, to have a speedy public trial in the county wherein the alleged offense was com- mitted, by an impartial jury thereof; on which trial he shall not be compelled to testify against himself, but if he introduces himself as a witness, he may be questioned on all matters about which he testified. Mr. BRONSTON. Without undertak- ing to argue the question, which I will not do, I will state to the Convention that there is a very serious proposition involved in the amendment. Under the law, as it is now construed, the defendant may testify upon his trial, if he sees proper to intro- duce himself, and may disclose such facts in his testimony as he sees proper, and upon cross—examination he may decline to testify as to any fact which might tend to criminate him, although he has unfolded the particular topic upon which he is being interrogated. I am not mistaken as to, BILL OF RIGHTS. 25 Wednesday,] BR eKrs-BRoNs'roN-—KxoTT. [October 29 . _ l that construction of the law, not only in Kentucky, but elsewhere. The gentleman wants to prevent that. He wants to make a provision that, whilst you cannot compel him to testify when he introduces himself on the trial, he may be subjected to cross- examination, and that he cannot refuse to testify as to facts which may be against him, and testify to those which may be in his favor. Mr. BRENTS. He may be questioned on all matters about which he has testified. Mr. BRONSTON. He can testify on the general subject, and yet if there is a question which, if answered, would convict him, he may say, “I will not answer, because that will criminate me.” I am not inclined to support the amendment offered by the gentleman, because I think that the rule of law, as clearly fixed, is a shield which the defendant should be permitted to have; that is, that he should not be required to testify as to the matter, although he has testified generally to a particular matter that might criminate him. Mr. BRENTS. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. If the accused takes the advantage of the law and testifies, do you not think he can be prosecuted for perjury or false-swearing upon matters about which he falsely testifies? Mr. BRONSTON. I will answer the question: In my practical experience I have found that it would be worse for the defendant to refuse to answer than for him to answer that particular question, so I do not think the community would suffer any by the defendant being permitted to refuse to testify to a particular specific question, although he may testify about the general subject-matter. Mr. BRENTS. That was not my ques- tion. Mr. KNOTT. I ask the gentleman a question. If there is not pretermitted from the report of the Committee this very important safeguard in the old Bill of Rights '? Mr. BRONSTON. I know it is omitted. I know what you mean. I was going to call the attention of the Committee to it in a moment. I suppose it was unintentional on the part of the Committee. They have limited this right of compelling a person to testify against himself to the particular trial that he may be engaged in, and say: “In prosecutions by indictment or informa- tion, to have a speedy public trial in the county wherein the alleged offense was committed, by an impartial jury thereof, on which trial he shall not be compelled to testify against himself.” The old Bill of Rights does not simply mean a man shall not be compelled to testify against himself on his own trial, but he shall not be com- pelled to disclose any fact which would tend to crlmmate himself upon anybody else’s trial, or anywhere else. I intended to call the attention of the Committee to that fact. ' And the vote being taken, the amend- ment was rejected. The amendment of the Delegate from Caldwell was withdrawn by him. The amendment to this subsection of the Delegate from Campbell (Mr. \Vashington) was withdrawn by him. The amendment of the Delegate from Morgan (Mr. Quicksall) was read, and is as follows: Strike out from the fifth subsection the following words: “Provided further, the General Assembly may provide by law for a change of venue in favor of the defendant, and also of the Commonwealth, in such pros- ecutions.” Mr. QUICKSALL. I predicate my amendment upon the fact of allowing jus- tice to both parties to an action, and grant- ing them an equal right. Mr. AUXIER. Will the Delegate from Morgan allow me to ask him a question ? Has not that been acted upon in my amend— ment and adopted? Mr. QUICKSALL. Only in part, I think. I think that justice requires that two parties in any action should have an 26 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] QUICKSALL—BULLITT—BRONSTON. [October 29, equal right extended to them. In a case like this, the Commonwealth is one party, and the defendant, or accused, is the other party. If we extended this right to the Commonwealth to a change of venue, as my worthy friend over yonder has just stated, it gives the Commonwealth too much power, in my judgment, over a single defenseless individual. From another stand-point, and viewed on the other side of the question, an individual being accused of crime, who asks for a change of venue, I ask this Convention what a change of venue is asked for‘? I do not for one moment doubt the fact that every member in this Convention recognizes one feature in that request of his, and that is, he requests, by word of mouth, that justice may be done him, when we all realize the fact tlf'at he intends to defeat justice by moving his trial somewhere else, and in 'nine cases out of ten justice is defeated ,by the change of venue, so far as my knowl- edge has extended, and I do not doubt but what this fact is within the knowledge of every person in this Convention. There— fore, 1 move this amendment to cut off from the Legislature the power of granting, under a general law, the privilege of a change of venue, either by the accused or by the Commonwealth. And the vote being taker. on the amend- ment of the Delegate from Morgan, the same wéas rejected. Mr. BULLITT. I ofl‘er an amendment to subsection 5, as follows: Amend by adding the following: "In all cases of a change of venue by the State, the State shall provide for paying all the witnesses and their board, in attending Court in the county to which the case may be taken, and their traveling expenses.” Mr. BULLITT. I understand, as all of you perhaps do, that a large majority of the crimes committed are committed by people that are unable to pay the expenses of their Witnesses. And to say that he may be carried to a distant county without the means of carrying his witnesses there—and generally these conflicts are among people who are not very wealthy—therefore, to take an accused away from the. county where the offense was committed to a distant point, and force him into a trial without the means of car- rying his witnesses to the place of trial, is virtually a denial to him of justice; so, that if the Commonwealth takes him awayfrom his county and carries him to a distant point, the Commonwealth ought to be com- pelled to pay the attendance of his wit- nesses and their expenses in attending to a different county from which they live. The Commonwealth does not pay witnesses for the accused at present, and has not for some years past. Mr. BRONSTON. I would interrupt the gentleman a moment. You are limit- ing the power of the Legislature, which is left entirely open by the other provision. It is not fair for us to assume that the Leg- islature would make an unfair or unjust law as to a change of venue; that is for them to consider what they will do for the Com- monwealth or defendant. Mr. BULLITT. I want, whenever the Legislature provides that the Common- wealth may take a man away from his county to a'distant county, that the Com- monwealth shall provide for taking the de- fendant’s witnesses there. Mr. BRONSTON. That is now done by the Commonwealth. Of course, they do not pay the per diem of the witnesses; but if the witnesses cannot come, the Common- wealth will bring them. Mr. BULLITT. WVhen was the law passed ‘? It has not been the case in my county. \Ve have not been able to find the law. Mr. BRONSTON. It has been the law since 1849. Mr. BULLITT. We have not been able to find the law in my county requir- ing the Commonwealth to pay the ex- pense of the defendant’s witnesses in such The Auditor refuses to pay such But at any rate, gen- cases. clai ms down there. BILL OF RIGHTS. 27 Wednesday,] AUXIER— M CCHORD—BRONSTON. [October 29 . tlemen, I think it is wise to compel the Legislature, when they pass a law to take a man away from his county to have a trial, that it shall provide the means for him of having a fair trial. Mr. AUXIER. I offer an amendment. to the amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend the amendment of the Delegate from McCracken by striking out the word “boarc .” Mr. AUXIEB. I suggest that if pay- ment is made of the per diem to the wit— nesses of the defendant, the defendant ought not in addition to require the Commonwealth to pay their board. They ought to pay their own board out of their per diem and mileage. And the vote being taken on the amend- ment, it was adopted. Mr. MCCHORD. I offer an amendment to that. Mr. BRONSTON. The substitute that I offered, if it be in order, I would like to have read for information of the House. It covers all this matter, because our Com- mittee had considered it in detail, and we cover the entire subject-matter in the sub- stitute. The CHAIRMAN. \Ve shall probably save time by going on this way. Let the amendment of the Delegate from VVashing- ton be read. The amendment of the Delegate from Washington was read, and is as follows: Amend by adding the words “ witnesses examined in good faith to sustain the dc- fense.” And the vote being taken on the adop- tion of the amendment, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted 25 in the affirmative and 33 in the negative; so the amendment was rejected. The vote being then taken on the amend- ment of the Delegate from McCracken, it was rejected. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to have my substitute read for the information of the House. The substitute was read, and is as follows : That in all criminal prosecutions the ac- cused hath a right to be heard by himself and counsel; to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him ; to meet the witnesses face to face; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; that he cannot be compelled to give evidence against himself, nor can he be deprived of his life, liberty or property un- less by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land; and in prosecutions by indict- ment or information, a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the vicinage; but the General Assembly may provide, by general law, for a change of venue in such prosecutions for both the defendant and the Commonwealth. Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire to offer an amendment to that substitute. Mr. NUNN. I desire to offer an amend- ment to subsection 4. The CHAIRMAN. Subsection 4 has been passed, and we have been considering the fifth subsection. Mr. NUNN. It has not been adopted. It has just simply been passed. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair under- stands we have been considering the section by subsections, and the vote will be event- ually upon each one of the subsections. The Committee moved it should be con- sidered by subsections instead of by sec- tions. The fourth section has been passed, but by unanimous consent we will go back to consider the amendment to the fourth section, which has been offered by the Delegate from Crittenden. The amendment reads as follows: Amend by adding to the fourth sub- division the following: “And in case of a change of venue by the State, to make necessary provision for their attendance.” The subsection would then read: To have compulsory process for obtain- ing witnesses in his favor, and in case of a change of venue by the. State, to make necessary provision for their attendance. And the vote being taken on said amend- ment, it was rejected. 28 BILL OF RIGHTS. [October 29 . Wednesday,] RAMSEY—RODES—AUXIER. Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to offer an amendment to subsection 4 of section 10. The CHAIRMAN. By unanimous con- sent it will be considered. Mr. RAMSEY. It now reads : “To have compulsory process in his favor.” to amend that by adding thereto: “And to have the assistance of counsel for his de- fense." We say in the first part of it that he bath a right to be heard by himself and counsel, but we do not provide that he shall have the assistance of counsel. I desire to make that amendment. Mr. RODES. I wish to suggest right here whether that does not pave the way for all the of'ficers and lawyers who may be brought in to be provided for. And the vote being taken on the amendment, it was rejected. The amendment of the Delegate from Pendleton (Mr. Applegate) to the substi- tute of the Delegate from Lexington was read, and is as follows: Amend by striking therefrom all of same afterthe word “vicinage.” in the ninth line thereof. Mr. APPLEGATE. Public sentiment is liable to sway as far one way out of what is right as it is in another. It seems to me if that substitute is adopted that we have gone further than any State in this Union has ever gone upon that question. At least, I have not read all of the Constitu- tions, but in all that I have read and ex- amined I have not been able to find any that has gone that far, to give the State the absolute right by general laws to entitle the Court to carry a defendant here, there, or anywhere in the State to try him. Mr. BRONSTON. Did the gentleman ever read section 38 of the Kentucky Con- stitution ? Mr. APPLEGATE. Yes, I read that section. I do not think it applies, but that is a question. If it was meant to control, it is in very vague terms. The gentleman has offered the old Bill of Rights with that modification, and if it is already in our old I desire . Constitution, what do you want to make it stronger for‘? If you so construe the old Constitution, why are you not satisfied with those terms? It is conceded upon the floor of this Convention that there are very serious doubts as to whether the State of Kentucky has the right to carry a defend- ant anywhere except within the vicinage, as provided in that section of’ the Constitu- tion, to try him. On account of the law- lessness in some of the counties in this State there is a sentiment that the men ought to be convicted, and justice is not done until the accused is convicted. The men who are accused of the crimes in those lawless counties may be innocent. and the guilty ones may not be the men under in- dictment for the offenses. It seems to me that when you empower the State with the right to carry an ‘humble citizen anywhere within its limits to try him. you have made the greatest invasion upon private rights and individual liberties that has ever been made in a civilized country. If that law is enacted by the General Asesmbly, as pro- vided by this substitute, I say that the poor and the weak and the friendless are practi- cally denied justice,because you put it within the power of the Court, in order to create a public sentiment in its own behalf, to carry a man anywhere and try him. There ought to be some limitations upon it, if you are going to give the Commonwealth the right to a change of venue. I say it is a confession of weakness upon the part of the State to say that the law cannot be enforced within its borders, and that you cannot secure a jury to try a man within the locality in which he is accused of com- mitting the offense. Is the State of Ken- tucky more powerful‘ in the city of Louis- ville than it is in the most remote moun- tain county of this State ‘? Isn’t the arm of the law as efl'ectual and as powerful everywhere‘? Cannot you send out of the county and get a fair and impartial jury to go into that vicinity, where the ofi'ense has been committed, and if the state of case BILL OF RIGHTS. 29 Wednesday,] BRONSTON—APPLEGATE. [October 29 . ‘exist there that you assume exists, are not ‘they the people who need the majesty of the law established, and to show that men can be convicted, and overawe them with the importance of the enforcement of the law‘? It is not merely the guilty that _ you are trammeling with this provision of the Constitution, but it may be the inno- cent, the friendless and helpless that you propose to put to the mercy of the State to carry them anywhere, before any jury that the Judge may see fit to send them to. Mr. BRONSTON. This Convention has .already adopted. as an amendment to the Committee’s report, the provision that the gentleman is arguing so eloquently against The amendment of the Delegate from Pike has been adopted. He is offering an amend- ment, however, to that portion of the sub- :stitute offered by myself, which contains the same provision. Therefore, I will answer his statements made on that amendment. In the first place, under the substitute pro- vision referred to by his amendment, the Legislature is simply given power by gen- eral law to provide for changes of venue ‘for the defendant and Commonwealth both. It is not fair for us to assume that that de- partment of the government will not care- fully guard the interests of the poor as well .as the rich. In the second place, before a change of venue could be had under the operation of a general law, the Court will have to exercise a wise discretion, and it is not for us to assume that the Court, under .any state of case, would abuse the discre- tion as to the defendant. In the third ‘place, the Constitution of Kentucky—which has been in existence since 1849—contains this very provision, with this simple excep- tion, that it fails to speak in sufliciently plain language, and leaves two words in the second section open to confused construc- tion. Section 38, article 2, which the gen- tleman says ‘does apply, I cannot see how language could be plainer: “The General Assembly shall not change any venue, either in criminal or penal prosecution, but a ‘the gentleman a question. shall provide for the same by general law.” That provision is not limited to the defense or to the Commonwealth. _ Mr. APPLEGATE. I would like to ask Even granting that you shall have a change of venue, does it not require it to be within the vicinage ? Mr. BRONSTON. I might say, yes; and for that very reason in my substitute I leave the word “vicinage,” because that word has a much wider meaning than seems to have been attached to it by the gentlemen of the Committee. Vicinage means “ in the neighborhood,” and I leave the word “vicinage” there because we pro- pose to require the Legislature, even when it passes a law to change the venue, to con- fine that to the vicinage. Mr. ‘APPLEGATE. I concede that yours is a much more friendly amendment than the one that has been adopted here by the Committee. ~ Mr. BRONSTON. Let me suggest to the gentleman that the defendant is not going to suffer. We ought to look to some extent to the unfortunates who have been molested by the strong arm of the violators of the law. All that any man should want is a fair trial, and an impartial trial. He wants an ascertainment of the truth. Under this law, the man who violates, as well as the victim or the friend of the vic- tim, is put on an equal footing, and is per~ mitted as a last resort to get out of the at- mosphere which might oppress him on the one hand or relieve him too much on the other. Mr. APPLEGATE. Doesn’t this law apply to a man who may be innocent? You are illustrating by a man who has committed an offense, and the man upon whom it may be committed. Doesn’t this law apply to a man who is merely ac_ cused? Mr. BRONSTON. Certainly; but every man’s innocence is presumed until he is found guilty. In the second place, you do not take a man up and take him out of the so BILL or Rien'rs. Wednesday,] J ONSON—-—BRONSTON——RAMSEY. [October 29. county merely because he is charged with crime, but there has to be an investigation of the crime by a grand jury, and there must always be an indictment. M. JONSON. I move that the Com- mittee rise and report progress. Mr. BRONSTON. I move that the ses- sion be extended until this motion is dis- posed of. Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to offer an amendment to the substitute proposed by the Delegate from Lexington. The CHAIRMAN. It is out of order, because there is one amendment pending to the substitute. And the vote being taken upon the amendment of the Delegate from Pendle- ton, it was rejected. On motion, the Committee rose, and the President, Mr. Clay, resumed the Chair. THE CONVENTION. Mr. YOUNG. The Committee of the Whole have been in session, and had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They re- port progress, and ask leave to sit again at three o’clock this afternoon. The report of the Committee adopted. was Leaves of Absence. Leaves of absence were granted Messrs. Applegate, McDermott and Bourland. The Convention thereupon took a recess until 3 o’clock P. M. AFTERNOON SESSION. Preamble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. There being no business before the Convention, the Chair holds that the Committee of the Whole is in order for this hour, and the Delegate from Scott, in the absence of the Delegate from the Fourth Louisville District, will take the Chair. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. Mr. ASKEW thereupon took the Chair. Mr. BULLITT. I have an amendment to the substitute under consideration, which, as I understand, is the substitute of the Delegate from Lexington to section 10. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend by striking out the words “ both grind the Commonwealth” in the eleventh me. Mr. BRONSTON. That was voted down just before the adjournment, there being ex- actly a similar amendment by the Delegate from Pendleton. The amendment of Mr. Bullitt was again read. Mr. BRONSTON. I see there is a dif- ference. He now proposes to allow the change of venue to the defendant, and not to the Commonwealth. Mr. BULLITT. Knowing that a large- number of the people in the western part of our State have not yet gotten through with paying off mortgages on their lands, given by them to enable them to raise the money to attend the Federal Courts under an indictment where there has not been any cause of action presented against them, I feel assured that if this Constitution goes before that people who are still suffer- ing and groaning under this hardship, hav- ‘ing to provide means to carry their witnesses to distant Courts, it would require a great deal of persuasion to induce them to accept the Constitution. I cannot agree with the Delegate that the present Constitution authorizes such changes. I have never understood from any interpre— tation of the provisions of the present Constitution that anybody contended that the Commonwealth might ask a change of venue. He claims there is a right arising from section 38. ‘ Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to state to the Delegate: we do not claim that, under the Constitution, it has the right to a change of venue, but do claim that, under this provision of the Constitution, the Leg- islature may authorize it. - Mr. BULLITT. I cannot accept that BILL OF RIGHTS. 31 Wednesday,] BRONSTONfBULLITT. [October 29. interpretation of the present Constitution, that under that provision the Legisluture has the right to so provide. Under the Bill of Rights it is clearly declared that he .shall be entitled to a trial in his vicinage. So far as he is concerned he has the right to claim the vicinage. But he has a higher right if the vicinage fails to furnish him a fair trial~—to ask a change of venue. That is according to the oldest principles of law that a man is enti- tled to a fair trial, and if his own vicinage fails to furnish.him an opportunity for a fair trial, he is entitled to carry his case to another vicinage. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to ask the gentleman where he got that clause? Mr. BULLITT. IE comes from the Con- stitution itself, section 38. Mr. BRONSTON. Does that limit it to the defendant alone? Mr. BULLITT. The Constitution plainly declares that he is not to be forced away from his vicinage under this section 38- It reads: “The General Assembly shall not change any venue of any criminal or penal prosecution, but shall provide for the same by general laws.” As a matter of course, just as the Courts have always held, it ap- plies simply to the individual himself upon his individual application. He cannot go to the Legislature and ask the Legislature to grant him a special change of venue, but\ the Legislature must provide by a general law granting him no higher right than all other criminals have. What is the ground for a change of venue‘? Upon what is it always based? It is based upon the fact that the party is so unpopular, or he stands in such low esteem amongst his neighbors and acquaintances, that he cannot get a fair trial upon that issue. New, pray, what aflidavit would the Commonwealth have to make, that it is so unpopular that it has acted in such a manner that it cannot get a fair trial '? Whoever heard of a Republi- can government having to resort to such means ‘? It makes itself unpopular by un- fair dealing, by partiality, by improper conduct and mismanagement of affairs. (Here the gavel fell.) The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the gentleman may proceed. Mr. BULLITT. The idea that a Com- monwealth cannot enforce the law because of lawlessness is to me a curious doctrine for us to admit. When they failed to find a Sheriff in Daveiss county who would col; lect the taxes, they sent abroad and got a Sheriff to go there and collect the taxes. If a citizen of a county refuses to hold an otfice and discharge the duty of executing the law, the Governor or somebody ought to have the right, and doubtless has the right. Perhaps the Legislature may have to act before the Governor could appoint; but where the laws are not executed for the want of officers in a county, the Legislature has the right to authorize somebody to ap- point officers and to go to that county and enforce the law. People prefer to obey the law. You may take a lot or pirates upon the sea, and they prefer to have some laws to govern them. Take society in any State, and they prefer to have rules, and will abide by the rules as long as they are satified that those rules shall be enforced. True, some will violate the law, but those who attempt to violate it must be punished, and I guar- antee that if you assure the people in these counties that claim to be lawless, and if you will guarantee to them that they will have their laws enforced, and all violators of the law punished, I am satisfied you will have the support of the other citizens, and the laws can be executed, and do as they did in Daveiss, and as they are doing in other counties where they are refusing to execute the law, send to some other county and get a man who will enforce the law. I know there are people in Kentucky who will enforce the laws in each and every one of these counties. There are men that will stand up for the law, men who love the law and obey the law, because they love the law and respect it, because of its justice to 32 BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘have establish ed Wednesday,] CARROLL—BULLIFT—BRONSTON. [October 29 . mankind. I feel sure that it will require a vast amount of persuasion to induce the people of my part of the State to accept this Constitution if it authorizes the citi- zens to be carried from their homes upon the afiidavit of the Commonwealth, or the order of anybody else. Mr CARROLL. If the Commonwealth is a party to the suit, is not the Common- wealth as much entitled to a fair trial as any other party‘? Mr. BULLITT. I have not the shadow of a doubt about that. Mr. CARROLL. It‘, then, the Common- wealth cannot get a fair trial in the county where the case is pending, why has it not the right to a transfer of it to some ad- joining county, as any other litigant has‘? Mr. BULLITT. I will answer that in this way: Whenever the Commonwealth makes itself so unpopular by unfair means, it is not entitled to a trial. That is the foundation of a change of venue, because the man is unpopular in his county. Mr. CARROLL. Or popular‘? Mr. BULLITT. If he is popular, he never wants a change of venue; but if he is a popular man, a man of influence, the afiidavit of some County Attorney or Com- monwealth’s Attorney carries him off from where he has lived. and where he has es- tablished a good fair name, and that good fair name ought to go before the jury upon every accusation against him, and I am satisfied this ought not to pass. Iwould be sorry to see the Commonwealth of Kentucky, in this sovereign Convention, admitting that it could not get fair trials in some counties in the Commonwealth. A county that is so hostile to the Common- wealth of Kentucky ought to wiped out, or the Commonwealth itself ought to be wiped out. There ought not to be any law author- izing the Commonwealth to carry the citi- zens away from their homes, where they character, to be tried among strangers, and to be put to the cost of carrying their witnesses with them. I thank the Convention for the indulgence given to me. Mr. BRONSTON. I merely arise to call the attention of the distinguished Delegate to the fact that we are not pro- viding for a change of venue upon the aflidavit of the Com'inonwealth‘s Attorney or County Attorney. We are simply leaving it to the Legislature to pass laws with such restriction as the Legislature in its wisdom deems necessary to protect the unfortunate criminal who may be charged with public ofi'ense. This matter has been voted upon this morning, however, and I do not think it is necessary to discuss it again. The vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from McCracken, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted 27 in the affirmative and 36 in the negative; so the amendment was re- jected. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the substitute of the Delegate from Lex- ington. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to reserve the residue of my time until I have heard from the gentlemen who oppose the substi- tute. Mr. RODES. I was under the im- pression that I was entitled to conclude the debate, being Chairman of the Com- mittee. ' Mr. MCHENRY. I think the rule set- tles it. It says expressly that a gentleman may have five minutes to advocate his amendment and another gentleman five minutes to resist it; and I do not think any gentleman can reverse that rule by reserv- ing his time. ‘ Mr. BRONSTON. I am perfectly willing to do whatever the gentleman may want done. In other words, I am glad to have the privilege of saying any thing at all. I am sure the courtesies of the House have been extended pretty freely to the Chair— man of the Committee while this section was under discussion, and I felt it was not BILL OF RIGHTS.‘ > 33 himself.” Wednesday,] BRONSTON, [October 29. too much to ask that I might be permitted to answer the objections last. If gentle- men, however, feel that such courtesies should be granted to one and not to another, I shall not insist. The difference between the substitute I offered and the one re- ported by the Committee, in two very essential particulars, is this: The substitute offered by me is the old Bill of Rights, ' with the simple transposition of section 38, . article 2, to the latter part of the clause, by means of which the change of venue is authorized, or rather the Legislature is authorized to provide, by general law, for a change of venue, both to the Common- wealth and the defendant. That is the only particular in which the section offered -by me differs from the present Bill. of Rights. It differs from the Committee’s report in this essential particular: In my substitute we hold that a witness cannot, at any time, be forced to deliver testimony that would tend to criminate himself. That has been limited by the Committee simply to his testimony when on trial him- self. In the language of the report, it is “on which trial” (that is, his trial) “he shall not be compelled to testify against I take it that the Committee does not mean to break down that old principle that every citizen of‘ the Com- monwealth has been assured belongs to him, and that is, on no occasion, at no time, whether he testifies on’ his own trial, or on any other trial, shall he be compelled to testify on any matter that would tend to criminate him. The other respect in which the substitute differs from the Com- mittee is in this: The Committee has stricken out the word “vicinage,” and sub- stituted the word “county,” and then has adopted the legislative construction which has been given to that word “ county,” and which has been approved by the Courts in authorizing the selection of a jury from ad- jacent counties, when the Courts shall be satisfied that an impartial jury cannot be bad, and simply provides that the Court must so enter on its order-book. I take it that this Convention does not mean to say that the Court, whenever that (‘ourt should become satisfied, should change the venue for the defendant or should order the jury from another county. But we ought to leave to the Legislature the power to pro- vide the circumstances under which it shall be done and the manner of doing it. In other words, the Legislature ought to re- quire, as it is now, that the Court shall be satisfied, not simply by the Common- wealth’s Attorney stepping up to the Court and telling him, or simply by one making a suggestion, but by the Court first having made fair and diligent efforts, in good faith through its officers, to ascertain the fact that a jury cannot be had in the county be- fore sending outside of the county. The Committee limits that. It has only taken a part of the legislative provision on that subject. The Court is now required to make an effort in good faith by its officers to get a jury in the county before it can change the venue. The Committee does not require that. In the substitute offered by me I leave the Word “vicinage,” be- cause that word, I believe, has a double meaning. The language of the Bill of Rights is that he shall be entitled to a fair trial by an impartial jury of the vicinage. That means that the defendant himself must be tried in the vicinage, and that the jury must be selected from the vicinage. Both must combine. I, therefore, leave the word as it is, and simply provide that under that vicinage, which has been con- strued to mean not simply the county, but the adjacent counties, whenever any state of ease arises~ by which the truth cannot be ascertained, either because of the unpopularity of the defend- ant. or because of oppression of the Com- monwealth; or, on the other hand, because the name of the Commonwealth is only used for the protection, so far as it can, of society, and if the victims are so unpopular as to be unable to have the truth ascer- 34 BILL OF RIGHTS. Vvednesdajg] MCHENRY—RODES—B non STON. [October 29 , tained, let the Court, under the restrictions a ud guards thrown around it by the Legis- lature, have the power to say that that man may be taken into an adjacent county and tried. Those are the differences between my substitute and the Committee’s report. And, before I take my seat, I want to thank the distinguished gentleman from Ohio for permitting me to say this much. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog- nizes the Delegate from W'arren. Mr. MoHENRY. I want to say one word in reply to the gentleman. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has al- ready recognized the Delegate from War- ren. Mr. RODES. I take it that the rule made in this House was made advisedly, and not with a view of withholding any courtesy to anybody, or extending courtesy to anybody. Courtesy is not in the case. As the Delegate from Fayette said, courtesy does not come into the case when there is a fair observance of the rules. It is afair administration of the proprieties of the House, which any gentleman has the right to insist on. The Chairman of a Committee has the right to conclude the debate. and I regard it as being no violation of ethics to speak last. The Chairman has been given the right with a purpose, because, as we have to run the gauntlet of all these proposi- tions, he ought to have the right to conclude. This very matter introduced now, the substitute of the gentleman from Lexington, involves the question whether you will allow this particular provision embraced after the word “pro- vided,” in the sixth line, to be stricken out. That is the most of it. The rest of it is very little. The latter part of section 10 embraces the substance of section 194 of the Code of Practice. The gentleman may ask us, if that is in the law so long, it being thirty-four or thirty-six years since it was passed, why not let it remain the law ‘? why ask that it be made a part of the Constitu- tion? My reply is, I have never known the question of its constitutionality to be passed on by the Supreme Court of this State. 1 know there have been frequent trials under it in my sestion of the State, and men sent to the penitentiary under it; but when it comes to the Court of Appeals, and the Constitutional question is raised, I do not know what the Court of Appeals is going to decide. I simply propose to make that permanent and organic now that is un- certain, and if it is right, make it so; and if it is wrong. take it out. Is it right? By the old common law and the present Con- stitution, a man was assured a trial by a jury of his peers from the vicinage. The word “ vicinage,” the gentleman from Lex- ington says, “has a double meaning”—its old original meaning, and its conventional meaning. The conventional or local mean- ing now applies to the county as well as to the immediate neighborhood in which the transaction occurs. This is part of the sec- tion reported by the Committee, and it is enlarged by the Committee when it says, under a certain state of case, the General Assembly may authorize the Court to em- power the sherifi' to summon jurors from another county. The gentleman objects to that particular language, and says it is not exactly the language of the statute, because the words “good faith” are left out; but the General Assembly may clearly, under this provision in this section, authorize or require the Court in some way to test the good faith and see that it is properly done. I do not see that you add any thing to the strength of it by putting “ good faith ” in the Constitutional provision. ‘ Mr. BRONSTON. What is the section of the Code? Mr. RODES. It is section 194. Mr. BRONSTON. You leave out the words: “If the Judge of the Court be satisfied. after having make a fair efl'ort in good faith.” The CHAIRMAN. Does the Delegate yield the floor? Mr. RODES, No, sir. That section is BILL OF RIGHTS. 35 Wednesday,] BRONSTON~RODES. [October ‘.29 . as follows: “When jurors may he sum- moned from adjoining county, if the Judge of the Court be satisfied, after having made a fair effort in good faith for that purpose, that from any cause it will be impracticable to obtain a jury free of bias in the county wherein the prosecution is pending, he shall be authorized to order the Sheriff to summon a sufficient number of qualified jurors from some adjoining county, in which the Judge shall believe there is the greatest probability of obtaining impartial jurors, and from those so summoned the jury may be formed.” Mr. BRONSTON. You leave out those words, “_after having made a fair effort, in good faith, for that purpose.” Mr. RODES. I say that this language, “ The General Assembly may authorize the Court to cause a jury to be summoned and empaneled to try the case, from any adja- cent county or counties,” etc., embraces language that is reasonable enough, broad enough,_and comprehensive enough to re- quire any jury to be summoned for a trial from other counties, to be summoned in the best of faith. I cannot imagine any thing more explicit. The question comes up, and the case is up for trial before you, and it is a test case, shall this provision stand ? We have used the word “county,” and left out the word “ vicinage.” I am partial to “ vicinage,” but as we used the word “county " in the proviso, we thought it best to keep the word “county” all the Way through. It means the same. Mr. BRONSTON. I want light on the subject. What I want to ask the Chair- man is this: Does he simply mean to in- corporate in this Constitution what: he be- lieves to be the meaning of the word “ county?” If that is the intention, why do the Committee not say that in cases wherea fair trial could not be had in the county, the Legislature may by general law authorize the selection of a jury from another county? Why do you limit that by inserting the additional words that that may be done whenever the Court may be satisfied. without making any effort in good faith to ascertain the fact‘? Mr. RODES. I do not know whether I fully comprehend or not the gentleman’s point, butI think I do. I can say this: That the power which is conferred by this section upon the General Assembly is all that is necessary to say, because it is the use of general language. We need not specify. The General Assembly may be as specific as they please. All we have to do is to clothe the General Assembly with power to effect that object, and then they have not only the power to say so, but to do any thing that looks to the execution of that power. Mr. BRONSTON. But you limit them; you make a provision saying it may be done, and do not require it to be done. Mr. RODES. If the gentleman can get any thing in this world to approach the ob- ject he wants to carry out, I would like to see it. You have to leave something to the Court. Mr. BRONSTON. I am not willing to leave it to the Court at all, unless that Court has made an efi'ort, in good faith, to get a jlil‘y in that county. Mr. FARMER. I rise to a point of order. I submit that these questions are being used for the purpose of making argu- ments. Mr. RODES. I think this language clearly empowers the General Assembly to guard the action of the Court by requiring the utmost good faith, and hedging it about, in all directions, if necessary, for that purpose. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to re- spond to that last statement. The distin- guished Chairman of the Committee says he means to give to the General Assembly power to provide. I submit to any lawyer in the House if he does not qualify that power by saying the General Assembly may authorize the Court to cause the jury to come from another county or counties‘? He says that the General Assembly must do 36 BILL CF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] BBENTS—BRONSTON—RODES. [October 29 . it whenever the Court is satisfied. It changes the law as it now is, and does that which I practically know can work the very greatest injustice to the defendant, where the Court, of its own motion, can say a fair jury cannot be had in the county, without having properly tested thequestion. Mr. BREN TS. I would like to ask the gentleman from Lexington if his substi- tute does not omit both “county and vicinage ‘Z ” Mr. BRONSTON. I have the word “vicinage” in my substitute—“a speedy public trial by a jury of his vicinage.” The vote being taken on the substitute, and a division being called for, it resulted thirty-nine in the aflirmative and thirty- five in the negative; so the substitute was adopted. Mr. RODES. I would like to inquire whether there is any notification necessary that I will bring this matter before the House, and move to strike out the substi- tute‘? The CHAIRMAN. I do not think there is any necessity for that notice. The question is on the adoption of the :SGCtIOD as amended by the sub- stitute. Mr. BRONSTON. There is no neces- sity to put that motion, as the substitute is adopted. Mr. CLAY. Nevertheless, you have to vote upon it as amended, because the Con_ vention may not prefer either. They might prefer yours to the report of the Commit— tee of the Whole, and then might vote it down when the question is taken on the original proposition as amended. The CHAIRMAN. The question is whether you will adopt that substitute as a part of the report. A vote was taken on the adoption of the substitute, and a division being called for, after those voting in the aifirmative had taken their seats, and the Chairman had proceeded to count those in the negative» .vn. manner. I demand tellers. Mr. BRONSTON. I object. In the first place, the Delegate from Ohio had no right to call for the affirmative vote until the Chair had taken the whole vote. I never understood that a man had to be informed how many votes there were for a proposi- tion before he would make up his mind how he would vote. I understand this has been the rule of the House all the time; that the Chairman would direct the Clerk to assist him in making the count, and he never announced one-half the count, but he would announce the result. Mr. MCHENRY. The rule has been invariably the other way. It is usual and customary to say what the yeas are first and then to count the nays. The right to demand tellers is a different thing, and is not covered by the objection which the gentleman makes to my demanding tellers. Any one has the right to demand tellers before the vote is announced. Mr. BRONSTON. 1 do not understand that he has, after the vote has been taken upon the proposition, and the Chair stated the result of the afiirmative vote. He could have called for the tellers before the Chairman announced the count, but not afterwards. Mr. MeCHORD. I rise to a point of order. The gentlemen are both out of order. There is nothing before the Com- mittee. The CHAIRMAN. The count made by me agrees with the count of the Clerk, and I am going to let it stand. Mr. ALLEN. I rise to a parliamentary inquiry: Suppose it possible that the Chairman and the Clerk make a mistake, is there any way to correct it? I say the purpose of demanding and giving tellers is to correct a possible mistake the Chairman makes. The CHAIRMAN. I would suppose there could be an appeal from the decision of the Chair. The Chairman announced the result or’ the vote on the proposition, there ‘being,’ ' BILL OF RIGHTS. 37 Wednesday,] AUXIER.—RODES. [October 29, 39 in the affirmative and 36 in the nega- tive, so the section, as amended by the substitute, was adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Report the next section. The next section was read, and is as fol- lows: No person, for an indictable offense, shall he proceeded against criminally by infor- mation, except in such cases as do not amount to felony, and except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service in time of war or public danger, or by leave of Court for oppression or misdemeanor in office. Mr. AUXIER. I offer the following amendment: Amend by striking out the words “ex- cept in such cases as do not amount to felony.” This is the last amendment that I have to propose to the present report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. According to the way their section reads, as reported, it authorizes prosecutions for all offenses, except for felony, to be set on foot, and carried on simply by information, without the intervention of a Grand Jury. There are some misdemeanors in our Con- stitution that are almost equivalent to felonies. We have some statutes under. which a party may be convicted and con- fined in jail for twelve months. Others under which he can be confined in jail for six months, and other offenses where there is no limit to the time of imprisonment. We had one instance not long ago in this State where a man was sentenced to jail for three years for an assault. The jury have the right, under our present law, to send a man for five or ten years to jail. The objection I have to this section is this: That where these offenses are great, and the punishment is serious, the leaving of . that matter to a CountylAttorney' or a Commonwealth’s ,Attorney to file that information,‘subjects a man to disgrace, - turpitude and the malicaof a prosecution, when no grand jury has first inquired into the charge against him. I think it is putting too much power in the hands of the County Attorney, and he may subject the citizen to a great degree of indignity through malice. I think the rights of the citizen will not be secure unless we compel a Grand Jury to act upon it as they do in prosecutions for felony. I can imagine hundreds of cases where there may be an ill-feeling on the part of a County At- torney or Commonwealth’s Attorney in which he would desire to get after some fel- low, and although he may be innocent, to simply go before the Clerk and file his in- formation and send out and arrest a man, and subject him to all these indignities without the intervention of a Grand Jury. For that reason I move that we strike out those sections, and let a Grand Jury act, where a party is proceeded against for a misdemeanor, just the same as we do in those prosecutions where it amounts to a felony. I am not in favor so much of one- manpower as to give a County Attorney the right to set on foot these prosecutions. There is another fact connected with it, and that is, the County Attorney may want to favor some man who ought to be prose- cuted. Therefore, he may not want to file his 1nformation, which is another reason why I think it ought to be investigated by the Grand Jury. Mr. RODES. I wish to call the atten- tion of the Convention to section thir- teen of the present Constitution. The words that he proposes to strike out are not in the old Constitution, “ex- cept in such cases as do not amount to felony.” The object of that was not to re- quire indictments in cases that did not amount to felony, but to allow them to be tried by information or otherwise. Whether _or not this Convention‘ thinks it is neces- sary. to go through the tortuous process of a Grand Jury in all misdemeanor cases, I do ~- not know. I . . A vote being taken on the adop- 38 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] PETTIT—RODES—BRONSTON. [October 29 . tion of the amendment, it was rejected. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer, as a substitute for this section of the report of the Committee, section 13 of the present Bill of Rights. Mr. PETTIT. I make the point of or- der that that is the identical amendment that has just been voted down, except that it is in different words. The CHAIRMAN. I decide the point not well taken. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington was read, and is as follows: That no person shall, for any indictable offense, be proceeded against criminally by information, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service, in time of war or public danger, or by leave of the Court for oppression or misdemeanor in office. Mr. BRONSTON. I beg the pardon of the Committee; but this is a matter that ,our Committee has had under considera- tion and investigated with great care, and I wish to give you the reasons why you should adopt the substitute instead of the report of the Committee. The difi‘erence between the old Bill of Rights and the re- port of the Committee is this: that the Committee undertake to say that indictable offenses shall be proceeded against crimi- nally by information, where they do not amount to felony. Of course, every Dele- gate on this floor understands that, at pres- ent, the word “felony” means all oifenses against the law which are punishable by death or imprisonment in the penitentiary. By the Committee’s report, you can pro- ceed against a person for a misdemeanor by information. The punishment for misde- meanors, as is well known, is both by stat- utory and common law. The common law punishment is a fine; or imprisonment, or both, in the discretion of the jury. If you adopt the report of the Committee on this matter, you will put it in the power of the Legislature to authorize a proceeding against aperson who may be punished by confinement in the county jail for life, in n the discretion of a jury, without the interven- tion of a Grand Jury. I merely wish to say, after an experience of eleven years as Pros- ecuting Attorney, that you cannot subject the citizen to a more dangerous abuse of his liberty than by authorizing such a pros- ecution. I believe, whatever may be said about the Grand Jury system, that it does throw around the citizen safeguards which I would hate to see broken down. There are many misdemeanors that are common. A Prosecuting Attorney, if he saw proper, could institute a prosecution against a citizen, force him to employ counsel, and hold the case over a great length of time, when, if the opportunity was given, the citizen could, in two min- utes, expose the case. In this provision you do not require that there should be an aflidavit on which the warrant should issue. Under the warrant, as it now is, the Legis- lature has prescribed that, in some small misdemeanors, you could proceed by war-' rant. I believe the amount is fixed at one hundred dollars, but they don’t go beyond that. I say, by the information of a Prosecuting Attorney a man might be brought to a court-house, and subjected to a trial, when, if you allowed it to come before a Grand Jury, and allow the Grand Jury to hear the sworn testimony of the witnesses, no prosecution would ever be instituted. For that reason I beg the Convention and the Committee not to adopt this section. Under the provision, as we have it, there has been no abuses. Everybody is satisfied with it as it is. As we have it now, you can proceed before the subordinate Courts by warrant; but when you come into the Circuit Courts it should be investigated by a Grand Jury, who hear the sworn testimony of the wit- nesses. Mr. RODES. It occurs to me that this ~ is very plain: “ N 0 person shall, for an in- dictable offense, be proceeded against crim- inally by information, except in such cases as do not amount to felony.” What is the BILL OF RIGHTS. 39 Wednesday,] RODES—BRONSTON—BECKHAM. [October 29. meaning of that particular language ‘? The meaning of it is, that in all cases amount- ing to- felony they shall he proceeded against by indictment; and the further meaning is, that in all cases below felony the Legislature may or may not authorize an indictment. If there are any less safe- guards thrown around a person under this section than under the old one, I would like to know where it is. You may file an information, but that does not prevent a man from going and getting his warrant. The gentleman says it would be a terrible thing if a man was brought up on a war- rant without being brought before a Grand Jury. They do that every day, and have been doing it from time immemorial. Mr. BRONSTON. I didn’t say that. Mr. RODES. You said a man was brought up without a warrant or affidavit. There is nothing said about an aflidavit, but the power is left in the Legislature to regulate those things. We must pre- sume that the Legislature will have some regard for the rights of its citizens. The Legislature has it in its power to prescribe how it is to be done, as it now has. The Legislature will not prescribe that a man may be taken up and tried without indict- ment for a heinous crime. We have no more right to presume that they will do that any more than they would do it under this section. Mr. BRONSTON. Under the old Constitution the Legislature had no such power. Mr. RODES. What kind of power? Mr. BRONSTON. Power to authorize a prosecution against a man without an in- dictment. Do you not mean to enlarge the power of the Legislature ‘? Mr. RODES. If there is any enlarge- ment, I don’t know it. The CHAIRMAN. But it is there. Mr. RODES. What did the Chairman say was there? The CHAIRMAN. The enlargement. Mr. RODES. I have seen lawyers differ before when both sides were exceedingly positive. Under this section, as reported by the Committee, no person shall be pro- ceeded against except by indictment in cases that amount to felony. Suppose the offense does not amount to felony, are you bound to proceed by indictment now? Then where is your enlargement? Mr. BECKHAM. There are certain ofienses for which our General ‘Assembly has not provided a penalty. The punish- ment for them would be fine without limit in the discretion of the jury. Does the Delegate think it would be wise to trust a prosecution of a case like that without an indictment of the Grand J ury‘? Mr. RODES. Down in Simpson county —I think my friend from Simpson was there—they had an extraordinary scene at one term of their Court, in which a couple of prisoners at the bar took it in their heads to be very ofl'ensive, and one of them struck one of the ofiicers of the Court and attempted to strike another. What could be done? Nothing but file an information against them; and they were fined very heavily and ordered to be imprisoned. Now, the gentleman can say with the same pathos, “Would you take them up without indictment in that way?” I say yes. Whenever they violate a law 0? that kind, take them up by information. Mr. BRONSTON. Didn’t that arise out of the inherent power of the Court to protect itself? Mr. RODES. Certainly it did; but the inherent power didn’t add any thing to the reason for it. Mr. KNOTT. I would like to call the attention of the Convention to section 13 of the old Bill of Rights: that no person shall, for an indictable offense, be pro- ceeded against criminally by information, &c. Now, an indictable offense is not de- fined in that Constitution at all. Then, who has the right to define it? The Legis- lature. So that the Legislature, under the thirteenth section, can say that you can 4O BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] Kn OTT—PH ELPs—Ronns. [October 29 , proceed against a murderer or any other criminal by information ; but the Commit- tee limit it, and say you shall not proceed against felony in any way except by an in- dictment. I think in that regard, with all due deference to the opinions of gentlemen who differ from me, the Committee is right. If you want to preserve the right of a man to be put on trial by a Grand Jury, instead of ‘by information through a prosecuting otlicer, my judgment is that the report of the Committee rather limits than enlarges the power of the General Assembly in that regard. A vote being taken on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate, and a di- vision being called for, it resulted: afiiirma- tive, 30; negative, 41. so the amendment was rejected. The CLERK. There is an amendment here from the Delegate from the First Louisville District. Mr. PHELPS. That has been voted on. _ The CHAIRMAN. The vote will he on the adoption of the eleventh section of the report of the Committee. Upon a vote, the section was adopted. The next section of the Committee’s re- port was read, and is as follows: 12. No person shall for the same offense be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of himself or his representatives, and with- out just compensation being previously made to him in money, or paid into Court subject to the order of the owner thereof. And no special tax against the owner of such property shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the property so taken; nor shall any person be deprived of his property without due pro- cess of law. Mr. RODES. I wish to ask the Con- vention to allow the Committee to strike out the two words “ himself or,” so that it will read as it does in the present Constitu- tion. By unanimous consent, this was done. Mr. HOGG. I offer the following amend- ment: Amend section 12 by striking out, in lines three and four, after the word “with- out,” in the third line, the following: “The consent of himself or his representatives, and without.” Upon a vote, the amendment was re- jected. The CLERK. The Delegate from the city of Covington has offered the fol- lowing: Amend section 12 by striking from the third line the words “ or applied to,” and inserting in lieu thereof the words "dam- aged, injured or destroyed for.” Also the following: Amend section 12 by inserting after the word “thereof,” in the sixth line, the words “without any deduction on account of benefits to any property of the owner.” The same Delegate offers the following Amend section 12 by striking from the sixth line thereof the words “special tax,” and inserting in lieu thereof the words “ local assessment.” The CLERK. The first amendment in order is the amendment offered by the Delegate from Christian, which is as follows: Amend section 12. line 2, by striking out the word “limb/“and inserting the word “liberty.” A vote being taken on said amendment, the same was declared to have been re- jected. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Boyd, as follows: Strike out of line 1, section 12, of the report the following words: “ Be twice put in jeopardy of life and limb,” and insert in lieu thereof “be twice tried when life or liberty is involved” (the word “tried" to be construed to mean a complete trial from indictment to verdict). Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to amend my amendment so as to make the section as amended read : No person shall for the same offense he BILL OF RIGHTS. 41 Wednesday,] MooRE—RonEs. [October 29 . twice tried when life or liberty is involved, except when a new trial is awarded. Upon the application of such person, the word “tried” is to be construed to mean a con- viction or acquittal. I have but little to say in addition to what I stated before. I simply desire to relieve my amendment from the objection of the Delegate from Madison. I am not presumptuous enough to oppose my opinion to his upon a legal proposition, but I de- sire to oppose to his opinion the opinions of the Courts of the country—the Supreme Court of the United States. In the first . place, the distinguished gentleman says that if we were to strike that provision out of the Constitution that there is a like provis- ion in the Federal Constitution which would bind us, and that the Federal Court has delivered an opinion just like the opinion delivered by the Court of Appeals of Kentucky. I desire to say that upon that proposition he is mistaken. In a case decided as early as 1824, by no less a Con- stitutional lawyer than Story, the following language is used: The prisoner has not been convicted or acquitted, and may again be put upon his defense. 'We think that in all cases of this nature the law has invested Courts of jus- tice with the authority to discharge a jury from giving any verdict whenever in their opinion, taking all the circumstances into consideration, there is a manifest necessity for the act, or the ends of public justice would otherwise be defeated. But, after all, they have the right to order the discharge of the jury, and the security which the public have for the faithful, sound and conscientious exercise of this discretion restsin this, as in other cases, upon the responsibility of the judges under their oaths of office. "a \'-. :". That is the opinion of the. Supreme Court of the United States, and it is directly an- tagonistic to the decision of the‘ Appellate Court of Kentucky. So that, even admit- ting, what I suppose is not true. that that provision of the Federal Constitution is- binding on the State Courts, the opinion of Justice Story is directly in conflict with the .opinion of the Court of Appeals. Now, in the Vermont case—State Keys—it is said: That the Seventh Amend- ment to the Constitution of the United States is limited to trials in Federal Courts, and does not apply in State Courts. That is the amendment in the Federal Constitu- tion similar to the section we are now on. In Livingstone vs. The Mayor of New York, an opinion delivered by Chancellor Walworth, it is said: “ I apprehend, how- ever, that this Court will not arrive at such a conclusion. The assessment of damages by Commissioners, instead of a jury. is sup- posed to be in violation of those amend- ments of the Constitution of the United States which provide that no person shall be deprived of his property without due process of law; that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation ; and that in suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved. I have formerly had occasion to examine the question how far these amendments of the Constitution of the United States were restrictive upon the power of the individual State, and the conclusion at which I arrived was, that all the amendments adopted by Congress at its first session, and afterwards sanctioned by the requisite number of States, were in- tended to be restrictive upon the Govern- ment of the United States, and upon its officers exclusively. That is‘ precisely the opinion of the Court in Kentucky, and the opinion of every Court I ‘have examined which has expressed any opinion upon it. So that if my amendment is adopted, and I think it ought to be for the reasons I have given already, the Federal Constitution can have no influence. Here the gavel fell. Mr. RODES. Can you not in some way or other manage to keep the old words, “jeopardy of life or limb?” If you can, I will be inclined to vote for your amend- ment. 4'2 BILL OF Rlb‘rtl'l‘b‘. Wednesday,] MooRE Mr. L. T. MOORE. I want to get in that idea, and then you can amend it to suit yourself. Mr. BRONSTON. I do not want to an— tagonize the Committee and the gentle- man,but I would like for the Convention to think a moment before adopting this amendment, by which you put it in the power of the Commonwealth’s Attorney or a Court to dismiss juries until you‘ get a jury which would convict the defendant. You place no restraint. The Court can look at a jury and say that it is satisfied that it will not get a conviction and dis— miss it. Courts are human. and are you going to give the Court power to dismiss one jury and empanel another‘? It occurs to me that it is much better .the way it is now. ' Mr. L. T. MOORE. I would like to call your attention to a case decided not a year ago, and referred to by the Delegate from Floyd—a case of bigamy. Mr. BRONSTON. I never heard of that; but in the case as it. has been put here, I think the man ought to have been acquitted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Didn’t you say a few moments ago that you wanted a fair trial? Hr. BRONSTON. Yes; and I do. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Is it a fair trial to the Commonwealth when, through ignor— ance or the innocence of a Judge, a juror is discharged and the prisoner goes free by it? Mr. BRONSTON. I will say that the Court pro tanto represents the Common- wealth, and is selected by the Common- wealth. The Commonwealth’s Attorney and the Sheriff represent the Common- wealth. The man is brought to trial without his consent. He is only allowed so many challenges; and when he is put upon his trial the Commonwealth should not be allowed to take advantage of his own gnorance and force him to a second trial. BRONSNON— MONTGOMERY. [October 29 . Upon a vote, the amendment was adopt- ed; yeas 86, nays The next amendment, one proposed by the Delegate from Adair, was read, as fol- lows: “Strike out all of section 12, after the word ‘limb,’ in the second line of said section, and :in lieu of the remainder of said section insert the following: ‘ Private property shall not be taken for public uses without due process of law, and without just compensation being made to the owner thereof; and no private property shall be condemned and taken for the use of any private corporation without due process of law, and without just compensation having been first paid to the owner thereof or his representatives in money, or paid into Court subject to his order.’ “ The amendment just read will follow im- mediately after the amendment just adopted Mr. MONTGOMERY. My amendment is to strike out, as the report originally stood, all after the word “limb " in the twelfth section. In the first place, I do not think that which follows the word “ limb” has any connection with the first part of the section. There is no connection be- tween them at all. One is in regard to the trial of persons for criminal offenses, and the other is in regard to taking his property for public uses. But that is not the most serious objection I have to it. The section does not seem, in my mind, to discriminate between the taking of property for public uses and the taking of property for the use of a private corporation. It puts them on an equality, as if the taking of property for the use of a corporation was the same as the taking of property for public uses. 1 think there should be a difference between taking property for public use and for the use of a private corporation as to the man- ner of compensation. The report of the Committee is that no man’s property shall be taken or applied for public use without the consent of himself or representatives, and without just compensation being pre- viously made to him in money or paid into E BILL OF RIGHTS. 43 Wednesday,] MONTGOM ERY. [October 29 . Court subject to the order of the owner thereof. I do not think that a county, where, under its authority, it wants to con- demn a pieceof land for a public highway, ought to be required first to pay the owner for the property. The county should be allowed to condemn the property, and the owner of the property required to look to the county for his pay. If it is neces- sary to condemn a piece of property for the purpose of erecting a common school, the community has to have the money; and, ordinarily, they don’t have it on hand ~ for purposes of that sort, and they cannot know how much they have on hand until after the condemnation. So it is in the matter of a county condemning property. It is not the policy of a county, or any subdivision of the Commonwealth, to keep money 011 hand to meet contingencies that may arise. The policy of our law has been that, in the condemnation of property for public uses, the property is condemned and appropriated, and the owner of the property must look for the pay to the Commonwealth or community which takes his property. Therefore, I think there should be a distinction. I don’t think the Commonwealth, or any part of the Commonwealth which is part of the government, ought to be required to pay for property before they take it, be- cause the Commonwealth is sovereign, and ought to have the right to condemn prop- erty. Suppose an army starts out under the authority of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, and it becomes necessary to im- press some property for the use of the army. Under this section they could not do it until they first paid for it, and an army marching from one part of the State to another might not have the means to provide for payment for supplies, and, if it became necessary, they could not take it without first paying for it. There- fore, I say, a citizen should be made to trust the Commonwealth for any thing the Commonwealth may choose to condemn and take from him. I make a distinction between a private corporation and the authority of the State. We do authorize under our laws, and I believe it is proper in some cases for private corpora- tions, railroads and‘ turnpike companies, to condemn and take the property of private persons. While we recognize in having these private corporations some benefit to the State, they are more especially for the benefit of the corporations building the rail- road or turnpike, and while we authorize the corporation to condemn land, we should say, in that case they shall stand on the same footing as aprivate individual. They shall pay for it before they are allowed to appro- priate it. So I made a distinction, and I want to call the attention of the Convention to the distinction. Private property shall not be taken for public uses without due process of law, and without just compensa- tion being made to the owner thereof. That is just exactly the language of the present Constitution—not exactly the language, but the idea, so far as it goes. The rest of the amendment which I offer applies to private corporations or any thing less than the Commonwealth or a part of the Com- mon wealth, “and no private property shall be condemned and taken for the use of any private corporation without due process of law, and without just compensation having been first paid to the owner thereof, or his representatives, in money, or paid into Court subject to his order.” Now, ac- cording to my amendment. that cures all the troubles that have grown out of this condemnation of property for railroads and turnpikes. I undertake to protect the Com- monwealth by the first part of this amend- ment, and protect the citizen by the sec- ond part against these corporations that condemn property. Now, I want to point out the special objections I have to the part of the section I wish to strike out, “and no special, tax against the owner of such property shall be levied or collected to re- imburse the payment for the property so 44 BILL OF RIGHTS. _, Wednesday,] M ONTGOMERY—JONSON—ASKEW. [October 20 . taken; nor shall any person be deprived of his property without due process of law.” I do not know what construction gentle- men may put upon that. I do not know what construction the Committee may put upon it. I have learned that that was put in on account of something that oc- curred in 'Covington. I do not think we should undertake, in making aConstitution, to put somethingin to meet some special casein Covington or anywhere else. My construction of this language in the Com- mittee’s report would be this: If a county were to undertake to condemn some land over which to run a public highway, that they could not levy any tax against the man who had received full compensation for his land. Without any regard to the question i or whether or not he pays any thing, he re- ceived full compensation for what is taken; and no tax is to be levied or collected against him on account of that addi- tional expense which has been created. Instead of protecting him, that would give him a special privilege over and above the rest of the citizens of the county. While he would receive full compensation for his property, to which he is entitled, he would be exempt from taxation and receive a special privilege over and above other citizens. So it would he in the case of a school district. You go to condemn a man’s property for the purpose of building a common school, and the man whose prop- erty is condemned receives as much benefit as any other citizen. He gets full compen- sation for his property; and the construc- tion I would put upon this section would be, that he would not have to pay any part of that tax; that in raising that tax to pay him for the property condemned, he would be exempt, thus getting above his pa y an exemption from taxation. I could p it no other construction upon that, and I don’t think the Courts would. Therefore. I think that should be left out entirely. A vote being taken upon said amend- ment, the same was declared to have been rejected. Mr. JONSON. It is a fact that a Special Committee having an important matter to report have to meet this evening. I therefore move that the Committee now rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. THE CONVENTION. The motion was carried, the President resumed the Chair. Mr. ASKEW. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The Convention thereupon adjourned. tZonnention Record I KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1.] FRANKFURT, OCTOBER 30, 1890. [No 43 ‘Thursday,] McHENRY-JoI-1Ns'roN-McCHoRn. [October 30 . The Convention was called to order by ‘the President, Mr.' Clay, and the proceed- 'ings were opened with prayer by the Rev. ‘Father Young. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings :was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. The next thing ‘in order will be the reception of peti- itions. Resolutions. Mr. MCHENRY. ‘which I desire to offer at this time. The resolution was read, and is as fol- lows: Resolved, That at the usual adjourning hour to-day, the Convention take a re- 'cess. Mr. JOHNSTON. 1 would like a ‘have some reason why we should take that ‘recess. a _ Mr. MCHENRY. I will give the rea- .-son. I think that by the work to-day, by having an evening session and the session rto-morrow morning, we shall have no ‘trouble in getting through with the Bill of Rights; and I would like. to do that so that we will be in shape to make the adjourn- 'ment. Mr. MCCHORD. Was not that em- bodied in the resolution the early part of 'the week, fixing the time for the evening .' session for the whole week. Mr. MCHENRY. No; that provided for evening session only for two days. This extends it one day more. The vote being taken on vthe resolution ’ it was declared adopted. Mr. YOUNG. I have a-petition from nthe Women’s Club _of Louisville, in regard I have a resolutionv to lotteries, and ask that it be referred to the Committee on General Provisions. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it will be so referred. Reports from Standing Committees are in order. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I am directed to return to this body the following resolu- tions, with the request that they be referred to the Committee on General Provisions: Resolutions 36, 156 and 208, all of which refer to the matters of jury trials. The Committee on Circuit Courts consider they have no right to consider these questions, and ask that they be referred to the Com- mittee on General Provisions. The‘ PRESIDENT. Without objection, the reference will be made. Motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. YOUNG. I desire to offer a resolu- tion, and will read it from my desk if there is no objection. The resolution reads as follows: Resolved, That a Committee of three be appointed to confer with the State Libra- rian to determine what can be done to im- prove the ventilation of this hall, and to carry out any measures that will secure such ends. Mr. STRAUS. I second the motion. And the vote being taken on the adop- tion of the resolution, it was declared adopted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I submitted a reso— lution on yesterday and gave notice I would call it up this morning; but if adopted by the Convention it is subject to change at any time by a majority. For that reason “I ask that it be referred to the 2 - PRINTING. Thursday,] MooRE—WILLIAMs—CLAY. [October 30 .. Committee on Rules. It is in regard to giving indefinite leaves of absence. The PRESIDENT. Without objection. the resolution will be so referred. Mr. PETTIT. I have an amendment which I propose to rule 57, by adding after the word “applicable,” in line 2, the follow- ing: “Except as to number necessary for a quorum, which, in Committee of the Whole, shall be a majority of Delegates.” I ask that it be referred to the Committee on Rules. “The PRESIDENT. The resolution, without objection. is so referred. Mr. L. P. V. \VILLIAMS. I move that the Convention resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for further con- sideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest that there is a special order for half-past nine o’clock, the report of the Spe- cial Committee in regard to printing matters. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move to amend that motion by requesting the Committee, if they are ready now, to report. Mr. GOEBEL here took the Chair. The PRESIDENT‘: pro tem. Is the Special Committee prepared to report‘? Report of Special Committee on Printing. Mr. CLAY. The Special Committee make the following report, and ask that the report be read, and then I wish to make a brief statement. It is in the form of a resolution: Resolved, 1. That the action of the Con- vention in dismissing the Oificial Reporter, and in discontinuing the printing of debates and proceedings, be rescinded. 2. That this Special Committee be author- ized to employ some competent person to edit the debates and proceedings of this Con- vention. The said person shall establish his ofiice in the Capitol building, and his duties shall be prescribed by this Committee. The said person shall hold his employment sub- ject to the will of this Committee and Con- vention, and his duties shall be regulated from time to time in their discretion. The compensation of said Editor shall not ex- ceed eight dollars per day. 3. The question of reprinting any part of” the debates and proceedings, as well as the- first printing, shall be left to the discretion of this Committee. Mr. CLAY. The Committee have based their action upon two assumptions: The first is, that the Convention, by its very de- cided vote in dismissing the Official Reporter and discontinuing the printing of debates and proceedings, indicated its judgment that these debates and proceedings should not be printed, if they are to be printed in the- manner in which they have been previously printed. The second is, that the Conven- tion, by its equally decided votein ordering the creation of this Committee, indicated its- willingness and its wish that these debates should be printed, if they could be printed with a reasonable degree of accuracy. I do not propose to discuss the wisdom and ex- pediency of either one of these judgments. We took them for granted as the basis of our action, and we have been very patiently and carefully for two nights considering what was the best method of solving this difficulty. We have carefully examined and consulted with the Printer and the Reporter. We find that the printing office ought not to be held responsible for any errors in the copy or original matter that is sent to them; that they can only make a correct print of the copy that they receive, correcting only errors in spelling. We find, upon consultation with the Reporter, that he has not the time to prepare this matter for publication and properly edit it; that he is occupied for twelve or fourteen hours in taking notes and ti'anscribing them by means of a type-writer, and has not the time or opportunity to consult with the individual members of this body so as to be in a position to make the necessary corrections in order that a clean copy shall be sent to the Printer’s oflice. In consid- eration of these facts, we have been reluc- tantly forced, as the only possible solution of this matter, to request that you author- ize us, in our discretion, to employ some- competent person to edit and prepare this. PRlNTING. - _ 3 Thursday,] l matter for publication, who shall have an office in this building, of easy access and in close communication with you, who can devote his whole time to the correction of this matter that is to be sent to the Printer. We make no reflections upon either the Printer or Official Reporter. We do not consider that they are to blame in the least. It is not their fault. It is the fault of the system. So far as the Reporter is concerned, he shows a great deal of indus- try, and has always shown a commendable zeal in our behalf, trying to carry out the wishes of the body. He has continually grown in our respect and esteem. The fault is in our system, and we think we have presented to you the very best solution of this difficulty. Some gentleman may say‘that, according to the resolution under which we employed the Reporter, he is required to edit and read proof of the de- bates and proceedings. Let us examine that one moment: In the first place, he has not the time personally to do it. He is already employed from twelve to sixteen hours a day, and if we have an afternoon session the length of time he works will be increased. That is conclusive of that mat- ter. In addition to that, he has not the particular experience and expertness required That requires a man expert in that line, and who has paid par- ticular attention to it, and especially a man who can devote his whole time to it; and such a man would have no easy job to do the work satisfactorily. Some one has asked, why not force the Reporter to em- ploy such a person to prepare the matter for publication and read proof? The Re- porter says to us that, after paying his ex- penses, he is only making about ten dollars a day, and if you require him to employ this Editor, in the first place he may employ some one whose qualifications to do this kind of work might not be sufiicient, and in the next place he will probably have to pay seven or eight dollars aday to that man, - which would leave the Reporter the misera- CLAY-QULLITT. [October 30 . blepittance of two dollars a day. This Con- vention can not afford to be unjust to its Re- porter. Upon all things let us show that we are alive to our dignity and our responsibil- ity, and that we do justice to those we employ in the matter of pay. This Editor, by put; ting this matter in the best possible shape, and in the most condensed form, in all prob- ability will save the State more than his compensation. I believe he will save a good deal more than is paid him, and in this way this is a measure not only de- manded by our self-respect and dignity, _ but also by economy. Now, in regard to the third part of the resolution, I will say this: that we propose that part of the resolntion in the interest of economy. It may not be necessary to re- print all of this work, and we thought it best for us to be allowed some discretion in that matter. In the interest of saving money we add the last part of that resolu- tion. At most, if this session extends ninety days beyond this period, and this man is employed at the maximum price, the whole amount will only be $720, an amount insig- nificant compared with the important results to be achieved. In addition to that, I believe it is a measure of economy, an d it certainly is a measure demanded by our self-respect. I believe our constituents will thoroughly indorse us in employing the necessary force to have our debates prop- erly published for their benefit and in- formation. -» Mr. BULLITT. I heartily approve of the plan of employing an Editor. I have been somewhat mixed up with this arrange- ment of getting the proceedings of the Convention printed. My idea was that we were acting for the people; that the people have a right to know what is being done here, and that this printing and publication ought to be had. I think much difficulty has grown out of the fact that there were two sets of ofiicers, and the fault has been concurrent. I think the proposition made by the Committee, that this part of the 4 PRINTING. Thursday,] J ONSON—PETTIT. [October 30 . printing shall rest upon their shoulders and a part of it on the shoulders of the Printing Committee, will not cure the difficulty. There should be one head, I do not care which it is, whether it belongs to the Printing Committee, or whether the whole printing matter is transferred to this Committee; but whoever has the manage- ment of it, ought to have the manage- ment of the whole printing matter. I move, therefore, instead of the matter being subjected to this Committee, that it be referred, with the same powers that are to be delegated to this Committee, to the Printing Committee, or that the Printing Committee be relieved of it entirely. But, for the purpose of considering the question, I move it be referred to the Printing Com- mittee. Mr. JONSON. When this matter was up, before the unfortunate action of the body the other day, I insisted that those persons employed and paid to do this work be required to do it. Since hearing the re- port of this Committee and the remarks of its Chairman (our President), I have been convinced that to require this, especially of the Stenographer, the Convention would be requiring of him something he is not com- petent to do. Occupying a place near him at the table in our hotel, I have observed for some time that his physical condition is not keeping up. He does not eat half as much as I do, and I am not a hearty eater. His appearance is that of a man who is overworked; and I believe that, in strict justice to him, as well as to all our fellow- creatures, we ought not require of any one a physical impossibility. I am always ready, as some gentleman said here yester- day morning, when I have acted wrong and found it out, to come forward and say my action was wrong. I believe that the argument I made at that time was an error, and Iam willing to correct it. Since the action of the Convention in dispensing with the report of the proceedings, I have had conversations with eminent gentlemen in this State, gentlemen occupying places upon the bench of the Court of Appeals and others. They express .the opinion that the action was unfortunate; that the people of Kentucky have a right to these debates as amatter of information to that the Courts are in the habit con- stantly of referring to volumes of debates of the several States in decid- ing and determining great Constitutional questions, by which they arrive more read- ily at the views and intentions of the per- sons who framed the provisions than from any other source. I believe that their statement is correct, and that the people have a right to have these reports printed, and as a matter of common sense they ought to be printed well. It is a matter of justice to the Delegates who make the utterances that there should be accurate printing. As amatter of history, and in every aspect, it is right and proper that they should be properly and accurately printed. And, for these reasons, I think that the report of the Committee ought to indorsed. Mr. McCHORD. I ask a division of the question. Mr. PETTIT. Without taking the gentleman oil’ the floor, I desire to ask one or two questions of the Committee before we vote on the passage of the report of the Committee on Printing. If we are to employ an Editor, as it looks that this reso- lution contemplates, for one, I do not be- lieve that the simple reading over and correcting and putting in proper form of the fifteen or sixteen pages we have here will be employment sufficient for this gen- tleman; and without I could have some as- surance that the indexing, which was at first contemplated, should go in with the duties of this oflicial, and that he should give attention to that, thereby at the close of the session saving us from a large ex- pense, I would feel very much disposed to throw some clogs in the way of the report. There is another point I would like to ask them ; PRINTING. 5 Th ursday,] CLAY—BECKNER——FUNK. [October 30 . the Chairman of the Committee, and that is: By our action the other day we deter- mined that we would not print the proceed- ings as kept by the regular Clerks of this Convention. Two votes have been taken on that proposition, and this Convention refused to print those proceedings—the ofiicial report of the proceedings. I thought it was wrong at the time, but I desire to call the Convention’s attention to this _fact, that they may act ‘as they think best on that point. Mr. CLAY. In regard to the first ques- tion,"no doubt the Committee will require of this Editor that be properly index the volume, and it is in order that we may do the best possible thing that we left the whole thing in the discretion of the Com- mittee. Suppose in that resolution we had .fixed the duties of the Editor, and found we had made a- mistake, we would have been precluded from correcting mistakes; and it was in order to get the very best result that we put it in that shape; and if this man does not serve the purpose for which he is employed, we can dismiss him at any time. Having it in that shape, we thought we had it in the best shape possi- ble. Mr. BECKNER. I desire to say that I hope most sincerely the motion of the gentleman from McCracken will not pre— vail, and that we can get rid of this matter. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The mo- tion of the Delegate from McCracken did not have a second. Mr. BECKNER. I thought it ‘had. I hope the report of the Committee will be adopted. ,Mr. FUNK. I do not understand that debate is cut off on this question if a mem~ ber desires to say any thing. I would like to have read by the Clerk the papers which I have in my hand as information to the 'members of the Convention, in order that I may base on it the few remarks which I desire to make. I ask the Clerk to read it: THE CONVENTIONT RECORD. The British House of Commons, ‘‘ the world’s greatest Senate,” has no corps of official Stenographers, and never had; neither has it a publication correspond- ing to the American Congressional Record or the. Kentucky Convention Record. The British Commons and the British public depend on the newspaper press of London and the provincial cities to pre- serve parliamentary eloquence, and all of it worthy of immortality is rescued from oblivion by the newspapers. Until about the close of the reign of George II. the English Parliament deliber- ated in secret. The splendid eloquence of Somers, Halifax, Bolingbroke and Carteret, like the earlier orations of Chatham, Burke and our Patrick Henry, is only known through tradition and the imperfect diaries of some of their auditors. The elder Pitt said that he would rather add to the Eng~ lish classics a certain speech of Boling- broke than to restore to ancient literature the lost books of Livy. Doctor Johnson reported the debates of the Commons for the newspaper press, though he had never set his foot inside of St. Stephens, but evolved the speeches from his teeming brain, and took good care that the “Whig dogs got the worst of it.” The Congressional Globe and its success- or, the Record, are responsible for a great deal of the charlatanism in what is known as American statesmanship. These vol- umes contain miles of eloquence, such elo- quence as it is, that Congress never heard, and bushels of lore, such lore as it is, that never emanated from the brains of its puta- tive authors. The publication is for the groundlings, and though it contains a good deal of sound grain, it is hidden under a mountain of chaff. If the Record were abolished at the beginning of the next ses- sion, the newspapers would preserve a sufii- ciency of Congressional eloquence to sup~ ply any healthy demand the people may prefer for it. And so with that publication at Frank- fort. It can conserve no public good; it only retards business, and all the effect it can have is to let old Kentucky know what a lot of giant intellects she has sent to Frankfort to make a fundamental law for the government of her people. One of the great ills that afliict the American Union is the tremendous lung power that lugs round small loads of brains in nearly every voting precinct between the two oceans. O‘- PRINTING. Thursday,] FUNK. [October 30 , The gift of gab is very dangerous when coupled with little learning. THE PRINTING OF THE DEBATES. The Constitutional Convention is making a rather humiliating spectacle of itself in the printing matter. First of all, the Dele- gates found fault with the published debates because they were filled with errors, either of their own making or the result of the incompetency of ithe Printer or Stenog- rapher. This led to a controversy that consumed much of the time of the Conven- tion, and engendered not a little bitterness among several of the Delegates. Yester- day the matter was finally brought to a head, with the result that the printing of the debates was abolished, the Convention in doing* so performing the best piece of work it has done since the session began. Now, after thinking over the matter a few hours, and having their vanity and egotism touched by the thought that all their eloquence, oratorical fiapdoodle and personality generally will be lost to pos- terity by such a course, the Delegates want to undo their good work of yesterday, and make as graceful a backdown as possible. But they present a sorry picture as, with excuse and subterfuge, they endeavor to show that they are bound to fulfill their “contract” with the Stenographer. What a shallow pretext this is! If their bond is so sacred in this respect let the State see that it is requited. Better this than to incur a greater debt by continuing the use- less service. There is no necessity for printing these tiresome debates just because a man has been hired to report them. Let him be paid in full, if necessary, and dismissed. Such printing serves no purpose unless it be to gratify the vanity or “ ambition ” of those who want to see their speeches “in print.” It is a need— less waste of time and money, and, if for no other reason, ought to be abolished on the ground of conomy alone. All that is nec- essary is a brief record of the official pro- ceedings of the Convention—the rest is superfluous. But superfluous or not, it is quite prob- able that it will be continued. It matters not what the waste of time or the expense to the State, so that the spell-binding Ciceros and the heavy-browed Solons in our Convention be given a chance to engross their burning words and spatter their brains on the Scroll of Fame. Mr. FUNK. The articles just read are editorials from two of the leading news- papers of the South, the Evening Post and Evening Times. It is generally supposed that the newspapers express the feelings and views of the community in which they are published. While I voted for the ap- pointment of this Committee, I believed it would at least accomplish some good. The Committee have no doubt been very careful in investigating the matter, and have made a most intelligent report to the Conven- tion; but it does occur to me as a whole this Convention will humiliate itself by adopt- ing it. In the first place you have a Com- mittee on Printing. It is supposed, if this is adopted as presented here, that this Com- mittee will supersede them and take it off of their hands. Why not dismiss the Com- mittee on Printing? I think that it will be setting a bad precedent to adopt this as a whole. There are many things I would gladly vote for, but I cannot accept the en- tire report as it is. They have undertaken too much. It occurs to me if this Conven- tion adopts that, that the Convention is left at the mercy of this Committee. Their power 1s unlimited. They can do what they please. While I have every confi- dence in the Committee, individually, at the same time I do believe that this Con- vention should, under all circumstances, have every thing done reported back to the Convention for their approval or disap- proval. Therefore, in that particular, I cannot sustain the report of the Com— mittee; while, on the other hand, if we are to have this Record printed, let us have it done in the proper and intelligent manner. I consider the amount of eight dollars a day to the Editor as a very small amount when it is considered that we have wasted so much time already on this question of printing. What do I care to hand down to my children or grand- children a volume where the first six or seven hundred pages are given almost exclusively to the controversy over this printing. If they will expunge from the Record every thing in connection with thi PRINTING. 7 great-grandchildren .ten thousand dollars. ‘Thursday,] FUNK—MAY—HOGG- [October 30 . printing matter, then I would favor it much quicker than I will as it is placed What will our grandchildren and say when they see this‘? Our grandfather or great-grand- father belonged to a Convention where they fooled away eight weeks time in dis- cussing the matter of printing. I am in favor of almost any thing to settle this matter. If you adopt this Committee’s report as it is now, and you think it better to do it, I would make one suggestion, and .ask the Committee to consider it, and that is, that a wood engraver be employed to illustrate it. If we are going to do it at .all, let us do it right. It may not be neces- sary to employ an engraver. It is possible ‘.the Public Printer may be able to do it. What 'was the action of the Convention the other day‘? You ordered the printing of a few amendments to section 2, to be laid on the desks next day. It was a very small job of printing, but still, at the same time, that could not be considered the next here. day, because the Public Printer could not have it on our desks, and it was postponed further. Is that right‘? I say no. I had a conversation with the Public Printer night before last, and .he stated that he wished that they would dispense with the printing of these debates; that it caused him so much trouble. Two weeks ago I presented a resolution to do away with the printing the debates, but it was voted down. I ‘thought that would end it; but it does occur to me that there is no end to this matter. Let us send it some place. One paper placed on our desks this morning says that this matter alone has cost the Convention Now, if the Com- mittee will agree to ‘enter into a contract with this Convention for ten thousand dollars to get up this thing right, I say give it to them, and let us be done with it_ Mr. MAY. My opinion is we are not ‘considering what our grandchildren or great-grandchildren may say in regard to the printing. We are considering what is just in the premises. That is what is before the Convention, and what we ought to attend to and try to do right in the premises. It matters not what our grand- children or great-grandchildren may say about the printing. Mr. HOGG. I desire to offer a substi- tute to the report of the Committee. Substitute read, as follows - In order to expedite and proceed at once to form a Constitution, Be it resolved by this Convention, That hereafter the Convention proceed with its business with closed doors, and no one be admitted on the floor or lobbies or galleries except the Delegates to the Convention, Secretaries, Sergeant-at-Arms, Door-keeper, Janitor and Pages. The Judges of the Court of Appeals, Superior Court Judges and Circuit Court Judges are permitted in the lobbies or on the floor; also-the Gov- ernor and Lieutenant-Governor may be admitted to the floor. 2. That no Delegate, officer or employe of the Convention report its doings to any newspaper correspondent or other person. The PRESIDENT pro fem. The Chair is of the opinion that the resolution is not in order. Mr. DEHAVEN. I have no desireto detain the Convention on the question but afew moments. It is palpable to every member that the practical question that addresses itself to us is how to get out of this trouble. My/ own conviction is that we are in- an attitude that it will not do to dispense with “the services of the Stenographer. At the beginning of _our deliberations, so far as I was personally concerned, I was indifferent to the employ- ment of that ofiicer, and if it had been left to my judgment, I would have said we should not have him; but the Convention ' in its wisdom determined otherwise, and we have been in session fifty-odd days. That there are some mistakes in our pro- ceedings is undenied. And this Committee have endeavored, as was forcibly presented ' by the Chairman, to clear them up as‘ far '8 PRINTING. Thursday,] DEHAVEN—JOHNSTON—MACKOY. [October 30 . as we were able to do it, and as far as the limited time allowed us to see where the blame should be. We are perfectly satis- fied, from the statements made before us, that it is utterly impossible for any Sten- ographer on the face of the earth to do the work that we demand of him, and do it correctly. I don’t think there was a sin- gle member who was not perfectly satis- fied that we were demanding of this officer an impossibility. Now, if it be the pleasure of the Convention, and that seems to be what they desire, that its pro- ceedings should be reported, my idea is that it should be done with at least a reas- onable degree of accuracy, and that can only be obtained in the manner suggested by the Committee. There are but three proposi- tions contained in the report of the Com- mittee: The first is that we rescind the action of the Convention of the day before yesterday. That action was hasty, incon- siderate and unjust. I don’t think ten men on the floor will deny that we have done wrong, and we turn around as quickly as possible to repair that wrong. In the first place, then, we recommend that we re- scind that action. We then recommend, as the only practical way by which we can reach the object we have in view, the ap- pointment or the selection or employment of a man whose business is to correct these proceedings and resent them to the Printer, and see that they are published in proper shape to present to the public. The additional cost does not amount to any thing. Having gone on printing the proceed- ings for forty or fifty days, I think it will be a little difiicult to explain to our con- stituents why we now abandon it. One of two things is true: Either we have not wisdom to devise means by which this work can be accurately done, or we have gone on and incurred a needless expense. I suppose the expense now incurred will amount to ten or twelve thousand dollars. If the action of the Convention day before yesterday is ad- hered to, we place ourselves in a position 0 ' having gone on and spent that amount of money and then turned around like chil- dren and burnt up what we have. I don’t think we should be placed in that attitude‘ _ before the country. So far as the news- papers are concerned, I don’t think they will have any serious criticisms to make,. and at any rate I am not to be intimidated by any strictures on my conduct. I came- here for the purpose of doing what I thought was right, and if there is not a man in the State of Kentucky who agrees with me, it will be my misfortune and not my fault. I think the only way we can correct our error is to adopt the report made by the Com- mittee. It is not imperative that we shall employ this man, but we leave it to the dis- cretion of the Committee as to whether we shall or not employ him, and I think every member of that Committee will be disposed to give his utmost efforts in attempting to rectify errors that have already been com- mitted. I hope the Committee’s report will be adopted. Mr. JOHNSTON. I would like to ask what the opinion of the Committee was as to the legal status of what has been styled the contract with the Reporter. Mr. CLAY. The Committee did not consider that matter at all, and formed no conclusion with reference to it. We based our action on the other grounds. Mr. JOHNSTON. Can any member of‘ the Committee give an opinion on that? Mr. MACKOY. It seems to me that the question of the legal status of the case has nothing to do with it so far as the Con- vention is concerned. It is a matter that concerns the honor of the Convention itself. I was not present when the action was taken two days ago. ‘I have been absent from the Convention several days, and I must confess that I was surprised when I saw what had been the course of the Con- vention two days ago. I do not think there‘ was any reasonable excuse for that action; that it was taken in haste, and that the: report of the Committee made this morn- PRINTING. 9 Thursday,] ing affords to this Convention an oppor- tunity of retracing its steps, and of putting itself back in a position it never should have retired from. I hope this report will be adopted without separation or division, but asawhole. It seems to me it is im- portant, and that it becomes the dignity of this Convention that it should adopt that repprt just as it has been written. Having been outside of the Convention, and having looked at it from a distance, I know, to some extent, what views persons who are away from it take of it. 1 think when members sit in this hall and remain in Frankfort they lose, to some extent, con- tact with the outside world, and they do not know the views taken of their actions Outside, among those I have met, I am confident there is pot one who would not be disappointed if this Convention Record were not printed. The gentlemen I have sent copies to are glad to get them, and have thanked me and requested me to con- tinue sending them; and it is due to ourselves that our proceedings should be faithfully and accurately reported, not only due to ourselves, but also the officers of this Government, Judicial and Execu- tive—both those present and those who are to come hereafter—that ,our proceedings should be faithfully reported; and I say this without regard to the action of any other State. I do not care whether Missis- sippi published its report or not. I do not care whether the Parliament of England caused its proceedings to be reported, or whether it proceeded with open or closed doors. We are competent to form our own opinions, and pursue the course of action which we think proper, and which we think is best adapted to the State and the circum- stances in which we live. Taking that view, I shall cordially support the report made this morning. and I trust the Con- vention will adopt it exactly as it has been read. Mr. HOGG. I understood there was a division of the question asked. CLAY—TWYMAN—PHELPS. [October 30 . Mr. CLAY. I make the point of order on the call for a division. I am a little doubtful about it, but I think it is good. It is this: that the first and the second part of the resolution is not divisible, and this will best illustrate my purpose in regard to that. My individual vote upon the first section is conditioned on the passage of the second. I am not for the first section un- less the second is passed, and there is logi- cal connection between the two. There are a great many others who will not vote for‘ the first, unless they are assured they can have the second section in the report. The previous question was moved and seconded. Mr. TWYMAN. The result of the- adoption of this report takes the responsi- bility from the Reporter, and places it in the hands of the Committee. As I under-- stand, they will be responsible for the cor- rect publication of the proceedings of the Convention. I think we should reserve the right to prescribe the duties of the Editor, so that if we make a mistake we can make the necessary change. If the compensation to the Reporter is not suffi- cient, would it not be better to increase his salary, and let the responsibility rest on him, and let him employ the Editor, than to put it in the hands of a Committee?‘ I make that point on the call for a di- vision. . Mr. ZACK PHELPS. It has been uni- versally held in this Convention by the’ distinguished President, that wherever a resolution was presented which had two or three different subjects, that it was proper to have each voted upon separately. I have no objection in the world to gentle- men having permission to vote first on the- question as ‘to whether or not we shall employ this new officer; but I do think we have a right to vote upon each of these? questions separately. For myself, I shall vote one way on one question, and one way on the other, and I claim the right i 10 PRINTING. Thursday,] to vote upon each of those questions sepa- rately. Mr. CLAY. I admit the rule of divisi- bility, but I question whether there is divisibility between these two propositions; whether they are not so connected that they cannot be divided. Mr. MCCHORD. So far as the divisi- bility of the subject is concerned, it seems to me that it is a matter of little impor- tance. There are two propositions clearly presented by the resolution offered by the Committee. The first is that the action of the Convention the other day be rescinded- So far as I am concerned, I am willing to say that I voted for the proposition under a misapprehension of the state of the Rec- ord. I am now willing to vote to rescind that action, because I recognize the fact that the Convention did itself an injustice and some of its employes a wrong. Mr. STRAUS. I make the point of order that he is discussing the merits of a question, when the previous question has been moved and seconded. The PRESIDENT pro team. The Dele- gate will please confine himself to the point of order. Mr. MCCHORD. There is another prop- osition in the report of the Committee, and that is whether the Convention shall em-i ploy an Editor. It seems to me that the great trouble of this whole matter has been to force the employment. Gentlemen have undertaken to criticise the report because, in some instances, a “t” was left out or a letter was upside down, and they insist that an Editor shall be forced on this Convention, whether they desire it or'not. There was first a proposition that an Enrolling Clerk should be employed. When they found that was not a matter of necessity, there was- The PRESIDENT pro fem. The Dele- gate will have to confine his remarks to the " point of order. Mr. CLAY. order. I withdraw the point of CLAY—MCGHORD—STRAUS. [October 30 . 4 Mr. STRAUS. I make it, and insist op it. Mr. MCCHORD. I am insisting that the point of order is not well taken. I am attempting to show that there are two propositions involved, one as to whether We shall rescind the action of the other day, and the other as to whether we will have an Editor to supervise the speeches made by the Delegates, or whether we will proceed --as the Convention did in 1849—withdut an Editor. The same proposition to have an Editor was made then, and they deter- mined that they could proceed without the employment of an Editor. We can’t keep from having these typographical errors. You will find them in the debates of 1849, and I have never heard that it detracted a particle from the great speeches made be- fore that Convention. It seems to me .to be a question as to whether we shall submit to having an Editor forced upon this Con- vention, when it, by a solemn declaration, decided that it did not want an Editor. Mr. STRAUS. It seems to me that the gentleman has gone outside of the point of order, and gone into the merits of the case. The PRESIDENT pro tem. It seems that the Delegate has gone outside of the point of order. Mr. DICCHORD. Then I yield. The PRESIDENT pro tent. The Chair thinks the matter is divisible. The first section relates to rescinding the action of the Convention; the second to the employ- ment of an Editor, and the third to reprint- ing that which has already been printed. The previous question has been moved upon the matter under consideration, and the vote will first be on the first portion of the report as to rescinding the action of the Convention. Mr. WOOD. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. HOGG. I second it. The first section of the report of the Committee was then read. Mr. WOOD. I thought that had been PRINTING. 11 Thursday,] pk“ “WM __. .__,_._._xk____ \. acted upon. I withdraw my call for the yeas and nays. Mr. HOGG. Mr. FUNK. Horxins—FUNx-PETTIT. I renew it. I second it. The result of the vote on the adoption of the first section of the ('ommittee’s report was as follows: Yeas—65. Allen, C. T. Askew, J. F. ,Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Bennett, B. F. BerkelenWVni. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Boles, S. H. Brents, J. A. Buchanan, Nathan Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles _ Elmore, T. J. ‘ Farmer, ‘H . H. Forrester, J. G. Goebel, Wm. Graham, Sam ucl Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. Hogg, S. P. ‘ Holloway, J. WV. J aeobs, R. P. Jonson, Jep. C. Kennedy, Hanson Kirwan, E. E. Knott, J. Proctor Lassing, L. WV. Lewis, WV. WV. Mackoy, W. H. Martin, WV. H. May, John S. McChord, WV. C. D’IcHenry, H. D. Miller, WVill. Montgomery, J.F. ,WIoore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. WV. Nunn, T. J. Parsons, Rob’t T. Petrie, H. G. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quieksall, J. E. Ramsey, WV. R. Rodes, Robt. Smith, H. H. Smith, WV. Scott Straus, F. P. ' Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George WVest, J. F. VVhit-aker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. vVVoMfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. Mr President Clay .- wars—1:3. Allen, M. K. Ayres, WV. W. Birkhead, B. T. Bronston. C. J. Brummal, J. M. Field, VV'. W. Funk, ‘J. T. Hanks, Thos. H. Hopkins, F. A. Johnston, I). P. McElroy, WV. J. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack 'I‘\v_\_~'man, I. WV. WVood, J. M. ABSENT—'20. Amos,_D. C. , Glen n,’_Dudley A. Applegate, Leslie T. Hendriclc’WV. J. Auxier, A. J, Bourland, H. R. Hines, J. S. James, A. D. Brown, J. S. Chambers, G. D. Clardy, John D. Edrington, WV. J. English, SanL'E. Forgy, J. M. The PRESIDENT 1))‘0 fem. [October 80. McDermott, E. J. Miller, WV. H. ()’H a ra, R. H. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Washington, George The first section is adopted, and the vote will now be on the second section, which the ("lerk will report. The second section, in reference to the matter of employing an Editor, was read. Mr. 'W( )()l). nays. Mr. DURBIN. M r. McH ENR Y. I call for the yeas and 1 second it. Let the last two sec- tions be considered together. Mr. McCHOR-I). That is as far as I de- sire a division. The third section, concerning the reprint- ing of the work already done, was read. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. tinct sections. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Those are dis- The \‘otfl will be first on the section section. The roll-call resulted as follows: vEAs4—53. Allen, C. T. Askew, J. F. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, WV. M. Bennett, B. F. Blackburn, James Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Buchanan, Nathan Bullitt, WV. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. Farmer, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Funk, J. T. Goebel, WVilliam Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. WV. Jacobs, R. P. Jonson, Jep. C. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Kirwan, E. E. Knott, J. Proctor Lassing, L. W. Lewis, W. 'W. Mackoy, WV. H. IWIa'rtin, W. H. May, John S. McHenry, H. D. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Muir, J. W. Parsons, Robert T. Petrie, H. G. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Ramsey, WV. R. Smith, H. H. Smith, WV. Scott Straus, F. P. Swango, G. B. WVhitaker, Emery WVilliams, L. P. V. Woolfolk, J.F. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay 12 PRINTING. Thursday] Hoee—FUNK—“Ioon. [October 30 _ NAYS—25. Hopkins, It‘. A. MeChord, Wm. C. McElroy, W. J. Miller, Will. Moore, Laban T. Allen, M. K. Ayres. W. \V. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. ‘T. Blackwell, Joseph Boles, S. H. Nunn. T. J. Brummal, J. M. Pettit, Thos. S. Buckner, S. B. Phelps, Zack Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Elmore, T. J. Field, W. W. Hogg, S. P. Quicksall, J. E. Twyman, I. W. ‘Vest, J. F. \Vood, J. M. ABSENT—22. Amos, D. C. Hendrick, W. J. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, J. S. Auxier, A. J. James, A. D. Bourland, H. R. McDermott, E. J. Brown, J. S. Miller, W. H. Chambers, G. D. O’Hara, B. H. Clardy, John D. Rodes, Robert Edrington, W. J. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Glenn, Dudley A. Washington, George The PRESIDENT pro tem. The second section is adopted, and the vote will be taken upon the third. The vote being taken, the third section of the report of the Committee was de- clared to have been adopted. Mr. HOPKINS. This Convention hav- ing reconsidered its action and decided to continue the publication of its proceedings, and while I do not believe we have any right to muzzle the press, we do have a perfect right to prevent the publication, at the cost of the State, of improper and unjust—I will not say indecent—‘criticisms by the press upon our actions. I therefore move that the newspaper articles just sent up by the Delegate from the 7th Louisville District, and read by the Clerk, be not printed in the proceedings of this Conven- tion. Mr. FUNK. I do not object to that, pro- vided all other matters of a like character are omitted; but I do not propose to stand quietly by and have the basis of my remarks left out, whenv other gentlemen on this floor have hadtheirs printed. It is not fair; it is not just; it is not right. The i Covention can, of course, do just as it pleases; but on that motion I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. HOGG. And I second it. Mr. PETTIT. I understood the gentle- man to send those remarks up a part of his speech, and how can the Convention strike out any portion of a speech‘? l make the point that it is not within the power of the Convention to strike that out. Mr. FUNK. If that is struck out, I trust my entire remarks will be stricken out. _ Mr. CLAY. I think the Convention is ' strong enough to stand the criticism, and I think the most dignified way for us to act is not to be sensitive about that crit- icism, and I hope the gentleman from Floyd will withdraw his motion. ' Mr. BECKNER. I think we need chas- tisement, and think we ought to let it go in. 'l‘ he PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair will hold that the motion is not in order. Mr. SCOTT SMITH. I have a resolu- tion which I desire to have read, but upon whichl do not desire action now. Mr. COKE. l rise to a point of order; we have not adopted that resolution of the Special Committee. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair understands that the whole resolution was adopted. It was put section by section, and adopted as read. The resolution of the Delegate fron'i Monroe was read, as follows: - Resolved, That it shall be the further duty of the Editor to prepare for publica- tion, at public expense, one thousand copies of the directory of the members and ofii- cers of this Convention; said directory to be prepared on the style of the Congres- sional Directory; the question of electro- typing to be left to the Special Committee having the matter in charge. I desire that that lie on the Clerk’s table, with the privilege of calling it up at some future time. BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 Thursday,] STRAUs-I\Ioi\"reo.\iERr—GoiiBEL. [October 30. Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. STRAUS. I move that the Con- vention resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole on the pending question. A vote being taken, the motion was de- [clared to have been carried, and the Presi- dent pro tem. designated the Delegate from the Fourth District of Louisville as Chair- man. COMMITTEE on THE wHoLE. The CHAIRMAN. On yesterday after- noon, at the close of the session of the Committee of the Whole, we were dis- cussing the twelfth section of the Com- mittee’s report. The Delegate from Adair, at the close of the session, had the floor on his amendment. Had he concluded his remarks‘? Mr. MONTGOMERY. I had. Mr. GOEBEL. I will ask that the amendment of the Delegate from Adair be reported. The Reading Clerk read the amendment. The Chair recognized the Delegate from Covington. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I would like to ask the indulgence of the Committee to make a short explanation. Mr. GOEBEL. I yield to him for the purpose of concluding his remarks. Mr. MONTGOMERY. The objection has been made to the amendment I offer that it does not use the words “by consent ‘of his representatives,” that is, “that private property shall not be taken for public use without the consent of his rep- resentatives.” I understand that the use of that word grew out of the struggle that the Colonies had with England. Our ancestors thought that the mother country had no .I‘ight to tax us without representation, and this word “representatives” was put in the original Constitution to meet that idea, that a man should not be taxed without the consent of his representatives; but this part of the Constitution has come to be used, and is construed to be for a different purpose. I construe the words “by due process of law” as being equivalent to the words “by consent of his representatives;” because all our laws are made by our repre— sentatives, and when a thing is done by due process of law, it is done by the con- sent of our representatives. Therefore, the words “by consent of our representa- tives” or “by due process of law” are one and the same. I have not used the words “by the consent of our representatives,” because it is somewhat obsolete, and the words “by due process of law” are under- stood by everybody. Mr. GOEBEL. The principal objection that I have to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Adair is not based on the matter to which he has referred. I do not think that the omission of the language that he has mentioned will make any dif- ference in the legal effect of his amend- ment, if it were adopted. The principal objection that I have to his amendment is ~this: it undertakes to establish a difference between the case of taking private prop- erty for the public use by a municipal cor- poration or the State, and the taking by a private corporation. I cannot see why any such difference should be made. The prin- cipal thing that we want to do in this mat- ter is to conserve the rights of the citizen and the rights of the property-holder who is about to be deprived of his property, and it makes no difference to him whether his property is to be taken by a public or by a private corporation. It was supposed-— Mr. MONTGOMERY. Will the gen~ tleman allow me to ask a question? Does not the Commonwealth have to be served to some extent ‘? Mr. GOEBEL._~ When the Common- wealth comes to take a man’s property he ought to be paid for it before that property is taken. It has been supposed, or, at least, intimated in several decisions of the Court of Appeals, that the Legislature had the constitutional authority to authorize in a condemnation proceeding the actual dispos- session of the property-holder, upon the ex- 14 BILL or RIGHTS. Thursday,] ,._.__ ecution of a bond with security, without the payment of the money after the dam- ages had been so fixed in the County Court, or in the Circuit Court, during the course of the proceeding. In other words, that the giving of a bond with security amounted, in a constitutional sense, to the making of pre- vious compensation; but in two cases that were determined in the Appellate Court within the last two years, one of them being taken to the Court of Appeals by my friend, the Delegate from Clark, the case of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company vs. Asher, and the other the case of Peale vs. the Short Route Railway and Transfer Company, it was held that the statute which authorized the granting of the writ of pos- session, after the fixing of damages either in the County or Circuit Court, and before the payment of damages, and upon the ex- ecution of a bond, was the making of pre- vious compensation in a constitutional sense. The Appellate Court held that statute to be invalid. They held that there could not be, in a constitutional sense, a making of previous compensation without the actual payment of the damages. And they reversed in those cases the holding of the Circuit Court Judges, granting a writ of possession upon the execution of a bond with security by the railroad companies which prosecuted those condemnation pro- ceedings. Those were cases, it is true, where the condemnations were had by private. corporations. It appeared in the case of Peale that he was the owner of one single piece of property. It was all he had on earth. It was a piece of business property that he used to earn a living. It could not have made any difierence on earth to him whether his property was taken by the city of Covington for a public purpose, by the county of Kenton, or by the State of Kentucky; or whether, as in that case, it was sought to be taken by a railroad corpo- ration for the purpose of completing its railway. If he had been dispossessed he would not have had any money in the one GOEBEL—M OXTGOMERY. [October 30, case nor in the other, and an appeal being prosecuted in either case, he would have- been in exactly the same condition; that is, it was sought in that case to givethe bend; it was given, and an appeal was prosecuted. The litigation was attempted to be delayed, and if the writ of possession had been en- forced he would have been out of possession of his property and the value of it as well. I do not see what a hardship of that sort should be imposed upon a citizen, when the condemnation is sought to he had by a public corporation, any more than if sought to he had by a private corporation. In either event, the result to the property-(Mner, the citizen, is the same. He is deprived of his property. An appeal may be prosecuted; the litiga- tion may be delayed; the actual payment of the damages to him may be deferred for years, and the result is just exactly the same to him in the one case as in the other. It ought never to be permitted that a citizen should be actually turned out of the pos- session of his property until the value of it has been paid to him in money. and it is that principle that the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights, with reference to- this matter, has sought to perpetuate; and which ought not, as it seems to me, to be changed. There is another matter referred to by the Delegate; that is, the portion of this section of the report of the Committee about the levy of a special tax to reimburse a payment made for property~ taken for public use. I understood him, after the adjournment last evening. to practically withdraw his objection on that subject, be— cause of the amendmentI ofi‘ercd on yester‘ day striking out the words “special tax” and substituting “local assessment.” Mr. MONTGOMERY. IVill the gen~ tleman allow me to correct him '1’ I do not withdraw my objection to the Committee’s I merely said that the the report as it stands. amendment offered might obviate difi‘iculty. Mr. GOEBEL. That is what I under- BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Thursday,] SMITH—NUNN—L/IACKOY. [October 30- stood the gentleman to say—substituting the words “local assessment” might obviate sit. ' The Words “special tax” in that con- nection have been subject to some criticism. Whether they be just or not, is a matter immaterial, as the amendment, if adopted, will remove all doubt on that subject. The words “local assessment” have a well de- fined legal meaning; a local assessment is not a personal tax at all, but it is a charge upon property in a particular locality, levied on account of actual or a supposed benefit received by the property by reason of the public improvement there made. Here the gavel fell. And the'vote being taken on the amend- ment of the Delegate from Adair, it was rejected. The Reading Clerk announced the amendment of the Delegate from Hardin (Mr. Smith) as in order. Mr. H. H. SMITH. amendment yesterday. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Crittenden (Mr. Nunn) was read, and is as follows: I withdrew that Amend by inserting after the word “limb,” in the second line, the following: “Nor shall any punishment, by fine or otherwise, be inflicted by a general law where a fine or other punishment for the same offense has been inflicted by any municipal government or other political subdivision of the State.” Mr. NUNN. I desire to offer this as an amendment to the amendment: “Nor shall any punishment, by fine or otherwise, be inflicted by any municipal gov- ernment, or other political subdivision of a State, where a fine or other punishment for the same offense has been inflicted by a general law.” Mr. MACKOY. I think the proposi- tion is correct, but doubt whether that ought to be incorporatedin the Bill of Rights. It'might be better to refer that to the Com- mittee on Municipalities, and have it incor- porated as a part of that article; and I move that it be so referred. The CHAIRMAN. The motion is out of order. The Committee cannot refer any thing. Mr. MACKOY. Thatis true. Irecom- mend that that be done by the gentleman. Mr. NUNN. I will say to the gentle- man that this idea, if adopted, can be put by the Committee on Style in whatever por- tion of the Constitution considered best by them. In one of the two cases referred to by me the other day, J. J. Marshall, the Court, in‘ its opinion, says: “That the rea- son for the punishment of this widow, for letting her slaves run at large in the town of Richmond, was because it was a peculiar- wrong to that town.” Upon the same principle, every wrong committed in the State of Kentucky is a peculiar wrong to the neighborhood or community in which the crime is perpetrated. My idea is, that. the law of this State ought to be that when- ever a man commits an offense, he should be punished for that offense, and all should be punished alike. It does not matter where he is situated in the State. Some have said that if you did this that the towns inflicting punishment. I do not pro- pose that, but in the Legislative De- partment, or in the Municipal Depart- ment of this Constitution, let it be stated that a town or city shall not pass a by-law or ordinance inflicting a punishment except. to the same extent that the general law inflicts for that offense. Let the punish- ment be equal throughout the State, and let one punishment be sufficient. That is_ all I desire to say on the subject. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. It does seem to me that a city or town ought to have some- way of protecting itself; but it occurs to me further. that if a little town can get itself incorporated under this idea; if it has _ some particular pets or favorites whom it would like to shield from the State law, and whom it does not want punished by the Courts, all it has to do is to catch them up and try them by the law incorporating the little town, andset them entirely free from would be prohibited from 16* BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] PHELPS—HOGG—GOEBEL. [October 30 . the penalties of the law of this State. It seems to me it would be a shelter and a shield for those little towns to shield their pets; and I think that a town should have a right ‘to prohibit the sale of whisky within its borders, under such penalties as may be necessary. It may take one penalty in one part of the State, and another penalty in another. Besides that, Grand Juries and Circuit Courts are not so particularly in- terested in the protection and good morals of a little town in the district as the town oflicers themselves would be; and if you compel the town ofiicers to try those violating the State law within their towns, you compel the towns to pay their own offieers to do work for the State. Then where are they going to get the money to pay the expenses of the town authorities for trying these parties? I do think a town ought to have a right to pro- tect itself. I do think a town ought to have a right to have laws of its own that are adequate to protect itself, in any locality of the State. In one part of the State, the State law may be sufficient; in another part it may not he, and it might take both. What I want to say is that a man has no right to go on violating the good order of a town, and go whining around and say, “ You cannot try me, because I am subject to an indictment by the Common- wealth,” and thereby create everlasting confusion in the whole country. If the people are inclined to be disorderly, a town ought to have a right to punish the ofi'end- ers then and there, and make every offender fear the town authorities, as well as the State authorities; but the town ought not to have the right to take up its own pets and try them for the purpose of shielding them from the penalties of the State law. The vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Crittenden, the same was declared rejected. The amendment of the Delegate from 'Owsley was read, as follows: Amend section 12 by striking out, in lines 3 and 4, and after the word “with- out,” in line 3, the following: “The con- sent of himself or his representatives, and without.” Mr. HOGG. The object in striking that out is this: The report of the Committee reads: “No man’s property shall be taken or applied to public use without the con- sent of himself or his representatives.” It seems to me that both have to be done. You have to obtain his consent. and, in addition, pay him a just compensation therefor. No matter what you pay, his consent is necessary. With the words which I suggest struck out, it would read: “Nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without just compen- sation being previously made to him in money, or paid into Court subject to the order of the owner thereof.” If you want, with this section remaining as it is, to con- demn land for any public purposes, his consent is first necessary, though you pay him ever so much for it; but by my amendment you can condemn a man's land, and obtain possession of it by simply making him a reasonable compensation for it, or putting it where it will be at his command. I think all counties ought to have that privilege of condemning land by paying a reasonable compensation. And the vote being taken on the amend- ment, the same was declared rejected. The amendment of Mr. Goebel was read: Amend section 12 by striking from the third line thereof the words "‘ or applied to,” and insert in lieu thereof the words “damaged, injured or destroved for.” Mr. GOEBEL. The object of the amendment is to give a cause of action that does not now exist to the owner of property which is injured, damaged or destroyed, although not actually taken for public use. There were some resolutions offered on this subject before‘ the report of this Committee was made. I do not know whether ‘the matter was investigated by the Committee or not. I have investigated the matter to m BILL OF RIGHTS. 17 'Thursday,] , gentleman a question. 'horse was killed. Under that provision _would the State have to pay for it? GoEBEL—STRAUS. [October 30 . :some extent, and I want to state to the Committee the result of my investigation. The original Constitutional provision of ‘this. character that was adopted was con- tained in the Constitution of Illinois .adopted in the year 1870. The same pro- vision has been embodied in every Consti- tution that has since that date been adopted .in this country, except the Constitution of North Carolina, and the Constitution of .North Carolina does not now, and never -- did, contain any provision with reference “ to the taking of private property for public ‘use or the exercise of the right of eminent domain. This provision is embodied, as I say, in the Constitutions of Illinois, Penn- ;sylvania, Alabama, ‘Texas, Nebraska, Colorado and California. "That much is shown by the compilations of Missouri, Arkansas, Constitutions made by Mr. Poore up to the year 1878. Whether any other Constitu- tions adopted since that date embody a '_provision of that sort, I do not know. What I want to effect by this amendment iis to give the citizen of the Commonwealth ‘of Kentucky exactly the same rights, when his property is injured or destroyed by a "railway company, although not actually '.-“taken from his possession, that are, under llike circumstances and conditions, given to ‘the citizens of Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ala- bama, Missouri, Arkansas, Texas, and some “of the other States. Mr. STRAUS. I would like to ask the Suppose a diseased Mr. GOEBEL. I think not. Mr. STRAUS. You say “damaged, in- jured or destroyed.” Suppose a man had rdiseased cattle which were a public nuisance, and the public authorities wanted to destroy them. Under your amendment the public authorities would have to pay 'for them before they could abate the nuisance. Mr. GOEBEL. I do not think so. I- --do not think that would be the taking of private property for public use at all. The strongest Constitutional provision on this subject is embodied in the Constitution of Pennsylvania. It is said to have been drawn by Jeremiah S. Black, and is in these words. I read from the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the_case of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company vs. Miller, which was decided in November, 1889, and is reported in 132 U. S. Reports. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company was a corporation created before the adoption of that Constitutional pro- vision, and claimed exemption from that provision, and that was the question de- cided. In that opinion the Constitutional provision is quoted, and" you will see how stringent it is: “Municipal and other cor- porations, ‘and individuals invested with the privilege of taking private property for public use, shall make just compensation for property taken, injured, or destroyed for improvements, which compensation shall be paid or secured before such taking,_ injury or destruction.” In considering that provision, the Court, speaking of the propriety, policy, and the justice of that Constitutional provision, not of the legal effect of it, says (and I call the special attention of the members of the Committee to this opinion): “The pro- vision contained in the‘ Constitution of 1873 was merely a restraint upon the future exercise by the defendant of the right of eminent domain imparted to it by the State. By its terms, it imposes a restraint only upon corporations and individuals ‘in- vested with the privilege of taking private property for public use, and extends the right to compensation previously existing for property taken to compensation for property injured or destroyed by ‘the con- struction or enlargement of works, high- ways or improvements made or con structed by such corporations or'individ- uals. Such aprovision is eminently just, and is intended for the protection of the citizen, the value of whose property may 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. T hursday,] GOEBEL—STRAUS—RODES. [October 30.. be as effectually destroyed as if it were in fact taken and occupied.” In that case, there was a verdict sustained in the Fed- eral Supreme Court of $20,000 for injury to property in the city of Philadelphia that was not actually taken, but an em- bankment built along the street in front of it. It seems to me there is no reason why, if these rights are accorded to the citizens of other States, that the same rights should not be accorded to the citi- zens of Kentucky, and that it ought to be secured in the same way that it is secured to the citizens of those other States .by a Constitutional provision. The fact is, that this has been the law of Eng- land ever since 18-l5 by an act of Parliament. There has been something said upon this subject as to the effect it would have with reference to injunctions. It has been as- sumed that it would make some difi'er- ence with reference to the equitable remedy of injunction, where property was not ac- -tually taken, so that an injunction might be obtained to prevent the construction of a public work, although the property was not actually taken, but simply on account of some damage that it was feared might result; but these Constitutional provisions and statutes have been construed, and the holding is universal, that it does not affect the equitable remedy of injunction at all; that, in order to obtain and maintain an injunction, by reason of some supposed damage or destruction that will result to property from the doing of a public work, where there is no actual taking of the prop- erty, there must be a showing of actual interference with the possession. That is, a common law nuisance that could be en- joined, were it not for the great and the superior right of eminent domain. The mere fact of resulting damage is not a ground for an injunction in cases of that sort, and, therefore, no injury or improprie- ty can be apprehended from that fact. I submit that a provision of this sort ought to be embodied in the Constitution on ac- count of the eminent justice and propriety of it. Mr. STRAUS. I would vote for the: amendment if it applied alone to private corporations; but if it is to be construed to prevent the State, or any authority of the- State, to abate a nuisance, then I am against it; and I am afraid, the way it is- worded, it will apply all along the line. It is a well settled principle of law, that if‘ a fire breaks out in a large city, the city authorities have a right to destroy a man’s- house to prevent the whole city being burned up. Under the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kenton that could not be done. We have statutes already in this State authorizing the authorities to kill‘ distempered stock. Under the amendment ofl‘ered by the gentleman from Kenton the civil authorities would have to pay for the- stock before they could kill it. If he will so word his amendment as to make it apply to private corporations, such as railroad corporations in condemnation proceedings,. it would be all right; but if he attempts to prevent the State, through its civil authori- ties, or any municipal authorities, from abat- ing a public nuisance, or protecting itself ' by the exercise of the great police power of the State, I am against it. And about the case that he has read from (I have not investigated that question) Cali- fornia, it seems to me, that the section, as construed by the Courts, has been confined to private corporations. I will agree with. the gentleman, that if a private corporation takes property, or destroys or injures it, he ought to have compensation; but I will not agree that the State or any subdivision of the State shall be curtailed in the exer- cise of these great powers by the adoption of this provision, and I think there is some danger in it. Mr. RODES. had this matter under consideration, and adopted the article after some thought.- ‘The amendment of the Delegate from I think- Covington, I think, goes too far. I think the Committee‘ BILL OF RIGHTS 19 Thursday,] there was a case years ago in England which illustrates my idea exactly, and that is all I shall say about it. The Duke of ' Argyle owned a large estate in Scotland. They run a railroad somewhere about his premises, and, as he thought, injured the peculiar beauty and the fascination of his place; and upon that ground alone, because he said it injured his view, he sued the railway company, and in some way got the case before ajury and obtained a large amount of damages. The application of that doc- trine in that connection, which, I think, is fully carried out by the gentleman’s amendment, I am opposed to. Mr. GOEBEL. I would like, with leave of the Committee, to make some brief re- sponse to the interrogatory put by the gentleman from Bullitt. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no objec- tion, the gentleman can proceed. Mr. s,GrOEBEL. He says that he is in fa- vor of the principle that is attempted to be put in this Constitution on this subject, but objects to its general application, and thinks it ought to be limited to the taking or injury or destroying of property by private cor- porations. If he will read the Constitu- tional provision in the Constitution of Pennsylvania, he will find the language of that provision is general. In fact, muni- cipal. corporations are especially named, in it; and in every other Constitutional pro- vision upon the subject the language is general, just as it is in this amendment, just as it will be in the twelfth section of this report of the Committee if this amendment incorporated in it. There is no distinction made of that sort. And the vote being taken on the amend- ment of the Delegate from Covington, the same was, upon a division of the vote, viz: 27 in the affirmative and 32 in the nega- tive, declared lost. The next amendment, offered by Mr. Goebel was read, and is as follows: Amend section 12 by inserting after the word “thereof,” in the sixth line, the Bones—Gone EL—McCHoRD, [October 30 . words, “ without any deduction on account of benefits to any property of the owner.” Mr. GOEBEL. That is substantially the provision of the Constitution of the State of Ohio, and I offered it for this reason: The law, as now construed by the Appellate Court, is, that when a man’s property is taken in a condemnation proceeding, and he seeks damages on account of the inci— dental injury to that portion of his prop-1 erty which is not taken, there ‘is to be de- ducted a benefit, actual or assumed, result~ in g to the remaining property from the mak- ing of the improvement for which his prop- erty taken is applied. It seems to me that that is a benefit that he enjoys in common with all other members of the community in the neighborhood, and that there is no reason or justice why, when you come to compensate him, he should be charged with that special benefit, and deducting it from the price to be paid him for his property. If there is no deduction made, there will be no discrimination between him and others who own property in the same locality. It seems to me that that is the proper thing to do, and that is the way the law ought to be. And the vote being taken on the amend- ment, it was rejected. The next amendment, offered by Mr.- Goebel, was read, and is as follows: Amend section 12 of the Committee’s report by striking out the words “ special tax,” and inserting the words “local assess- ment ” in lieu thereof. Mr. RODES. I beg leave to say, if the Committee have the right to do so, we are ’ willing to accept that term, “local assess- ment,” in place of “special tax.” The amendmentwas thereupon adopted. The amendment of the Delegate from Washington was then read, and is as fol— lows: ~ Amend section 12 by striking out the words “ without the consent of himself or his representatives,” in lines three and four, and insert in lieu thereof the following words: “ Unless authorized by law.” Mr. MCCHORD. The only reason I 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] MoCHoRn—RoDEs—BENNETT. [October 30, ofi'er that is this: We understand the definition of the word “representatives,” and the Court of Appeals have held the word “ representatives” means “ members of the General Assembly;” but various Delegates of this Convention seem to think that the word does not mean General Assembly, but means his representatives, either real or personal. It seems to me, if it is the purpose of the Constitution to provide that no property shall be taken for public uses, unless authorized in some act of the General Assembly, we ought to say so in so many words in the Constitution, without leaving it a matter of doubt as to what is meant by the word “representa- tives.” I take it there is no question that it means the General Assembly. There- fore, I offer my amendment to provide that no property shall be taken or applied to public uses'unless authorized by law. And the vote being taken on the amend- ment, it was rejected. The amendment of Mr. Bennett was read, and is as follows: Amend the twelfth section of the Com- mittee's report by striking out all after the word “thereof,” in the sixth line of said section, down to and including the word “taken,‘‘ in the eighth line. The part stricken out being: “ And no special tax against the owner of such property shall be levied or collected to reimburse the pay- ment for the property so taken.” Mr. RODES. I wish to say that those two words in the third line are already stricken out. Mr. BENNETT. It seems to me that if a man is paid for his property he should not be exempt from taxation. As it is now, it exempts a man, no matter how much property he has, from paying any tax to help pay for the property taken. It ex- empts all- the other property he has. He might have $20,000 worth of property. Under that clause he is exempt from pay- ing any tax at all, if a small piece of his property is taken as a site for a school- house. Mr. MACKOY. I discussed this matter the other day, in the remarks I made when the Committee was discussing the Bill of Rights as a whole, and I merely desire to call the attention of the Committee of the Whole to the fact that the substitution of the words “local assessment ” does not re- lieve that clause of the objection I made the other day. That is, it makes two classes in the community. If a person does not own the property against which the assessment is to be made, he can be assessed ; but if he happens to be the owner of both the prop- erty which is to be condemned for a local improvement and the abutting property, he cannot be assessed; so that in the same community you have two classes of persons, one of whom can be assessed and made subject to taxation, and the other cannot, simply for the reason that they happen to own the property abuttmg upon the prop- erty proposed to be taken. Another reason is, it is purely legislative. If the rule is a harsh one, if a person is required to pay too much, let the rule be changed by the Leg- islature; but do not let us introduce into the Constitution an amendment of this kind, which will produce inequality, to abate an evil which the Legislature is per- fectly competent to correct. Mr. GOEBEL having addressed the Chair— The CHAIRMAN. There have been two speeches on the amendment. Mr. GOEBEL. They were both in favor of the amendment ofl'ered. No one has opposed the amendment. The CHAIRMAN. I had not noticed that. Otherwise, I would not have allowed it. You may proceed. Mr. GOEBEL. The criticism of the Delegate from Greenup has been obviated, it seems to me, by the striking out of “special tax,” and the substitution of the words “local assessment.” I do not think there was any difficulty with the original language itself, because it is not a general tax that is meant, but a special tax, and a ' special tax levied for a particular purpose; BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Thursday,] DEHAvEN-BR0NsToN—GoEBEL. [October 30 . that is, to reimburse and to compel the payment back of the price that was paid for the property taken. Now, the words “local assessment” have a well defined legal meaning, both in the text—books and in the decisions. A local assessment is not a personal tax at all. It is a charge upon particular real estate in a particular locality, levied on account of benefit re- ceived by that property from a public improvement there made. Mr. DEHAVEN. Permit me to ask a question: Suppose it becomes necessary to condemn some land for school purposes, and it is condemned, the owner receives full compensation for it, and then a localtax is imposed upon the school district to pay . for it, ought he to be exempt from it any more than another? Mr. GOEBEL. He ought not, and this does not do any thing of the sort. Mr. BRONSTON. I would be glad to have the gentleman to stzte why it does not? ' Mr. DEHAVEN. It was with the idea that he might address himself to the sub- ject that I made the inquiry; and there is another suggestion I would make: If a man receives the full pay for the property taken, he is then even with all the balance of the people living in that district; Why ought he not to be assessed like all the rest in that district to pay the assessment made‘? Mr. GOEBEL. The object of this is to have him assessed like everybody else, and not in any other way. In the case referred to in the discussion the other day, this state of fact appeared: that property had been taken to lay out a street, and the jury had assessed the value of the property taken, and that value had been paid to the owner; a local assessment was then levied upon the abutting property of the citizen not taken, to reimburse the whole damages that had ‘been paid, and it is that sort of thing we want to prevent. It is not a special tax. A special tax cannot be special with refer- ence to one county, so far as all the citizens of that county are concerned. It might be special so far as the citizens of the State are concerned. It cannot be special so far as a city is concerned, with reference to all the citizens of the city. But the object of this is to have the reimbursement made by general taxation, that bears upon the owner whose property is taken alike with all other citizens of the local community, and it is limited to a local assessment levied for the purpose of reimbursing the payment. A ‘local assessment is, as I said, a charge upon property—not a personal tax at all; it is a charge levied upon property abutting upon the public improvement. In the city of Louisville, as I understand it, those local assessments are levied in squares or quarter- squares. In the city of Covington they are levied, under the city charter, on all property abutting on the improvement made—not upon any other. On the other hand, a local assessment is not levied upon all property in a district, or in a city, or in a county, or in a State. That is the differ- ence between a local assessment and gen- eral taxation. Mr. DEHAVEN. I am unable to per- ceive the force of the gentleman’s argu- ment yet. As I understand his amend- ment, as it now reads, is: “And no local assessment against the owner of such prop- erty shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the property thus taken.” Now, the case put to him comes exactly within the provisions of that section. It becomes necessary to build a school—house in a certain school district. No land can be obtained there except by condemnation. The land is condemned, and the value of that land is fixed by a jury. When the owner of the land receives the full com- pensation for his land, why does he not ’ occupy exactly the same position as the balance of the residents in that school dis- trict‘? How is that land to be paid for? It can be paid for only in one way, and that is by a local assessment or taxation upon the school district to pay for that 22 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] land. If I am mistaken in that, I am very egregiously mistaken about it, and there you will have this anomalous state of case: that you have condemned a man’s land'for school purposes, and he has re- ceived full compensation for it, and yet you exempt him from his proportion of the tax to pay for the land. Mr. GOEBEL. The gentleman would be right, if in the case of the school there were an attempt made to levy a local assess- ment; that is, to reimburse the payment made by the levy of a local assessment upon the property abutting upon the school-house property. That is what we want to pre- vent, not the levying of a tax upon the school district or upon the county at all. It is not a local tax, but a local assessment. Mr. DEHAVEN. It is a local tax— Mr. GOEBEL. Local assessment. )Ir. DEHA VEN. Upon that school district‘? Mr. GOEBEL. The gentleman does not consider the difi'erence between a tax and an assessment. A local assessment is a charge upon property. It is not a personal tax. It creates and imposes no personal liability at all. Mr. MUIR. The Committee propose to amend that section a little further, and to say, “and no local assessments on the prop- erty so taken or applied.” The case put by the gentleman from Oldham,in his view of it, would be a very proper objection, and I can see very well the force of the proposition; but this is the idea that is endeavored to be interpolated in this section, that there shall be no special assessment upon this particu- lar property in contradistinction to all other property; but that it shall bear its propor- tion of tax in common with all other property round about that is to be assessed or taxed for the payment of improvements; but that the owner shall not be assessed without all others around being assessed equally with him. To exemplify: I will put again the case that hap- pened to myself in the city of Chicago. I think that that will exemplify the matter GoEBEL—DEHAvEN—MUIR. [October 30 . certainly and perfectly, beyond mistake, and will impress upon the mind of every Delegate the of getting the section here in proper shape. I am wedded to no particular form of words, but I want it done in some such way as that in Kentucky shall not happen such a state of case as the gen- tleman said happened to him in Covington, and to me in Chicago, and that was this: I owned six acres of land on the western edge of the city of Chicago. It ran in the form of a square and in parallel bounda- ries. The city of Chicago and the little town of Cicero, west of Chicago, undertook to consolidate. My property lay in be- tween the two places, outside of the city of Chicago, and within the province of the city of Cicero. The city of Chicago, ex- tending its boundaries, out two lines east and west through my property, and one line north and south, for streets. They simply ran a plow marking the outside boundary of the streets. They assessed in my favor, for the taking of that property. $1,000. They assessed against me, for ben- efits, a special tax that was not assessed upon anybody else—a special assessment against me individually of $1,015, to cover the amount paid to me, and $15 for the cost of the condemnation. And that is what we want here to prevent. That is what we want to meet here. Not, as in the case of the gentleman from Oldham, that that particular property shall not bear its tax, in common with all the other lands around about within the district, for the building of a school-house, but that particular per- son, whose land may taken for a school-house site, may not, by virtue of some supposed advantage conferred on him, be obliged to pay the entire damages growing out of the condemnation of his property, to the ex- importance ’ clusion of his neighbors. Mr. MCCHORD. I ofi'er an amendment. Mr. MACKOY. I want to offer an amendment. I would not like to tamper with the original section of the Bill of BILL OF RIGHTS. 23 "Th ursday,] “taking out of other words. DEHAVEN Rights; but if this Convention desires to ‘tamper with it, the amendment I propose will produce what we want. The amendment offered by Mr. McChord ‘was read, and is as follows: Add after the word “taken,” in the 'eighth line of section 12, these words: *“But such owner shall be liable for any general tax levied for that purpose.” The amendment offered by Mr. Mackoy ‘was read, and is as follows: - No local assessment shall ever be im- ‘posed, levied or collected to reimburse the payment of property so taken. And the vote being taken on the amend- ment of Mr. McChord, it was rejected. Mr. DEHAVEN. I would like to in- quire of the gentleman from Nelson how it is possible to levy a tax upon property that is taken away from a man and vested somewhere else? Mr. MUIR. It is levied upon the prop- “erty from which it is taken. And the vote being taken on the amend- ment of the Delegate from Nelson (Mr. Muir), it was rejected. Mr. C. ALLEN. The amendment of the Delegate from Nelson strikes at the right thing, but it does not go far enough, .as it seems to me; and I desire to call the , attention of the Convention to the fact ‘that the words he inserts necessitate the If you insert those words, “ no local assessment on the property so taken or applied,” and then follow those with “against the owner of :such property.” it_won’t do. Mr. MCCHORD. I rise to a point of order. We have voted on that resolution. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair sustains the point of order. The vote being taken on the amend- ment of the Delegate from Greenup, it was .adopted. Mr. GOEBEL. .amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- I wish to offer an ' Llows: Amend by adding, “ and when property _ ALLEN—GOEBEL. 4 [October 30 . is so taken by, or for a municipal subdivision of the State, no tax other than a tax general to such municipal subdivision-shall be levied or collected to reimburse the payment for the property so taken.” ' Mr. GOEBEL. It seems to me that that necessarily obviates all the objections that have been made. It is a method of doing what was attempted by the Commit- tee. It is a simple declaration, that no re- imbursement tax shall be levied, except a tax general to the municipal subdivision of the State, by or for which the property is taken. It seems to me that nothing is re- quired more than a statement of the propo- sition to show its eminent justice and fair- ness. There ought not to be permitted the singling out of anybody in. order to impose a tax of that sort. If a tax is imposed, it ought to be general to thelocal community‘ for which it is taken. Mr. RODES. I think that meets the objection. So far as I am individually con- cerned, it does. A vote being taken on the amendment, it was adopted. The CHAIRMAN. The question is now on the adoption of section 12 of the Com- mittee’s report, as amended. Mr. BECKHA W .' I desire to offer, as a substitute for that section, section 14 of the present Bill of Rights, as follows: No person shall, for the same offense, be twice put in jeopardy of his life -or limb; nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of his representatives, and without just com- pensation being previously made to him. I may be very much mistaken, but I do think that there have been several serious mistakes made in adopting various sections . of this report. One, and the most serious, was in adopting section 4 of the report of the Committee, restraining religious free- dom and liberty of conscience. In my judgment, the Committee, by a vote of 36 to 35, has made a mistake scarcely less serious in adopting this amendment, which was offered by my esteemed friend from the 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday] Moonn county of Boyd. In turning over the leaves of the volume before me, I find lan- guage in the Constitutions of 1792 and 1799 precisely identical with that of the section which I have just read. We have lived under it, and we have prospered under it for that time. Two complaints have been made ——one by the Delegate from Covington, whose amendment has just been adopted, and one by the Delegate _from Boyd, and his amendment was adopted. I desire to call attention again to the serious char- acter of his amendment. What power does it give to a Court of Justice that it has not had for these one hundred years‘? I think, under the amendment adopted, after a capital case has been committed to a jury and they have retired to the jury-room, nay, after they have returned into the Court room with a verdict; before the verdict is read by the Clerk, the Judge of a Circuit Court can take the case from them and commit it to another jury. N ow, the case my esteemed friend from Boyd put was a hard case. But it is hard cases that make ship- wreck of the law. I do not feel that that hard case is sufiicient for us to deviate from what is the direct language of the section we have lived under ever since we have been organized as a State. That is all I desire to sav upon that subject. There is another question to which I de- sire to ‘call the attention of the Committee, and it is this : Let us concede, if you please, that the Fifth Amendment to the Federal Constitution is an inhibition or a prohibi- tion upon the Federal Government alone, and not upon the State, as heretofore ex- pounded‘ by the Court. I desire to put this question as to whether or not that prohibi- tion has not been extended by the adoption of this language in the Fourteenth Amend- ment to the Constitution of the United States: “ No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United tates, nor shall any State deprive any per- BECKHAM. [October 30 - son of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” I am not able to see that the Courts, State and Federal’, may not, in construing that Fourteenth Amendment, make it apply to the Fifth Amendment, which provides that “ no person shall be for the same offense twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” I desire to submit that question to the careful consideration of the Delegate from Boyd and to this Commit- tee, that we do not put ourselves in the at- titude of inserting a section in this Consti- tutionpvhich may be in conflict with the Constitution of the United States. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I have endeavored to answer this hard case three or four times. I desire to say to the distinguished gentle— man, in response to the queries he pro- pounds, that he cannot find a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States has reversed the decision I have read, nor can he show that they have made the Four- teenth Amendment apply to this Amend- ment, which our Courts have decided does not apply to trials by jury in our State. Mr. BECKHA \l. Will it interrupt the gentleman for me to state a case? Mr. L. T. MOORE. Certainly not. . Mr. BECKHAM. Under the system of taxation of railroads, we all know that the railroads are given a day on which they can appear in Frankfort before the Rail- road Commission to make complaint of the assessment against them, just as an individ- ual can go before the Board of Supervisors in a county and complain of an improper assessment. The Court of Appeals have held that that having a day before the Railroad Commission was, in the meaning of the Constitution, due process of law. That case was taken to the Supreme Court of the United States and was affirmed. Now, I put the question, how did the Sn- preme Court of the United States get juris- diction of that case unless the question was whether that was due process of law in accordance with the Fourteenth Amend» ment‘? BILL OF RIGHTS. 25 Thursday,] MooRE—JoNsoN—DEHAvEN. [October 30 - Mr. L. T. MOORE. That is what I say. It was in no sense a construction that this Amendment, of which I have spoken, was in the power of the State Court at all. They decided that case under the Four- teenth Amendment, and not under the Amendment on which I read the decision yesterday.‘ All of these gentlemen seem to be proceeding on the idea that Judges are going to be corrupt. I presume that they are going to be honest. I cannot as- sume that they are going to be corrupt in favor of the criminal. The Legislature can provide how a jury shall be charged, and our Court of Appeals never fail to re- verse a case when they find the slightest error committed against a criminal. There is no danger to the prisoners of the Com- monwealth under that section. Mr. J ON SON . I desire to submit a few remarks on this matter. The CHAIRMAN. can only proceed by leave. DELEGATES. Leave! Leave! Mr. JONSON. I am obliged to the Committee for the leave. I think the action of the Convention yesterday in adopting the amendment of the Delegate from. Boyd, with all due deference to the opinion of the majority, was incorrect, and was, perhaps, obtained by his eloquence and personal magnetism. I will not say, as did one of the Delegates from Louis- ville, that our “better” judgments got ad- vantage of us, but I hope our better judg- ments, aftera night’s sleep, and a little more reflection and consideration, will lead us in the other direction on this subject, and get us in the right direction. Now. I am perfectly willing to‘admit that we have no Judge in Kentucky today who is corrupt. I am perfectly willing to admit, so far as my memory serves me, that we have had no such J udge anywhere in any of the districts of this State. But this amendment is an innovation. It is striking down a principle that has been solidly imbedded in our jurisprudence since the The gentleman formation of the Government—one in which every State, old and young, so far as. I have any information, has, up to this time, concurred with absolute unanimity. I believe that it is a dangerous precedent to establish; I believe that it is a dangerous power; that. it is putting in the hands of one man your rights, your liberties and your life. I believe it is putting it in the power of one man opportunities for the oppression of the citizens of this State, the humblest as well as the greatest. I was reading last night something on this subject, and I was struck with the idea that there was too much legislation in this. country. Here is Congress at Washington legislating at large for the people of every State, and here are forty-two other Legisla- tures meeting, perhaps, annually. It seems- to me that this is an apt illustration of the position taken, that. there is too much legis- lation. I‘ am not assuming, and will not, that Judges are corrupt, or that they will be corrupt; but it is in the'memory of‘ most of us on this floor that a few years back there was an unfortunate state of affairs in this community, and all over the United States, in which passions were highly aroused. Judges, being men, are subject to like passions with the rest of us; and it was possible at that time, and very probable, that such a ruling might have been obtained as would have deprived a man of a jury of his peers properly,honestly and regularly empaneled. I do hope the the Delegates will concur with the Delegate from Shelby, and adopt his substitue. Mr. DEHAVEN. Will the Oom’ention indulge me while I make a single objection to the section as it is? If I understand the office of a Bill of Rights, it is to pro- tect the individual citizen in all his rights and privileges. I think the section we now have under consideration, with the amend- ment of the Delegate from Boyd, is the most dangerous doctrine that we can possi- bly promulgate to our people. If I under~ stand the amendment, you may put a man 26 BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘accused of crime is innocent. -of the citizens of this country. or malignant enough to do so. Thursday,] DEHAVEN -on trial as often as you please, until there is .a verdict and judgment. You can keep on with the trial until you convict him. The presumption of law always is, that a man The gentle- man has said that we have no corrupt Judges, and he cannot indulge in the pre- sumption that we are going to have any. I hope, from the peculiar attitude I occu- py, that it may be so presumed, as far as I .am concerned; but I do say the power that you have lodged in the hands of a Circuit Judge is a power greater than should ever be in the hands of any mortal man God Almighty ever created. You give to a Circuit Judge a power that is dangerous, and absolutely destructive to the liberties You say that a Circuit Judge may keep on trying a man until he is convicted, if he is corrupt I think the doctrine laid down in our Bill of Rights, and as it has been for years, is the correct one. To my mind, a man is not put in jeopardy until a jury is accepted and sworn. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Will the gentle- man permit a question‘? Mr.DEHAVEN. Certainly. Mr. MOORE. Don’t you know that the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that an individual could not be discharged unless there was conviction or acquittal? Mr. DEHAVEN. I am going on Ken- tucky authority. All I want to do is to call attention to the fearful power that is lodged in the Circuit Court Judges under the amendment of the Delegate from Boyd. And as popular and deserving as the Dele- gate from Boyd is, I am satisfied, if I were ‘corrupt or malignant enough, I could take him in his own county, and hang him upon .an indictment for murder. Mr. MOORE. Not unless I deserve it. Mr, DEHAVEN. If it is in order, I anove to reconsider the vote by which the MOORE—~GOEBEL. [October 30 . amendment of the Delegate from Boyd was adopted. Mr. MGHENRY. I rise to a point of order. The Committee of the Whole cannot reconsider any thing. The CHAIRMAN. The point is well taken. We will now take a vote. The Chair has been very lenient in this matter. Mr. BECKHAM. I would like to sug- gest that if my substitute is adopted, 1 will have no sort of objection to the amend- ment of the Delegate from Covington, as it now appears in the report of the Com- mittee. Mr. MOORE. I object to contracts being made about these things. The section of the report of the Com- mittee, as amended, was then read; also section 14 of the old Bill of Rights. the substitute offered by the Delegate .from Shelby county. Mr. GOEBEL. I would like in some way to get the matters separated, so that we can vote intelligently in favor of what we favor, and against what we are against. With all deference to the’ Chair, it seems to me that a motion to reconsider is in order. We want to get this thing in as good shape as possible; and I want to move to amend the substitute with such portion of the re- port of the Committee as is not embraced in the amendment of the Delegate from Boyde-the changes we have made with reference to requiring payment in advance for property before it is taken. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of the opinion that that is out of order. Mr. GOEBEL. I offer that as an amendment to the substitute. The CHAIRMAN. Afterwe have pre- pared ourselves for a vote and announced ourselves ready, it is too late to offer an amendment to the substitute. we must have a vote. And a vote being taken, the substitute of the Delegate from Shelby county was adopted. BILL OF RIGHTS. 27 Thursday,] Mr. GOEBEL. If it is in order, I want to offer an amendment to the substitute. Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point of order that it is out of order. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of the opinion that it is not in order. Mr. GOEBEL. It should be in order at some time. - The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks it will be in order when the matter comes before the Convention. Mr. KNOTT. As I understand the status of the question, the substitute of the Delegate from Shelby has taken the place ‘of, the section reported by the Committee. Is not that yet open for amendment‘? It has not been adopted by this Convention. Mr. RODES. Certainly, I think it is. Mr. KNOTT. I say my friend from Covington has aperfect right to offer his amendment. Mr. BRONSTON. This Committee has adopted the substitute of the Delegate from Shelby in lieu of the section reported by the Committee. We have already de- termined that we will take the substitute. Mr. BLACKBURN. . But the substi- tute which we have adopted was only offer- ed by the Delegate from Shelby this morn-~ ing. Therefore, the Delegate- could not offer his amendment until just this instant. Mr. GOEBEL. I offered it before the vote and afterwards. Mr. BLACKBURN. It seems to me that he should have a right to offer it. Mr. J ON SON. We are in this attitude: Here is aCommittee’s report with various amendments -— ' The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has de- cided the question. Mr. GOEBEL. Iofi'er my amendment as an amendment to the substitute, adding to it what was added to the Committee’s 're- port. Mr. BRONSTON. order. The CHAIRMAN. State the point. I rise to a point of GOEBEL—BROXSTON—KNOTT. [October 30 . Mr. BRONSTON. It is out of order to offer the amendment. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will de- cide the point not well taken; it is in order. M1‘. BRONSTON. win the Chair allow me to make a single suggestion? Why would it not be in order for the Delegate from Boyd to offer his amendment to this substitute ? The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks any gentleman can offer an amendment. Mr. BRONSTON. The Hcusehas voted that this substitute shall be the section. Now, after we have done that, can any gentleman offer an amendment‘? The CHAIRMAN The Chair may be wrong, but he is going to stick to it- You can go on and prepare your amendments. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to appeal from that decision of the Chair. The CHAIRMAN. I will refer the question to the President. Mr. JOHNSTON. Until the appeal. is sent up regularly, we should proceed with the business of the Committee. Mr. BRONSTON. I am willing to leave it to the President of the Convention. If this precedent is established, there will never be an end to things. I was of the opinion that the amendment ought to have been allowed before the vote was taken on the substitute, but after the vote was taken it was clearly out of order. The CHAIRMAN. Let the President decide it; the Chair will not take it as a re- flection on himself. Mr. CLAY. The opinion of the Dele- gate from Bourbon is this: That when the substitute was pending, before it was adopted, amendment was in order, but after it was adopted, amendment was not in order. What is offered as aisubstitute must be first perfected. I would hold that this amend- ment was in order before the vote was taken, but when the substitute was inserted in lieu of the original proposition, the amendments were not in order. I _ The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will 28 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday] CLAY—GOEBEL—BRONSTON. fi [October 30. change his mind. There is nothing like being right. Mr. CLAY. The Delegate from Bour- bon would suggest, that as the Chair refused to allow the Delegate from Covington to offer his amendment when it was in order, that that decision should also be reversed. Mr. MACKCY. I make the point of order that that cannot be done. Mr. GOEBEL. I move to reconsider the vote by which the substitute was adopt- ed. Mr. BRONSTON. I rise to a point of order. The CHAIRMAN. State your point. Mr. BRONSTON. The point of order I desire to make is, that that motion to re- consider cannot be made until the Conven- tion has determined whether it will adopt this substitute as part of the report of the Committee. Then a motion to reconsider will be in order. Mr. MCHENRY. I don’t think a motion to reconsider can be made in Committee of the Whole. Mr. KNOTT. Do not the same rules apply to the Committee of the Whole that apply to the Convention‘? Mr. MCHENRY. So far as applicable. That is not applicable. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would like to have some information from the Delegate from Bourbon as to whether a motion to reconsider can be made in Com- mittee of the Whole‘? Mr. CLAY. The Delegate from Bour- bon is not positive, but he supposes that the Committee of the Whole is in the main governed by the rules governing the Convention. He does not think that the right to reconsider is cut off in any way under our rules. Mr. STRAUS. I make the point of or- der that the Delegate from Covington (Mr. Goebel) cannot make the motion to re- consider, as he did not vote the right way. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I voted in the , right way to make the motion to reconsider, and I make it. A vote being taken on the motion to re- consider, the motion was declared to have been lost. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the next section of the Committee’s report. The Clerk thereupon read section 13 of the Committee’s report, and a vote being taken thereon, it was adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Report the next section. The Clerk read section 14 of the Com- mittee’s report, and a vote being taken thereon,it was adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Report the 15th section. The Clerk read said section. as follows: All persons shall be bailable by sufficient security, unless for capital offenses, when the proof is evident or the presumption great, and the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when in case of rebellion or oi'invasion, the‘ public safety may require it. To this section the following amend- ment was proposed by the Delegate from Russell : Amend section 15, line three, before the word“ great,” by inserting “of his guilt.” A vote being taken, said amendment was rejected, and the section, as reported by the Committee, Was thereupon adopted- The CHAIRMAN. Report the next. amendment. The 16th section of the Committee’s re- port was read, and is as follows: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel punish- ments inflicted. To that there is an amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark : Amend by inserting after the word “cruel” the words “or unusual.” Mr. FUNK. In the absence of the Delegate from Clark, I ask leave to with- draw that. BILL OF RIGHTS. 29 Thursday,] TRUSDELL—BRENTS—J ONSON. [October 30. The CLERK. There is a similar amend- ment to that offered by the Delegate from "Campbell. Mr. TRUSDELL. That was offered by Mr. Washington, who is not here. I have no authority to do any thing with it. Upon a vote the amendment was re- ~jected, and thereupon the section of the Committee’s report adopted. Mr. BRENTS. On October 3d I of- fered section 2. and part of section 3, of the old Bill of Rights, as a new section for ‘the consideration of the Committee. Sec- tion 2 was adopted as subsection 8 of sec- vtion- 1 of the Committee’s report. That being all I desire, I withdraw the amend- ment I ofl'ered. The CHAIRMAN. Report the next :section. Section 17 of the Committee’s report ‘was read, and is as follows: The person of a debtor,‘ where there is not strong presumption of fraud, shall not be continued in prison, ‘after delivering up his estate for the benefit of his creditors, in .such manner as shall be prescribed by law. To that there was an amendment offered by the Delegate from McLean: Amend by striking out section 17 of the vreport of the Committee, and inserting in lieu thereof: “ That hereafter no person .shall ever be imprisoned for debt at the suit of any citizen or citizens in this State.” Mr. J ON SON . I stated in some remarks ‘the other day that four States in this Union ‘_had incorporated in their Constitutions provisions similar to the one I offer as a substitute for this section of the Commit- tee’s report. I am glad to say that each of those States belongs to the particular sec- tion of the country to. which Kentucky be- longs. I am glad to say that they initiated that idea. It originated in Texas in 1845. I am glad to say that this idea, that the liberty of a citizen is absolutely superior to every consideration of dollars and cents, so far as it has found recognition, has found it in the South. I am glad to say that we have set an example to some of our neigh- bors in humanity and magnanimity—to those people who call themselves God’s people. And while I would not array any sectional prejudice for any purpose, or refer to any lineof longitude or latitude, here or anywhere, I am glad that, so far as it has been done, it has been done by our country. All I want now is to induce these hundred Delegates, representing this old State of ours, to adopt this in the Constitution. Long before the idea dawned in Texas, and while Texas belonged to a foreign power— in1821—we enacted a law that all‘ laws authorizing the issuance of any capias ad satisfaciendum should be repealed, and thereafter no such writ should issue. That law, as I understand, was intro- duced into the Legislature of Kentucky by that grand old Vice President of ours, whose monument I referred to the other day, Richard M. Johnson. I did not know of the existence of that statute until I saw that inscription, and when I saw it I began looking back to see what it was and when it was, and I found it to be “ Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, that all laws authorizing a capias ad satiyaciendum” should be repealed. I think that grand old man and his posterity had a right 'to feel proud that he was the author of that act. I am ready to say, as an humble citizen of the- Commonwealth, that I am glad it is so far back in our statute law; but when I come down to a later date, and read what has been our statute, I am not so proud. Our General Statutes, as I stated the other day, authorize the issuance of this writ upon judgments rendered in slander and trespass suits and cases for malicious prosecutions, and I assume and contend that our statute has a discrimina- tion against the poor and in favor of the rich, and I insist that that discrimination should not obtain any longer. If it is to be a part of the punishment, let it be in the judgment; but I do not think that the mere fortuities of circumstances, the own- 3O BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] McH EXRY—P'L'GH. [October 80 . ing or not owning property, should deter- mine whether a man shall go to prison or not. Mr. MCHENRY. I do not know but what we may have laws in Kentucky dit- ferent from the laws in Texas. We have a law which is nothing but imprisonment for debt, and it is a law that ought to stand. We need it in Kentucky, if we don’t need it in Texas. It is a law that requires that a man who should support a child which ought to be near and dear to him, and who fails to do it, shall be imprisoned. There is no construction of that except that it is an imprisonment for debt. You cannot keep the man in jail longer than ten days. He gives notice that he will take the insolvent debtor’s oath, and in ten days he is out, and that is an end of it, so far as the imprison- ment is concerned. I hope the amendment will not be adopted. . Upon a vote thereon, the amendment was rejected. Mr. PUGH. I desire to withdraw an amendment heretofore offered by me, and offer the one which I now send up. The amendment was read. and is as fol- lows: Amend the Bill of Rights proposed by the Committee by striking out section 17, and substituting in lieu thereof the following: SEC. 17. No person shall be imprisoned for debt in this State; but this shall not prevent the Legislature from providing for imprisonment or holding to bail persons charged with fraud in contracting or seek- ing to evade the payment of said debt, or from prescribing like punishment in matters of tort or personal injury. . Mr. Chairman, in presenting for the consideration of my associates at this hour an amendment to the Bill of Rights not suggested by the Committee, I fully realize the embarrassing, if not insuperable, difli- culties with which I am confronted. A sub- ject, however, involving imprisonment for debt is certainly of suflicient gravity to m rit a few moments’ investigation before it receives our final action. If those upon whom rests the responsibility of sending us here have a right. to expect that the Con- stitution we are attempting to frame shall reflect the concerted wisdom of at least a majority of the one hundred Delegates, then the assumption cannot prevail that the mere report of a Committee, prepared without any express instructions or declara- tion of sentiment upon the part of this body, must, through false delicacy or deference, or for any reason whatever, operate as a barrier to a different conclusion, or in any way preclude a free interchange of opinions, looking to such a result. With due regard for the exceedingly beneficial services ren- dered by the Committee, and with the high- est personal esteem for the seven talented and painstaking gentlemen composing same, I must insist that the ninety-three other Delegates, or any of’ them, if they choose, have a right in opposition to be heard. The Committee being chosen to aid and not to thwart our joint delibera- tions. I, therefore, cannot tolerate the thought that further inquiry involves any element of personal antagonism or disre- spect. The demand for this Convention presupposes the recognized necessity for change in our organic law. If we regard the old Constitution as the shrine of an- tiquity, and ourselves its blind devotees, we thereby lose sight of the very object for which we have been called. Far better that we should be regarded as iconoclasts, or idol-breakers, rather than idol-worship- ers, if we only confine our work of destruc- tion to the idols of the musty past that rep- resent obsolete and obnoxious principles. Our business is to voice the sentiment of the progressive living to-day; to cast down any idol of the past that fails to subserve the best interests of the present. Such an idol we have in the seventeenth section of this report, which is simply a rcaffirmance of the doctrine of 1792, and which has served as the ample shield for innumerable acts of heartless oppression. It may be a partial restriction of the old doctrine, but it falls far short of the spirit of the new. The hor- BILL OF RIGHTS. 81 Thursday,] PUGH. [Octobei 4O . ribly sanguinary rule of the Twelve Tables of Rome in the fifth century, which sub- jected the unfortunate debtor, at the caprice of the creditor, to sale into perpetual slavery beyond the Tiber or to death, and even to a dismemberment and horrid parti- tion of his body, fell into disuse, says Gib- bon, through the humanity of witnesses, accusers and Judges. Humanity has long since spoken as to this provision, which in terms now, as in all ages of the past, unjustly discriminates in favor of the creditor and against the debtor. Will we sanction here its dictates, or shall we await its judgment? In obedience to enlightened public senti- ment, imprisonment for debt in every State of this Union has become, de facto, a dead letter. Of the twenty-three States that mention it in their Constitutions, eight of them expressly prohibit it. Three only-— Pennsylvania, Vermont and Colorado—- have provisions similar to our own; but the other twelve confine the practice to punish- ment for fraud, substantially as provided for in the substitute I offer. I would not forbid punishment for fraud. but I cannot support a provision that necessarily implies that an unfortunate, yet innocent, person may be cast into prison for debt. Notice the language of the section: “The person of a debtor, where there is not strong pre- sumption of fraud, shall not be continued in prison, after delivering up his estate for the benefit of his creditors, in such manner as shall be prescribed by law.” To whom and what is the inherent right thus de- clared? Is it a right of liberty‘? or merely the right to regain, unless withheld on pre- sumption, the liberty thus shamelessly sacrificed? My revered jurist friend from the county of Todd has likened this Con- vention to a golden wedding, forgetting, perhaps, that golden weddings last but a day. He did not say, but I presume' Ken- tucky is the queen of the occasion, with the Preamble her crown and the Bill of Rights the wreath of glory to encircle her brow. ' Is imprisonment for debt, I ask, one of the rare, sparkling and priceless jewels to adorn the chaplet, and claim for her admiration among her modern-day rivals in the sister- hood of States? The substitute I offer draws the line, where public sentiment places it, by shielding the innocent, while it admits of due punishment to the evil-doer. I protestagain st adopting a clause which, by reason of the practices it renders possi- ble, and the outrages it has already justi- fied, makes sacriligious the declaration that we are “grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religiousliberty which we enjoy.” Let us see to it that no injustice be done our people in placing before the world in this most important record a fair representation of the spirit of our civiliza- tion, the line of our progress and meas- ure of our philanthropy. Lord Bacon says that a “ froward retention of custom is as turbulent a thing as an innovation; and ' they that reverence too much old times are but a scorn to the new.” Referring to an old soldier imprisoned for debt, Whittier beautifully expresses a sentiment I trust we all share; and with which I will close these rambling remarks :- “ What has the gray-haired prisoner done ‘I Has murder stained his hands with gore? Not so; his crime’s a fouler one: God made the old man poor! For this he shares a felon‘s cell— The fittest earthly type of hell! For this the boon for which he pour’d His young blood on the invader s sword, And counted light the leartul cost— His blood-gained liberty is lost! £22 -:a.- -:5:- ea:- -:5:- -:=:- ‘Down with the law that binds him thus! Unworthy freemen, let it find No refuge from the withering curse Of God and human kind! Open the prisoner’s living tomb, And usher from its brooding gloom The victim’s of your savage code, To the free sun and air of God I No longer dare as crime to brand The chastening of the Almighty’s hand! ” A vote being taken on the substitute, it was rejected. And a vote being taken, the section, as reported by the Committee, was thereupon adopted. - The CHAIRMAN. Report the next section of the report of the Committee. The 18th section of the report was read, and is as follows: 32 BILL OF RIGHTS. - authority under Thursd ay,] KNOTT. [October 30 . No ear: postfacto law, nor any law im- pairing the obligation of contracts. shall be passed by the General Assembly. Mr. KNOTT. amendment: I offer the following Amend by inserting after the words “ ea: postfacto law” the Words “ nor any retro- spective law.” It is scarcely necessary for me to say in a presence so intelligent as this, that retro— spective legislation is repugnant to natural justice. The very idea of law is a rule by which we govern our actions. It is true, as has been said on this floor, that retro- spective laws, at least of a certain charac- ter, are entirely within legislative competency as our Constitution now ex-_ ists. The Parliament of England had plenary power in this regard. It had the theory of that government to pass laws having retro- spective operations because of the supposed sovereignty of that body. It was supposed by some that all classes of this pernicious legislation were prohibited by the pro- vision of the Constitution which forbids the passage of any are postfacz‘o law; but it was properly held that that only applied to laws for the suppression and punish- ment of crime, and had no reference to civil jurisprudence. Retrospective laws have been passed in a number of cases in this State because there is no Constitu- tional inhibition upon it. I think it is time now that all laws should be made to commence in the future, and not like Janus, to look in both directions. My re- pugnance to this character of legislation began very early in my life. It was in- creased, if possible, by reading an old author when I was a boy, and that too by the light of a tallow candle. Blackstone says, speaking of natural laws: “It is likewise ‘a rule prescribed.’ Be- cause a bare resolution, confined in the breast of the legislator, without manifest- ing itself by some external sign, can never be properly a law. It is requisite that this resolution be notified to the people who are to obey it. But the manner in which this notification is to be made is matter of very great indifference. It may be notified by universal tradition and long practice, which supposes a previous publication, as is the case of the common law of England. It may be notified rim rear, by officers ap- pointed for that purpose, as is done with re- gard to proclamations, and such acts of Parliament as are appointed to be publicly read in churches and other assemblies. It may lastly be notified by writing, printing, or the like; which is the general course taken with all our acts of Parliament. Yet, whatever way is made use of, it is incum- bent on the promulgators to do it in the most public and perspicuous manner; not like Caligula, who (according to Dio Cassius) wrote his laws in a very small character, and hung them upon high pil- lars, the more effectually tc ensnare the people.” Now, I desire to say to my distinguished friend from Warren that I do not read this to impeach the accuracy of his histor- ical knowledge or to cast any imputation upon the reputation of Caligula. It may be that Draco was the man who did this. I do not know. Neither of them are any kin to me, and I do not care. Nor do I read it for the purpose of casting any re_ fiection upon Blackstone for having care- lessly followed the authority of Die Cas- sius; but I find it in my way, and there is no other way of getting around it and getting down to what I wish to read. There is still a more unreasonable method than this, which is called the making of laws err post forte, when, after an action (indifferent in itself) is committed, the Legislator then, for the first time, declares it to have been a crime, and inflicts a punishment upon the person who has committed it. Here it is impossible that the party could foresee that an action, innocent when it was done, should be afterwards converted to guilt by a subsequent law; he had, therefore, no cause to abstain from it; and all punishment for not ab- staining must of consequence be cruel and ‘BILL OF RIGHTS. - 33 unjust. . made to commence in future, and be noti- Thursday,] KNOTT—DEHAVEN—MCHENRY. [October 30 . All laws should be, therefore, fied before their commencement, which is implied in the term “prescribed.” Mr. DEHAVEN. I would like to ask the gentleman one question. Does not all the authority that you have read refer to ex post facio laws, and not to retrospective; and does it not often happen that the ends of justice absolutely require retrospective laws in the shape of curative statutes, and consequently does not justice require that the Legislature should have the right to pass retrospective laws‘? Mr. KNOTT. I do not think I shall be as long answering the question as the gen- tleman was in putting it. The section I have read is not confined to ex post facto laws at all, but relates, as the author him- self says, to all laws. I will here say that however much hardship may be incurred in the transactions mentioned by gentle- men, which may require some curative statute, the principle itself is an efiicient one. I might have read a little further to where it said, every man is presumed to know the law and act accordingly, and if he makes a mistake, he ought to take the consequences of it. I shall only make the further remark, that so repugnant are these kind of laws to the judicial mind, not only in this coun- try, but in England, that a Court never gives a retrospective effect to any law if there is a possible construction otherwise. A motion that the Committee rise was here made. The CHAIRMAN. Can we not take a vote on_ this section before the recess‘? Does any Delegate desire to be heard in op- position to the'amendment? Mr. MACKOY. I may desire to submit a few remarks this afternoon. THE CONVENTION. The motion to rise was put and carried; the President resumed the Chair, and the Chair- man made report as follows: The Committee of the Whole have been in session, having had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, together with various amendments thereto. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The question being put, the report was adopted. The Convention then took a recess. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention was called to order by the President, and, on motion of Mr. Beck- ham, resolved itself into COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE To further consider the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The President designated the Delegate from the Fourth District of Louisville as Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. We were consider- ing section 18 of the Committee’s report, and the Delegate from Covington (Mr. Mackoy) had indicated a desire to be heard on the amendment offered by the .Delegate from Marion. Mr. MACKOY. I wish to say a few words in regard to the amendment of the Delegate from Marion, which proposes to add the word “retrospective” to section 18 of the Committee’s report, so that it would read, “No ea: post facto nor retrospective law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contract, shall be passed by the General Assembly.” One would suppose, from the ordinary meaning of “retrospective,” that it would be very important to insert that word in order to prevent legislation which would be injurious if it could have retrospective action ; but at present a retrospective act is always healing and curative, and one bene- ficial in its operation. If it makes that criminal which was not before, the Courts say it is not retrospective, but comes under the section which says no ea: post facto law shall be passed. If it affects in any way a contract, the Courts say it is bad, because it impairs the obligation of a contract, and for that reason .is unconstitutional, so that the field to which a retrospective act is limited 34 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] MACKOY—FARMER. —_ [October 30 . is a very narrow one. It is curative and confirmatory in its character. It must ap— pearconclusively from the act itself that the act was intended to have, a retrospective operation, and certainly the Legislature can be trusted to pass those acts remedial and curative in their nature under the limita- tions imposed not to pass any ea: post facio law or law impairing the obligation of a contract. To show that I am correct in my statement, I desire to call the attention of the Convention to two cases which I had time to look up. It is said by the Supreme Court of the United States: “ The general rule is that retrospective acts are clearly Constitutional when they do not impair the obligation of a contract or are not in the nature of ex postfacto law.” It then has an extremely narrow limit, viz: that of curing defects. All wisdom is not going to die with this Convention, and it seems to me that we can certainly trust the Legisla- ture to pass acts which shall be remedial and beneficial, and which, under the other ,limitations of this section, certainly cannot be hurtful. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. The vote being on the section as reported by the Committee, the same was adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Report the next section. The Clerk thereupon read section 19, which is as follows: N 0 person shall be attainted of treason or felony by the General Assembly, and no attainder shall work corruption of blood, nor, except during the life of the offender, forfeiture of estate to the Commonwealth. The following amendment was proposed to said section by the Delegate from Hardin county: Amend section 19 of the report of the Committee by striking out the words “estate during the life of the offender.” A vote being taken thereon, the amend- ment was rejected. A vote thereon being taken, said sec-i tion of the Committee’s report was there- upon adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Report the next section. Section 20 of the report of the Commit‘ tee was read, as follows: The estates of such persons as shall de- stroy their own lives shall descend or vest as in cases of natural death; and if any person shall be killed by casualty, there shall be no forfeiture by reason thereof. Mr. FARMER. I have offered an amendment to that: That the whole of it be eliminated from the Consti- tution—that nothing of that kind be said. I think common sense and reason show that this should not be in the Constitution. What does it say? That the estates of such persons as shall destroy their lives shall descend as in case of nat- ural death. Does anybody dispute that? It has not been disputed for centuries. Some gentleman has said that by the com- mon law the estates of such persons could not descend as in cases of natural death, but I leave it to the lawyers of this body if that is so. I think you might as well say that the estates of all bald-headed men shall descend thus and so. There would be just as much reason in it. This is an old relic copied from one Bill of Rights into another, and has not a shadow of foundation to rest upon. It goes on, “ and‘ if any person shall be killed by casualty, there shall be no forfeiture by reason there- of.” The thing is so absurd that I trust not a member of this Convention will vote for retaining this old, antiquated pro- vision. I hope it will be stricken out. Mr. MCHENRY. That seems to me- right. I should like to hear some reason for retaining it. Mr. COX. I hope the gentleman had no reference to me when he spoke of bald— headed men. Mr. RODES. I am asked why this BILL OF RIGHTS. 35 Thursday,] should be kept here; just for this reason: that there is no telling what human nature will do. If any man has confidence in human nature not doing things in the future, it is more than I have. This is an old landmark. It indicates what We have passed through and whither we may drift, and as there are only four lines, and there is no sort of harm in it, I think we ought to keep it. Mr. PUGH. Will the gentleman per- mit me a question ‘.7 Mr. RODES. Certainly. Mr. PUGH. Do you think there is any necessity of incorporating in this section the old doctrine of thedeodand? Do you think there is any probability that that which has been done away with for a hun~ dred years, and upon which this is based, will be revived‘? Mr. RODES. This has been in all our Constitutions. As it once was the misfor- tune of mankind to be governed by laws of that kind, it may be their misfortune again. Let us not be in a hurry about tearing up things. I have no more faith in mankind than had Frederick the Great. You can- not tell what they are going to do. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. Mr. PUGH. I move to amend by strik- ing out all after the word “death ” in said section. It has been said that this is a fos- silized relic of a prehistoric age. The doc- trine of the deodand has never applied in America. It is odious to us. There is not a man on this floor or in Kentucky who would for a moment apprehend that Ken- tucky will ever resort to that odious doe- trine, which simply means, that if any piece of personal property has been the immediate cause of death, it should be for- feited to the Crown. Can any thing be forfeited to Kentucky by reason of it being the immediate cause of a death? I say no such doctrine will, or ever can, obtain in Kentucky. It has not obtained in England for a hundred years. It is an old fossil, PUeH—RODEs—BULLITT [October 30 , and should be relegated to the shade of in- nocuous desuetude, where it should have long since been. It serves no purpose; it is dead matter, and should be eliminated. To incorporate a declaration of this kind simply shows that we are one hundred years behind time. Mr. BULLITT. I simply desire to call the attention of the Convention to the fact that there is probably a present use for the word the gentleman seeks to have expunged from the Constitution. There is a growing prejudice against dueling in this State, and if some gentleman happens to get in a diffi- culty and should be killed, that would be losing his life by casualty, according to my interpretation. Mr. MCHENRY. It seems to me that would be design ‘on the part of somebody else. Mr. BULLITT. It would be casualty so far as he was concerned, and they might forfeit his estate. I don’t mean to defend dueling, but the prejudice against the cus- tom, that a law forfeiting estates in such cases might be passed. I don’t want any man’s family to suffer because he seeks to maintain his reputation by exposing his life. Mr. PUGH. Are you not willing to recognize that the code duello died a nat- ural death, and is it painful to you to see the old corse carried to the grave‘? I think it should be relegated to the shades of forgetfulness, where it long since has gone. Mr. BULLITT. Frequently, when a man has made a gallant fight and is nearly exhausted, nearly dead, the hardest pun- ishments are inflicted, and some gentleman coming from some other country may be imbued with the idea that it is right to maintain his honor at the point of the pis- tol. The very fact that the custom is nearly gone brings dire and severe punish- ment. Mr. PUGH. Did that doctrine ever ob- 36 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] BULLIT'r—PUoH—Woon. [October 30 . tain in Kentucky? Has it not always been odious in Kentucky‘? Mr. BULLITT. According to the Con- stitution of Kentucky, any citizen has a right to fight a citizen of another State. We simply prohibit dueling among our own citizens. Mr. PUGH. I want to out myself loose from all dead doctrines. I have enough to sustain myself on living issues. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. A vote was then taken, and the original section, as reported by the Committee, was adopted. Section 21 of the Committee’s report was read, and upon a vote, adopted. Section 22 of the Committee’s report was read, as follows: The General Assembly shall not grant any title of nobility or hereditary distinc- tion, nor create any ofiice, the appointment of which shall be for a longer time than a term of years. The following amendment was offered by the Delegate from Taylor county: Amend section 22 of the report of the Committee by adding after the word “ of,” in the third line, and before the word “years,” the word “ four.” Mr. WOOD. I have been exceedingly modest during the consideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. I want to make one amendment, and I could not propose a :shorter one. I simply wish the insertion of one word. It has been my fortune, and .the misfortune of the State, for me to be a member of a Legislature, and I know what they will do when they get into a state of ‘excitement, into which state they get pretty often. I only ask that the word “four” be inserted in the last line. “That the General Assembly shall not create any .oflice, the appointment of which shall be for a longer time than a term of four years.” There may be some emergency for the Legislature to bring into existence .a'new oflice, but I do not think they should do it for an unlimited time. The emer- gency may cease inside of four years; but if it don’t, the Legislature could continue it. It is the desire of a great many people in Kentucky that there should be some limitation put on the Legislature. I think the action of that body justifies the opinion. I think it would be nothing but right and proper to insert the word “four." I do not think the Committee can object to that. Mr. RODES. I hope the amendment will not be adopted. This power should be vested in the Legislature. Every succeed- ing Legislature will have the right to repeal laws passed by preceding Legisla- tures. There will be no irrevocable laws passed. I think it can be safely left to the Legislature. Upon a vote, the amendment was re- jected. Mr. FABMER. I desire to offer this as a new section. The CHAIRMAN. Do you desire it to be reported now? Mr. FARMEB. Yes, sir. The amendment was read, and is' as fol- lows: That the estates of deceased persons, by whatever means they come to their deaths, shall descend or vest as in case of natural death. Section 23 of the Committee’s report was read, and is as follows: Emigration from the State shall not be prohibited. An amendment offered by the Delegate from Madison county was 'read, and is as follows: Amend by adding these words: “Nor shall banishment from the State be ever en- forced as a punishment for crime. Mr. BURNAM. I remember, when I was a young man, that I was Common- wealth’s Attorney, and prosecuted a negro for murder in the town of Paris, Bourbon county. He was convicted and sentenced to be hung, and on the strong recommenda- tion of a number of his friends, his master BILL OF RIGHTS. 37 Thursday,] M CHENEY—BURNAM. [October 30 . and others, he was pardoned, on condition that he should be sold out of the State of Kentucky, and not permitted to come back here. In the Constitutions of Florida and Kansas, and of some other States, this pro- vision has been added. We have arrived at a time when there is no difl‘erence in citizenship on account of color; and I am not prepared to say that any such state of case as that which I have alluded to will ever exist in the future in this Com- monwealth} but it seems to me that it might be well to add to this Constitution such a section. It can certainly do no harm. We do not have, as the French do, a system of colonizing convicts, sending them to South America, or as England has, sending them to Botany Bay. Let us say that, in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, every person who violates the law is pun- ished here within the boundaries of the State. Mr. MCHENRY. I can see no reason- able objection to the Governor of Ken- tucky pardoning a man out of the Penitentiary upon condition that he leaves the State and does not come back. I can see that it might be an advantage to the State, and upon that condition a man might get his pardon when otherwise he would not get it. If this amendment is adopted, it would prevent the Governor from granting a pardon upon such condition, and it would have the effect of preventing a man from being pardoned who otherwise would be pardoned. I do not think that this is car- ried on to any extent whatever, but I can see very well why the Governor might sometimes grant a pardon of that kind. I don’t think the color of the criminal has any effect here. We may require it of a white man, negro, or anybody else convicted of a crime. The man confined in the Peniten- tiary may be a bitter enemy to some of the citizens who may fear that he will inflict his vengeance on them, and for that reason want him kept out of the State. I can see no good to result from adopting the amend- ment. Mr. BURNAM. I cannot see with what kind of propriety we can undertake to send off’ wicked men, who have violated the laws of Kentucky, to depredate upon the peace of distant communities. I recollect in 1833 there was a law passed by the Leg- islature which prohibited the importation of slaves into Kentucky as merchandise. There never was a law which caused more excitement in the Commonwealth than that. It was the ground of one of the most distinguished debates that ever occurred in the Commonwealth, be- tween Robert Wickliffe, Sr., of Lexing— ton, and the late Dr. Robert J. Breckin- ridge. The ground of the opposition to that law was this: that while men might be permitted to go and buy a negro servant to wait on their families, yet the purpose of the law was to prohibit the introduction into this State of diseased and wicked slaves, which was a class of negroes men would always be too ready to throw on the market as merchandise. And the law, notwithstanding the tremendous pro-slave- ry feeling in Kentucky, was at all times upheld. And I say it without any feeling in favor of this particularly, that it seems to me there is reason for it. I think when we undertake to say a man shall be pun- ished in Kentucky for violating our laws, we should see that the proper remedy is applied, and that he is not sent away to prey on other people. On a vote the amendment was rejected, and on a further vote the section, as report- ed by the Committee, was adopted. Section 24 of the Committee’s report was read, as follows: Slavery and involuntary servitude in this State are forbidden, except as a pun- ishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. An amendment, offered by Mr. Mont- gomery, was read, as follows : “ Strike out the word “ slavery.’ ” 38 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] Mr. MONTGOMERY. I offered that on the idea that it was idle for the State to prohibit itself from doing a thing it could not do under the Constitution of the United States, but since considering the question maturely, I am in favor of the section, and withdraw my amendment. The Delegate from Todd moved to strike out the section. Mr. PETRIE. I had the pleasure of making a short speech to the Convention upon some parts of this Bill of Rights, in which I referred to the motion I have made and to the subject embraced in the twenty- fourth section. I then said about all I wish to say on the subject. My motion is to strike out the whole section. I make that motion because I believe it is unnecessary to have it there; that it accomplished no good pur- pose; and, while I do not regard it as vital in any respect, I think, whether it is retain- ed or stricken out, Kentucky will go on, yet it is a matter of some concern to this Con- vention. It is at least a matter of policy as to what we should do on that subject. I have no fear, and I do not think any one enter- tains any fear, that that will ever be violated, or that slavery will ever be re-established in any way. The very fact of putting it into the Constitution in that solemn manner, to my mind, implies a fear or apprehension that such a thing might at some time exist ; that someperson might undertake to re-establish the institution of slavery in our State. I said then, and I repeat now, that any such appre- hension would be unjust to this Convention. I believe I know something of the disposi- tion and feelings of this particular class of citizens, who have felt the evil and the oppression of slavery, and who are now living among us as citizens. I represent, perhaps, as many of that class as any gen- tleman on the floor, in proportion to the number represented. I have communi- cated with them, and they have asked me about this provision concerning slavery. They know something about these provis- ions; they are being educated; they have M ONTGOMERY—PETRIE. [October 30 _ 4 learned all about that. They have asked me about what is going to be done about putting in such a thing in the next Consti- tution. I have told them no such thing would be put in, and assured them that, on that subject, I could pledge them that, of the one hundred Delegates who would com- pose this Convention, there would not be a solitary member but who would be in favor of leaving out those provisions that inter- fered with their right as citizens. I know that is so now. I know whatever this Committee does on that subject will be done according to our judgment of what is the best policy in the matter. I believe, if you could have the will expressed of the colored citizens of this State, you would not hesitate a moment. If they wish a provision of that sort in the Con- stitution, I believe the Convention would willingly put it there; and if they prefer not to have it, that we would as willingly leave it out. What interest have we to do any thing else than that? It has been said that it is a sort of assurance to them that in the future slavery shall never exist in this State, and that it brings them confidence. I do not think they have any apprehension of that sort. The idea impressed me from the start, that the proper thing to do, was not to say a word about it in the Constitu- tion; that our Constitution should be framed and adopted without the word “ slavery” in it at all. There is no neces- sity for any such reference. -Why, sir, so far from being desired by the ex-slaves who are citizens, the only evidence we have on that subject is a petition sent to this Con- vention by a few of the most intelligent negroes in the State of Kentucky. What do they say ? This matter has been up be- fore the Convention for several weeks, and you have not’ heard a word from any of that class of citizens asking you to put something in the Constitution to prevent them from getting back into slavery, or forbidding slavery in this State. On the _BILL or RIGHTS. s9 ‘Thursday,] PETRIE—PHELPS. [October 30 . other hand, I remember that memorial read a few days ago, from teachers, profes- sors and ministers representing that class -of people, which said to the Convention, that it was their desire that nothing should be said about it in the Constitution; that it should be omitted altogether. We have heard nothing on the other side. I believe they will be thoroughly satisfied, and that every other class of citizens will be satisfied. It is making a sort of distinction between citizens and classes, it seems to me, by say- ing that one class shall never be again enslaved by the other. Of course, we know for what class this section is intended. I shall not fall out with my friends over this matter. I do not feel interested in it any further than I desire to do the best we can. It struck me at first, and I have continued in the belief, that this is the best we can do in regard to that section; and another argument in favor of it: if you strike out the section it will leavea very nice place for the new section, offered by my friend from Henderson. I do not wish to mar the symmetry of the Bill of Rights, but by striking out this section, and inserting his, you have the same num- ber as before. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. If I may be heard five minutes, without offering an amend- ment, I would like to occupy that time. Otherwise, I shall offer my amendment. The CHAIRMAN. Are you for or .against the amendment‘? Mr. J. L. PHELPS. Does that cut any .figure? The CHAIRMAN. Yes; you would have to have leave if you were for the :amendment. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. If I thought the word “ slavery ” in the Constitution would hurt any thing, I would be against this section of the report; if I thought the word “slavery” would lose the Constitu- tion one vote in the State of Kentucky, I might be against it; but I apprehend that men intelligent enough to oppose the slavery clause on the ground they do, will not vote against the Constitution if the word “slavery” is in it. I know in the section of the State that I represent, if you leave out the word “slavery” there will be quite a number of people who will vote against the Constitution. I know it has been said, with an independent air, that they are becoming educated, and under- stand these things. I am on this floor to represent the humblest and the ignorant, as well as the most educated, enlightened and refined, and I say if this section is stricken out, a shrewd man can go through the State of Kentucky and prejudice hun- dreds and thousands of voters against the Constitution, and the time may come. when this Convention and the one hundred Dele- gates composing it may be very anxious to get every vote they can. Suppose you put in a clause that dissatisfies corporations, or those who are in favor of lotteries, or the whisky traffic, and all these combine to beat the Constitution? They will go among the eX-slaves and vote nine out of ten against the Constitution. I guess then the Delegates would begin to think it would have been better that this section had been inserted. The word “slavery” may sound a little bad to those who owned slaves, and who do not like to talk about it. But we, as the people who have framed the Constitution, how will we feel if we leave it out and our work is defeated? 1 care nothing about it. I had as soon it was out as in; but in my opinion there is an element which desires this insertion. Is it your purpose to satisfy only the intelligent and educated? It has been said that the gov- ernment is best which pleases the people best, and that government which demands and has the respect of the ignorant as well as the intelligent is the best government: The enlightened, the intelligent, the edu- cated can be controlled by reason, but you have to have the respect of the ignorant for a government before you have a good government. I am here to represent the 4O BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] whole people, the ignorant and unlearned, and everybody else as well. Mr. HARRIS. The principal objection I have heard to the insertion of section 24 in the Bill of Rights, is based upon the fact that a similar provision is contained in the Constitution of the United States. Not only does it contain a similar provis- ion to section 24, but the Federal Consti- tution contains many other provisions, ‘similar to those in our present Bill of Rights. That Constitution provides that no State shall pass any Bill of Attainder, ezv postfacto law, or law impairing the ob- ligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility. It provides that a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of every State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It provides also that no soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. In another of its provisions it guar- antees the right to the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, using the same language we find in the Bill of Rights of Kentucky. Now, if the fact that this provision is contained in the Federal Constitution be sufficient, it seems to me that these other provisions in our Bill of Rights, which are secured by that same instrument, ought to be stricken out by this Convention; yet I have heard no motion to that effect. Gentlemen have stated that the mere fact that this is in the Federal Constitution was suflicient, and for that reason they would oppose sec- tion 24 of the Committee’s report; yet for that same reason nobody has yet offered to strike the other provisions out of the’ re- port. I take it that one hundred years ago the mere fact that these provisions were in the Constitution of the United States, was a suflicient reason for putting them in the Constitution of Kentucky, in order HARRIS—BRONSTON——MCHENRY. [October 30 . J4 that the two Constitutions might be similar and harmonious. But, aside from that, there must be some other reason for reject- ing section 24 of the Committee’s report. It may be that we are standing too near the great events that transpired a quarter of a century ago that made the truth of this section possible in this State. It may be that our present relations to those events make it a delicate matter for us to vote for the insertion of that section. I have no right to attribute to any man any motives for his vote that he does not frankly and fully avow on this floor; neither have 1 any dis- position or inclination to assume that he is governed by anybut the purest and best mo- tive for casting his vote; but the reasons given are insufiicient, it seems to me. Now, I ask the Convention not to pass over this matter too lightly. I recall to this Con- vention the fact that the colored popula- tion of this State have just emerged from bondage; that they are ignorant, without. property, and that they absolutely have no- knowledge of Constitutional history and Constitutional guarantees. Why, take up‘ the section in the Federal Constitution, the inhibition that the State shall pass no em post facto law, and all those pro- visions designed to secure the rights of the citizens! What would a colored man ordi- narily know about that? Not a solitary thing. In my opinion, and so far as my county is concerned, they will have very little care about the different provisions in- corporated in this Bill; they will know little about them; but section 24, in my opinion, is the aggregate of the sum of their hopes and of their wishes in this re- gard. Mr. BRONSTON. What information have you received on that subject different from what the Convention has? All the petitions are to the contrary. Mr. HARRIS. That is true; but I pay very little attention to a petition from ten or twelve men in three hundred thousand. Mr. McHENRY. We have now upon BILL OF RIGHTS. 41 Thursday,] HARRIS—JACOBS. [October 30 - our statute books various statutes recogniz- ing the institution of slavery. I want to ask, if we fail to put this provision in the Constitution, and rely exclusively on the provision of the Federal Constitution, if, for any reason, the Federal Constitution is abolished, is not slavery re-established in this State? Mr. HARRIS. I will not answer the question. I leave it to the Convention. You know as well as I do that the papers of the State are now talking about a war of races. You know that the Constitutional Convention of Mississippi, now in session, has seen fit to strike down the right to vote of a large number of colored people in the State of Mississippi. I have no censure to pass on them; but I say, under that state of case, the colored people would be more than human if their alarm was not excited, and they did not manifest some uneasiness and unrest in regard to it. I grant you that these provisions that will be incor- porated into our Constitution will guaran- tee to them their rights; but I say to you, for the last twenty-five years they have been looking to sources outside of and ex- traneous to Kentucky for protection. I want this section inserted in the Con- stitution, because I know that it is so plain that he who runs cannot fail to read it, and every colored man can under- stand it. If it is adopted in our Bill of Rights, every colored man in the State will feel “this is my Constitution, my State, my government;” and I do not want them to have to look to a body of men at Washing- ton City, or an instrument whose continued validity depends upon strangers. I want them to feel that they have that security, safety and protection that comes from friendship at home. I want them to feel that they can safely rely on the race with whom they live, and trust their destinies and interest to that race they see will sacred- ly guard them. As has been suggested here, I want them to feel the sense of safety and security so perfectly that, although in the coming flight of future years some great political earthquake might shake our Fed- eral system to pieces, although Kentucky might stand alone the shattered fragment of a once glorious Union, yet there would be embodied in her organic law the pledge- of freemen, the plighted faith of a great people. This provision would be to them the most priceless and precious gem in the- crown of liberty, and in that midnight hour of their darkest gloom and distress its lustre to them would dim the radiance- of a star. Standing here as freemen, the representatives of freemen, with not a single one of their race on this floor to speak in their behalf, unawed by the pres- ence of a squad of armed soldiers, unswayed by any threats or blandishments of power, it would be a most graceful act on the part of the Convention, looking to the best interests of all the people and especially to a sense of security on the part of this un- fortunate class, to incorporate section 24 of" the Committee’s report into our Bill of Rights. (Applause) Mr. JACOBS. If I thought foramo- ment that the rights of the humblest colored man of this State were involved in this question, I would support the section as reported by the Committee; but know- ing, as I do and you do, that it is no more possible to subject a colored man to slavery than it is to subject a member of this Con- vention, I vote upon this question accord- ing to my information as to the desire of the colored man, This is a matter purely of sentiment. It is not a practical ques- tion, and all the earnest arguments of the gentleman from Simpson have no bearing on the question as to how we shall vote upon this subject. It is not possible, in all ages to come, whether Kentucky be dis- membered from this glorious Union, or whether she stands, as I hope she will, the last to ever leave it, that slavery can be re-introduced into this, State. It is not possible that this section can apply to white men. N 0 one anticipates that any 4-3 BILL oF RIGHTS. ' Thursday,] . slaved. J ACOBS—M CHENRY—RAMSE Y. [October 30 . white man will ever be reduced to slavery, and, therefore, when we put it in here, it is only with a view to facts of the past, and that is, that colored men have been en- What is our information on this subject? The other night at a meeting of our Committee, there were representative colored men from every part of the State. Those men came before ‘the Committee, and with an intelligence and eloquence that I have not even heard surpassed in this Convention, begged us, pleaded with us, to make no distinction in the law between the white and the colored. They said to us: We do not and we would not seek social equality, but the humble peti- tion we make before you, the request we ask at your hands, is, that in the eyes of the law you shall make no distinction between us and the whites. It seemed to me to be a just and reasonable request. Now the whole question here is that what we desire to do is to gratify that race. ‘Gentlemen have said not one of the race have been heard. Outside of those who ‘came before our Committee, there has been a memorial presented to the Convention from nine or ten of them, asking that we leave this clause out, and that in this Con- stitution, as one of them expressed it, it should be a colorless instrument. Mr. MCHENRY. I would like to ask the gentleman if this section makes any difference between whites and blacks ‘? Mr. JACOBS. No, sir; but this is made and put in with a view to the fact that the negro has been enslaved, and everybody will understand that the reference is to the negro. Mr. RAMSEY. As has just been stated, the declaration in section 24 of the Bill of Rights, as reported by the Committee, does not by any thing it says make any distinc- tion as to race or class. It is a simple declaration of a principle which has been established in this mountry, and which is now recognized in this country by the glad =sho§uts of millions of our people, including even the owners and masters of those who were formerly slaves. It is a declaration of a principle in which not only the colored man is interested, but which every'man who loves liberty in this bright land of ours should rejoice to support, and send ringing through the country to let those other States know that no longer in Ken- tucky are there any slavery laws. Is it not a reflection on us that we find arrayed against us the Constitution of the United States, of Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louis- iana, Maryland, Michigan, Missis- sippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Many of these States have taken action on that question since the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was adopted, and they have all recognized that principle which has been established in this country. and inserted it in their Constitution. That pro- vision has been inserted in the Constitution of Mississippi by their Committee on Bill of Rights. I can see no reason why we should be unwilling to adopt it. I see in the Constitution of the United States a note to that provision, which was taken from the Declaration made by Thomas Jefl‘erson in the First Continental Con- gress, in regard to the Northwest Terri- tory, showing what States had adopted the amendment, and in looking over that list I regret very much to say I failed to find the name of Kentucky. Every time that ques- tion'has been submitted to the people of Kentucky they have failed to come up and recognize it; and it seems to me, if we fail in this Convention to insert such a provis- ion as the Committee reports, it will be a declaration equivalent to saying that the people of Kentucky have not and do not indorse that principle. Let us put it in our Constitution, saying to the BILL OF RIGHTS. 43 Thursday,] BURNAM. [October 30. colored man—even the humblest and monwealth of Kentucky, not numbered by poorest who treads the soil of this hundreds, but by thousands. who would be State—that when that Colossal Statue satisfied with the present Constitution of which stands on Long Island representing Liberty to the world, that here in Ken- tucky we have put a provision in our Con- stitution which shall also be a monument to liberty. Mr. BURNAM. The honorable Dele- gate from Lexington asked one of the speakers if he had any information to indi- cate that the colored people of the State of Kentucky desired the incorporation into the Constitution of a clause like this. I am prepared to say for the colored people I represent, that those doctrinaires who have been before the Committee on Education are not true representatives of their wishes. On the day‘ when I first addressed the people of Madison county announcing my- self as a candidate for Delegate to the Con- stitutional Convention, I read that clause in the Constitution of the United States for- bidden slavery in the hearing of a large audience of both white and colored people, and Ilthen told them that, in my opinion, one of the first things this Convention would do would be to strike out this section of the Bill of Rights, the tenth article in regard to slavery, and the word “white” where it appeared as a necessary qualification for an elector. Now, I should hate to go home before the people to whom I promised that, and find, as I believe I would find, seven- teen-twentieths of the negroes of Madison county calling me to account, and stating that they were ready to vote against the adoption of this Constitution because they had/been deceived. Unfortunately it may be for myself, at an early day of this Con- vention, I introduced a resolution on that subject. The newspapers of Louisville thought I was a little too previous in call- ing the attention of the Convention to that matter. I was severely criticised by a number of those papers; but, standing here now, I do not hesitate to say, in mydeliber- ate opinion, there are those in the Com- Kentucky with the incorporation of the twenty-fourth section of this report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, and no other change. I am not one of those who believe in that alone, but I say that this is a great and important matter. In the argument I made the other day I stated, and stated truly, that if'no reference had been made to this matter at all, if it had heed ignored, and the Constitution of the United States alone, by its irresistible sway, should operate here, I might have been satisfied; but when this learned Com- mittee, appointed by ourselves, and when the distinguished Delegate from the county of Marion in the substitute he has offered, both report language which has been adopt- ed by nearly all the State Constitutions for insertion in ours, and we are called upon now to strike it out, I say if we do that we will be subjected to the criticism, not only of our own people, but of the enlightened, the virtuous and the freedom-loving people of other States and distant lands. Why should we be afraid of this? Is there any sacrifice demanded? The hon- able Delegate from Lexington at one time said that when he endeavored to silence discussion he did not want the shame of his ancestors revived or any commentary made upon it. I do not want to bring up any- thing to shame my ancestors. It was my misfortune to be a large slave-holder, but I desire to say now, and in the ‘presence of this Convention, that while the late terrible civil war was one that brought woe and desolation upon this people, it was not without its compensations, and that compensation was that, in the wisdom of Almighty God, this system which had not only enslaved these peo- ple for generations, but had brought in- calculable wrong on the whites who owned them, was wiped out. I say that was in a large measure a payment for the terrible 44 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] BURNAM—BRONSTON—PETRIE. [October 30 .. suffering we endured. I repeat it would be a most strange and extraordinary thing if we permitted the wiping out of this section of the Committee’s report when it was framed after careful investigation, the un- doing of all that has been done, because A, a minister of the Gospel, B, a Professor, these doctrinaires, have gone before the Committee on Education and elsewhere, and said they represented the peo- ple and they desired it. It would be the hardest thing in the world, as you have been told by the Delegate from Simpson county, to tell these colored people that a matter of this kind was brought be- fore this Convention, and nothing was done about it except to leave it just as it was be- fore. I have learned, I do not know that it is true, that when the Exposition was held in the City of Paris, in France, in 1888, a request was made by a Committee of that Exposition upon the Governors of the various States for copies of their Constitu- tions. They desired to lay them before the nationalities whence emigration comes. When the call was made on the Governor of this State, he declined to send a copy of the State Constitution, because it would re- quire a long and difficult explanation to those who are not conversant with our dual system of government, to explain that the Constitution of the United States over- rode the State Constitution of Kentucky. Let us make our State Constitution sym- metrical with the Federal Constitution. If the Constitution of the United States says that neither slavery nor involuntary servi- tude shall exist in this country except as a punishment for crime, why can‘t we say it? I speak, I trust, without passion. I certain- ly speak with feelings of the utmost kind- ness to every member of the Convention, and I do think it would be the best thing we could do to uphold this section of the Committee’s report. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to say to the gentleman that- my question as to the information was possibly misunderstood by him. I merely wanted to know what in- formation they had from the colored people,. because I think their wishes should be con- sulted. Mr. PETRIE. Does the gentleman think that the colored citizens of his county would vote against the Constitution without the- word “slavery ” in it and vote for the old Constitution, which they would have to do if they didn’t take the new one, with all of its provisions about slavery‘? Mr. BURNAM. I do not think any wise man would, white or black, but I mean to say this, that when I went before my people and committed myself by an absolute assurance in the hearing of a large crowd, (I‘stated it all over the county) that this clause of the Constitution of the‘ United States would go into the Constitu- tion of Kentucky, when I go home and tell them that the members of this Consti- tutional Convention were not willing to- adopt that, I would feel that the power I would have had otherwise as a citizen, I will not say as a leader of public opinion in the county, but as an advocate for our work, would be lost before the people. Mr. PETRIE. Don’t this class of citi- zens, the ex-slav'es in your county, cherish above all things their right to citizenship, their equality as citizens before the law, and would they not deprecate any distinc- tion made between themselves and other classes of citizens. Mr. BURNAM. They do cherish that and cherish most warmly the friendship of their white neighbors and friends in Madi- son county, and they would be rejoiced to know that their white neighbors and friends had done that which had been done else- where by the whites. A vote being taken, the amendment of the Delegate from Todd was rejected; yeas 26, nays 51 on division. The Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Pulaski as follows: Amend by striking out the words “are BILL OF RIGHTS. 45 Thursday,] active sense. M Air—FARM ER—COK E. [October 30 . forbidden” in the first and second line, and inserting in lieu thereof “shall not exist.” Mr. MAY. I am not only in favor of section 24 as reported by the Committee, but also favor of making it stronger by the use of the words I suggest in place of “are forbidden.” It seems to me that the latter words put it in rather a passive sense. I have suggested the inser- tion of words to give a stronger and more I would have it read “ slavery and‘involuntary servitude in this State shall never exist, except as a punish- ment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” Now, while I do not believe the people of the African race are equal to the Anglo-Saxon race, and while I do believe that it would be better for this country that they were separate and apart to themselves; while I do not, believe in mixed schools; while I do not believe in social equality, for that can never exist by any enactment of the Legislature of this State, or of the Federal Government, I do believe that every hu- “man being should be equal before the law. And yet, while I say that, I believe such is not the fact to-day. There are forty or fifty thousand colored voters in the State of Kentucky. Have they any representatives on this floor to vindicate their rights, and to represent that large number of voters in the State of Kentucky? That comes about, no doubt, under the existing laws and surrounding circumstances, yet, it is true. i It seems to me, to talk a little for the ‘other side of the question, that when we put in this section 24 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, we are fearful that slavery or in- voluntary servitude might be brought on us in the future; and I wish to say that slavery and involuntary servitude may be brought into existence again. If I under- stand the statistics of the country at this time, the increase in the coloredfpopulation since the war has been much greater than that of the white. How then can we know that slavery and involuntary servi- tude may not be again established‘? How do we know that those people who have been in bondage for a number of years may not conclude that, as they have been servants and have had masters, it is now their time to become masters. Little did the people of Rome think that their free- dom was in danger. Little may the lion, the king of beasts, lying quietly in his fastnesses Here the gavel fell. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate can only proceed by leave. Mr. FARMER. And I call the en- forcement of the rule. Mr. COKE. I would like to call atten- tion to the wording of this printed section: “Slavery and involuntary servitude in this State are forbidden,except as punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” Gentlemen object that if you don’t put this in the Constitution, the colored portion of our fellow-citizens will be dissatisfied. If you do, won’t they be dissatisfied? This says slavery, as a punishment for crime, may exist; that is, you may provide for putting them back into slavery. Mr. BURNAM. A ‘comma after the word “ slavery” will remedy that. Mr. BRONSTON. I move to amend by striking out the last word. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of the opinion that that is out of order. He can see your object. Mr. KNOTT. I see a good deal of force in the suggestion of the Delegate from Logan, and think it would be better to say, “neither slavery or involuntary servi- tude,” etc. Mr. RODES. I say the words are preferable the way they are, and I hope they will be adopted. A motion to rise was made by the Dele- gate from Carroll county, but upon a vote, was lost. 46 BILL ,OF RIGHTS. ‘ Constitution in the ‘proper place. Thursday,] CARROLL—CLAY—ROD ES. [October 30 - A vote being taken, the amendment of the Delegate from Pulaski was rejected, and on a further vote, the section, as re- ported by the Committee, was adopted. The Clerk read section 25 of the report of the Committee, which, upon a vote, was adopted. . The Clerk then read section 26 of the report of the Committee, at follows: 2" Lotteries and gift enterprises are for- bidden, and no privileges shall be granted for such purposes, and none shall be exer- cised, and no schemes for similar purposes shall be allowed. The General Assembly shall enforce this section by proper penal- ties. All lottery privileges or charters heretofore granted are revoked. The following amendment ofl'ered by the Delegate from Christian was read: Amend by adding in the third line after the word “allowed,” the following: “Nor shall any trust or combine detrimen- tal to the interest of the State, nor gambling in agricultural products, known as “Dealing in Futures,” be allowed. Upon a vote the amendment was re- jected. _ Mr. CARROLL. I move __to strike out that section entirely; and in support of that motion, I desire to say this. I am heartily in favor of the idea embodied in that section, and there is no question what- ever that it will be incorporated in the It is certainly nothing more nor less than a limitation on legislative power, and if, under the head of the Legislative Depart- ment the substance or the exact language of this section is placed, the question of lotteries in this State will be forever settled ; but I do insist that in so important an article as the Bill of Rights nothing about lotteries or gift enterprises ought to be said. I see no reason at all why you might. not as Well put in the Bill of Rights a prohibition against gambling of any kind, or against any other crime that is now punished by statute. I see no reason why you might not as well place there an inhibition against trusts or monopolies; and yet the Convention a moment ago voted down an amendment of that kind. I trust that this section will be expunged from the report of the Committee, in order that it may be placed in the Constitution in its proper place, and for no other reason do I make the motion. Mr. CLAY. I wish to say a word in reply to the Delegate from Henry. We- have appointed a Committee in this Con- vention on Divisions, Titles and Arrange- ment, and before the location of sections is; determined upon, the matter is submitted to that Committee, which will make a proper division of the various articles adopted by this Convention. Mr. CARROLL. Does the Delegate from Bourbon think the Committee on Di- visions, Titles and Arrangement would be- authorized, under the power they now have, in transferring this section from the Bill of Rights to some other part of the Constitution ‘2 ' Mr. CLAY. I do. Mr. RODES. I do not think they have- the right to transfer. They have the right to recommend the transfer. Mr. CLAY. I concur in the statement of the Delegate from Warren. That is what I meant. Hr. RODES. In regard to this lottery question, I have nothing to say further than what I said in my former speeches. I tried to portray the extreme dangers to the- country arising from lotteries. the strength now to repeat it. The Chairman recognized the Delegate- from the county of Bullitt. Mr. KNOTT. I make the point of or- der that there is only ten minutes’ debate allowed. Mr. STRAUS. The Chairman of the Committee didn’t speak five minutes. The CHAIRMAN.‘ The gentleman can proceed by leave. Mr. MCOHORD. Iobject. Mr. STRAUS. I desire to take about three minutes. I have not BILL OF RIGHTS. 47"‘ Thursday,] Mr. McCHORD. I object. The CHAIRMAN. If you object, the gentleman will have to take his seat. Mr. STRAUS. ‘ I would like to say that the Chairman of the Committee didn’t take anything like his ‘time. The CHAIRMAN. He made some re- marks, though. Mr. PETRIE. This is an important matter, and I hope the leave will be granted. Mr. MCCHORD. I object. A vote being taken, the motion of the Delegate to strike out the section was lost. Mr. FUNK. I offer amendment: the following Amend section 23, in line 3, by adding after the word “ allowed,” the following: “Nor any other species of gambling or gaming.” I take it that the Committee overlooked the matter in this respect. Itake it that their Intention was, as far as possible, to do away with gambling. Therefore, it is not necessary for me to say much on that point, as I have already fully explained myself on it on a future occasion—on a past occasion, I see that is where we could use an Editor- However, there was so much talk about the ‘slavery clause that 'I became confused. Therefore, I should be excused for making mistakes. As I said before, I suppose the object this Committee. was a good one, and if it was intended for the purpose I have stated they ‘will not object to adding these few words. I I do not offer to strike out any thing, but only to add‘ a few words. I believe that the Committee should recommend to the Convention that this matter should be sub- mitted to ~the Committee on General Pro- visions, so that they can bring in a clause covering this entire matter; but if it is the intention of the Committee of the Whole to recommend this latter clause, why not recommend it with the amendment 1 have offered, and which in my judgment makes M CCHORD—STRAUS—PETRIE. [October 30 . it complete. If it is harmful to gamble in one form, it is in another. Therefore, if you want to drive it out, let us drive out all: kinds of gambling, bucket shops, pool rooms and everything of that character.-. You stop lotteries in Kentucky, and what -. does it do? It simply gives the Louisiana Lottery Company an additional quarter of ' a million dollars a year. That is all it does.. If you want to get at the root of the evil of gambling, why not accept the amendment I have offered and let us trample it out altogether. Mr. RODES. The object of this matter as I explained before is to deal with a great . and growing evil, one of ‘no ordinary pro-- portions, but one that is Titantic in its. character, size and origin. We cannot afford to deal with little matters in this; Constitution. We must leave something to the discretion of the Legislative power. A vote being taken, on a division, the‘ amendment was adopted; yeas 34, nays 33. . A vote was then taken on the section as . amended, and the same was adopted. A motion that the Committee rise, made- by the Delegate from Lexington, was lost The twenty-seventh section of the report. of the Committee was read, as follows: N o perpetuities of estate shall be allowed except for charitable purposes, and the Gen-— eral Assembly shall pass all proper laws in regard to the same. Mr. MACKOY. I move to strike out the words “except for charitable purposes." It seems to me, in endeavoring to suppress. lotteries would build up an evil which; would be worse than lotteries or the great-~ est abuses ever perpetrated by a corpora» tion. Mr. RODES. I think the gentleman is. entirely mistaken. Perpetuities have not been allowed by law. Charitable objects. have. I know the gentleman in-his speech the other day had a good deal to say about the statute of limitation. Mr. BRONSTON. I approve of the idea of the Committee, but I want to ask ifj' 4'8 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thu rsday,] MACKOY—GOEBEL—RODES. [October 30 . by way of a charitable purpose you might not create a perpetuity which the Commit- tee does not desire. The Courts have con- strued it now that perpetuities, except for charitable objects, are forbidden. The stat- ute of uses has not been in vogue since 1796. The statutes in England left it at sea for a hundred years, and did not know whether they held their land by equity or law. Mr. MACKOY, If, as has been stated’ the Courts have already construed that there may be perpetuities for charitable‘ purposes, why not let it stand on that con- 'struction, and leave it to the Legislature, if evils grow out of it, to change the law. Here we are fastening the thing on the State by a constitutional provision, and putting it out of the power of the Legis- lature to correct a wrong or dangerous construction that might be made by the Court of Appeals. Mr. GOEBEL. I move to strike the whole section out. Mr.' MACKOY. I second it. Mr. RODES. I said the other day that the thing had been attempted in England. A Mr. Thessullian attempted to perpetuate an estate, and give it to an heir far in the future. I tell you now, as I told you the other day, unless you put in some such pro- vision, there is nothing but a thin legisla- tive barrier between rich men and perpetu- ities. That is the marked dividing line between this country and Europe. Mr. GOEBEL. It is said that the whole matter is within the control of the Legis- lature. Undoubtedly, the effect of this section will be to take from the control of the Legislature all perpetuities for chari- table uses. One of the greatest abuses ever known under the English law was perpetu- ities for the sake of charitable'uses. All the legislation about mortmain grew out of those abuses, and it seems to me there should not be any thing inserted in this 7‘ Constitution which would deprive the Leg- islature of the power which it has now, and which it has always rightly exercised. Mr. RODES. As I said before, while the laws forbid perpetuities, ‘they have always distinctly recognized the fact that charitable objects are fitting subjects for them. Mr. MACKOY. We don’t want to make it worse than it is. It seems to me this simply magnifies and increases the evil. I withdraw my ‘amendment to allow the vote to be on the motion to strike out. A vote being taken, the motion to strike out prevailed—yeas, 37; nays, 31, on di- vision. Section 28 of the report of the Com- mittee was read, and upon a vote, was adopted. _ The CLERK. The Delegate from Chris- tian county has offered the following as an additional section: The Legislature shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens. Mr. RODES. I think that is fully pro- vided for. A vote being taken, the proposed new section’ was rejected. The new section proposed by the Dele- gate from Henderson was read as follows: The estates of deceased persons, by what- ever means they come to their death‘, shall descend or vest as in case of natural death. Mr. FARMER. I shall be very brief in my remarks, and I hope the Convention will indulge me. When I offered my amendment to section 20 of the Commit- tee’s report, I was under the impression that it. needed but a reading of the section to throw it out of the Constitution—that serious argument was not necessary. I found Iwas mistaken. The majority taught me that, without some constitutional pro- vision, what little fortune I have might not, in case I lost my life in an accident or by suicide, descend to my children. That is a dreadful apprehension for a man to live under—that his property may not descend to his children. When I left my family BILL or RIGHTS. > ' 49 Thursday,] PHELPS—MCHENRY—ALLEN, [October 30 . and started to this Convention I did not know that, but for this constitutional pro- vision, in case I was killed in a railroad accident my little estate would not descend to my children. So, to still further secure our right, I offer this provision, which I think covers all that matter in better shape than it has yet been presented. I am not willing longer to go about with a fear that my estate shall not descend to my children, so I offer this section providing that no matter how a man dies, his estate shall de- scend to his family. A vote being taken, the proposed new section was rejected—yeas 17; nays 25, on division. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I make the point of order that no quorum voted, which leaves this matter undecided. Mr. MCHENRY. I move that the Com- mittee rise. The motion was lost. The following amendment, proposed by the Delegate from Caldwell county, was read: The General Assembly shall prescribe by general laws the punishment for all crimes and misdemeanors, common law“ as well as statutory; and no person shall be pun- ished in the discretion of a Court and jury, except within the maximum and minimum ' limits prescribed by law. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. The necessity for some such constitutional provision was sug- gested to my mind by the Corneilison case. I am not certain that this is a proper place to put that amendment, but I do think there ought to be a quietus put upon pun- ishing men, either for common law or statutory offenses, within the discretion of a jury or Court. I suggest to the Con- vention that the matter is worthy of consid- eration, and it ought to be somewhere in the Constitution. - A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. Section 28 of the report of the Committee was then read and adopted. Mr. RODES. I move that the report of the Committee with the amendments which have been adopted, be printed and laid upon our tables. The CHAIRMAN. There are two substitutes for the report of the Commit- tee. ' Mr. CLAY. We are acting under the rule that each section shall be treated as an independent proposition. We have acted under that rule, and I think the considera- tion of the matter is now finished in the Committee of the Whole. Mr. KNOTT. Without any regard to the substitutes which have been offered and which have not been called up‘? 'Mr. CLAY. The rule was introduced so that gentlemen could shape their sub- stitutes and amendments to conform to it, and if they have not done that, the fault is theirs. Mr. KNOTT. So my distinguished friend is of the opinion that no substitute can be offered for the whole report as amended‘? Mr. ZACK PHELPS. It was distinctly announced when we began the considera- tion of the Committee’s report that we should take that up section by section and perfect it; then take up the substitute of the Delegate from Marion, consider it sec- tion by section, with proposed amendments, and perfect it, and similarly with the sub- stitute offered by the Delegate from Scott. Then the question would come up between those various substitutes and the Com- mittee’s report as to which shall be taken. With that announcement made at the out- set, the matter has been considered from time to time, and I believe everybody thought an opportunity would be given them to vote between these separate meas- ures. Mr. STRAUS. ‘I do not know what rule the Delegate from Bourbon refers to, but I know if such a rule has been passed it is in violation of all parliamentary law. I never heard of such a rule in a Conven- tion 01‘ any deliberative body that a substi- 50 BILL OF RIGHTS. I Th ursday,] GLAY—KNOTT-——BECKHAM. [October 30. tute could not be ofl'ered for a perfected re- port of a Committee. I do not think this Convention ever knowingly passed such a rule. If they did, they will have to take it back. It would be impossible to proceed under it. ‘ Mr. CLAY. I say under the rule we were to consider this report of the Com- mittee, each sectiop of it as an independent proposition, to which substitutes and amendments were in order. When it was adopted, that concluded the matter. Mr. KNOTT. I call for the reading of the rule. ' The CHAIRMAN. We have had a long session, and I suggest if we are going to wrestle with this question, we had better take a fresh start. Mr. BE'oKHAM. I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. THE CONVENTION. The motion was carried and the Presi- dent resumed the Chair. Mr. YOUNG. ‘ The Committee of the Whole have been in session and have had under consideration the report of the Comj mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The report of the Committee was adopt- ed by the House. The journed. Convention, upon motion, ad- Q'Ionvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1. FRANKFORT, OCTOBER 31. 1890. No. 44 Friday,] BUCKNER—HOGG—SMITH. [October 31 . The Convention was called to order at '9 o’clock A. M., and opened with prayer by the Rev. Father Young. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. Petitions, etc. The PRESIDENT. in order. Mr. BUCKNER. I am instructed by the Committee on Legislative Department to present the following petition, which I ask to be read. The petition was read. It was signed by several colored ministers and educators, and requested that no reference to slavery be made in the Bill of Rights or Constitu- .tion. Mr. BUCKN ER. I am furtherinstructed by the Committee to say that the signers of that petition appeared in person before the Committee of their own accord, and with _great earnestness and ability presented the views which are there e'xpressed. It was suggested to them that those most friendly to them desired in the Constitution a guar- anty in reference to the question of slavery. But they said that those who thus repre- sented them were not the true representa- tives of their race; that their race did not desire it. The Committee thought it proper to submit these views to the Con- vention. Mr. HOGG. I was with the Committee when these gentlemen of color were before them, and while they were intelligent and educated men, and claimed to be repre- sentatives of their race, and while they seem earnestly to desire that no mention of slav- ery, still they would not consent that we Petitions are now F should leave it out of the school system. They did not want it mentioned any- where. and my country would not accept a school system that way. While they are willing to vote to the colored population their proportion of the money, they want the schools kept separate. While these gentlemen were willing to have it stricken out of the Bill of Rights, they also wanted it left out of the school system. On motion of Mr. H. H. Smith, the petition was referred to the Committee of the Whole. Mr. Quicksall filed a communication from the County Clerk of Magofiin county, showing the indebtedness of the county, which was referred to the Special Com- mittee, of which the Delegate from Ander- son is Chairman. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I have a petition from Ben S. South, asking for the abolition of fees to J ailers, that certain property be not taxed, and that an efficient public school system be provided for. I ask a reference to the Committee on Education. The PRESIDENT. The reference will be so made. Reports from Standing Com- mittees are in order; if none, reports from Special Committees. If there are no re- ports from Special Committees, motions and resolutions. Mr. SWANGO. I desire to enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which the report of the Committee on Municipalities was adopted. Of course it will have to lie over. On motion of Mr. Carroll, the Conven- tion resolved itself into COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, Mr. Young in the Chair. 2 BILL OF RIGHTS. _-_-~ Friday,] The CHAIRMAN. Yesterday after- noon we completed the consideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. RODES. If there is no objection, I would like this morning for the Committee to allow us to reconsider and strike from section 4 certain words. I have consulted most of the members of my Com- mittee upon this matter, and they all concur in this action. We pro- test earnestly that we are as much in favor of liberty of conscience as anybody, but as there are some gentlemen who do not seem to like that section, we ask permission to strike out the words, “or justify prac- tices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State, or opposed to the civil authority thereof.” I understand that there is serious objection on the part of some gentlemen, who would like to have that part stricken out. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the words can be stricken out. Mr. BULLITT. I desire to call the at- tention of the Chairman of the Committee on Bill of Rights to a certain part of sec- tion 4, and ask that he consider that propor- tion at the same time that the other is con— sidered. I remember that Judge Ballard put Father Young in prison—- The CHAIRMAN. The question now is on the motion to strike out particular words. Mr. BULLITT. If he will add some other words, it will expedite matters. I do not want to make a speech, but simply de- sire to call his attention to the effect of some Words that some of the gentlemen of the Convention regard as exceptionable. This part of the language which recites that the liberty of conscience secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State. It is known by a large number of Delegates to this Convention that Judge Ballard at- RODES—BULLITT—KNOTT. [October 31 tempted to force Father Young to testify in Court as to matters that were confessed before him in the confessional, and Judge Ballard put him in prison to force him to do so; but because of the language of that section of the old Bill of Rights, after keeping him in jail forty days, be dis- charged him,'concluding that that section prevented him from keeping him farther. It is desired by many of us to dispense with the words “oaths or aflirmations," for the purpose of allowing the Catholic people to worship according to the dictates of their own consciences, and according to the laws of their State. I will ask that the Com- mittee strike out those words, as well as the words they refer to. Mr. KNOTT. I would like to know the exact question before the Committee, The CHAIRMAN. The question is the request of the Committee to strike out cer- tain words in their report as it now stands. Mr. KNOTT. If the request is to go back and consider the whole question, I have no objection. Mr. PETTIT. It would be improper to reconsider in Committee of the Whole. The CHAIRMAN. Will the Commit- tee please allow the Delegate from Warren to make his motion ? Mr. RODES. I'move that the words, “or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the State, or opposed to the civil authority thereof," be stricken out. Mr. MAY. If that be done, would you not have to put in some other word before the word “excuse” to make it read right? Mr. RODES. Yes; the word “or” would have to be inserted. Mr. BECKHAM. Could we not get at it in a better way by'moving a reconsidera— tion of the vote by which the fourth sec- tion was adopted? I make a motion to that effect. The CHAIRMAN. A motion was made- to strike out those words. '3 BILL or RIGHTS. A 3 Friday,] KNOTT—BULLITT—CLAY. [October 31 . Mr. KNOTT. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that is not in order. The CHAIRMAN. The motion to strike out does not require unanimous con- sent. Mr. KNOTT. What does it require? We have passed by all of that, and we can- not go back without unanimous consent. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of opinion that the object is to get the Bill in condition to receive the approval of the Committee of the Whole. If the majority of the Committee want to strike out those words, I shall not insist on having a lot of circumlocution in order to arrive at the re- sult in Committee of the Whole. In Con- vention, it might be different. Has the Delegate any thing else to say‘? Mr. KNOTT. I believe I have nothing further to say. Mr. BULLITT. But after it is passed on, it is no longer. the property of the Committee of the Whole. The CHAIRMAN. If a majority of the Committee want to strike it out, I do not see that it will hurt anybody. Mr. JOHNSTON. Is it the ruling of the Chair that that can be done? The CHAIRMAN. It is. Mr. KNOTT. Is it in order to move not to insert, as well as to strike out? The CHAIRMAN. No, sir. Mr. KNOTT. Is 1t in order to offer a sub- stitute to the whole? The CHAIRMAN. It is. Mr. KNOTT. I move, as a substitute to the whole section, this language: That no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship, or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, or obliged, against ‘his own consent, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion whatever; but all per- sons shall be protected in their right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; and the. civil rights, privileges, or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching whatsoever. Upon a vote, the substitute was adopted, on a division, thirty in the afiirmative and twenty-nine in the negative. Mr. KNOTT. I demand tellers. The result was re-announced, and the call for the tellers was withdrawn. Mr. PETTIT. I renew the call. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair appoints Messrs. Knott and Allen. The rule is, that these tellers shall stand by the desk and the Delegates pass between them. The result of the vote, as announced by the tellers was: in the affirmative, thirty- seven; negative, twenty-one. The CHAIRMAN. That adopts the substitute. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer as a substitute sections five and six of the old Bill of Rights. Mr. CLAY. That wlll be in order when the vote by which those sections were adopted is reconsidered. The CHAIRMAN. Such will be the ruling of the Chair. Mr. BRONSTON. I would have'been obliged to the Delegate from Bourbon if he had made the point of order sooner. Mr. CLAY. I was not listening. Mr. BRONSTON. The point of order was made. The CHAIRMAN. But not in the same way. The Chairman desired to strike out some words, and it was done. Mr. BRONSTON. Every member on our side of the House was led to believe you had released the rule‘ for the present and allowed votes on substitutes. The CHAIRMAN. They had no rea- - son to believe that. The motion is out of order. Mr. vBRONSTON. The offer of this substitute ‘? The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir. 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. ,your motion out of order. Friday,] Mr. BRONSTON. Well, what is the status now‘? The CHAIRMAN. The Committee’s report is completed by the adoption of this substitute. , Mr. BRONSTON. The House has never voted upon the adoption of the substitute ‘of the Delegate from Marion. The CHAIRMAN. It did it just now. Mr. BRONSTON. The House may de- sire some other substitute. It merely has taken the substitute of the Delegate from Marion in lieu of that section offered by the Committee. The CHAIRMAN. We will wrestle with that when we get to it. I will rule The question is now upon the substitute offered by the Delegate from Marion to the whole report. Mr. KENNEDY. I move to recon- sider the vote by which the substitute of the Delegate from Marion was adopted. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair holds ‘that is in order. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to call the at- tention of the Chairman to the rules laid ‘down in all works on Parliamentary law- Jeiferson’s Manual and Smith’s Digest. It says, “no previous question can be put in the Committee of the Whole, nor can this Committee adjourn as others may, nor can the yeas and nays be taken, nor can ‘a motion to lie on the table be entertained, nor a motion to reconsider.” The CHAIRMAN. We will carry out the ruling of the Chair to-day, and if we want to change it Monday we will change it. As I permitted a motion to reconsider at one time, and had high authority for it—the President of the Con- vention—and as there seems to be some difference in the Parliamentary rulings on this question, I will adhere to my ruling. If I am wrong, I will decide it this way7 and the next time I will decide ‘it right. We will entertain this motion this time be- cause I permitted it to be done before. Mr. MCHENRY. It has been decided BRoNs'roN-—KENNEDY—PETTIT. [October . before that we could reconsider, and we did reconsider yesterday. I never knew it could be done before, and made the point then; but I could not lay my hands on the Parliamentary law which forbade recon- - sideration in Committee of the Whole; but it was done, and it has been done this morning. I raise the point of order that there was no appeal from the decision of the Chair, and what has been done up to this time is legal, because, if it was decided wrong by the Chair, without appeal, it would stand. I now make the point of order that no reconsideration can be had in Committee of the Whole. There is no sense in going into Committee of the Whole if we have the same rules as the House of Representatives. The CHAIRMAN. You had a different opinion a day or two ago. Mr. McHENRY. I have been right on the question all the time. It was the Chair that was wrong. The CHAIRMAN. The point is raised that a motion to reconsider is not in order in Committee of the Whole. The Chair will rule it is in order, and some gentleman can take an appeal. Mr. MCHENRY. I will take an appeal. No, I don’t know that I will. It takes time to write it. Mr. PETTIT. We don’t want to over- rule any decision of the Chair, and I am glad the appeal is not pressed. We know: the Chair is-trying to get along with the business, and if he does make a mistake, we know it is an honest mistake. Mr. BRONSTON. I raise the point of order that there is nothing before the House. The CHAIRMAN. I will permit the motion of the Delegate from Nicholas. He moves to reconsider the vote by which the substitute of the Delegate from Marion was substituted for the Committee’s report. The ~ question is on the substitute of the Delegate from Marion. Mr. KNOTT. I desire to perfect my- BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Friday,] MCHENRY—BECKHAM—BRONSTON. [October 31 . own substitute. I wish to have certain clauses inserted that were inadvertently omitted. The CHAlRNIAN. jection? Mr. MCHENRY. What became of the substitute offered by the Delegate from Scott? The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will state about those substitutes. The CLERK. On October 3d, the Dele- gate from Marion oifered a substitute for section 1, and on; October 7th, by unani- Is there any ob- mous consent, he‘withdrew that amendment, and in lieu thereof offered this substitute. Mr. MCHENRY. first. The CHAIRMAN. Read the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Marion, The amendment reads as follows : Then that puts him Amend by adding before word “no,” on line 1, clause 9, section 1, the following: “No man shall be compelled to send his child or children to any school ;” and strike out all after the word “therefore” on line 4, clause 10, section 1. Add after the word “comfort,” on line 3, clause 6, section 2, “and no person shall be convicted of treason except upon the evi- dence of at least two witnesses to the same overt act.” Add on line 3, clause 7, section 2, after the word evidence, “and if established by the proof, shall be a sufficient defense.” Mr. BECKHAM. Will you please state how the substitute will read then‘? The CLERK. It would then read: “That no man shall be compelled to send his child or children to any school; and no prefer- ence shall ever be given by law to any ' religion, sect,” etc. Mr. BECKNER. I object to that. Mr. BRONSTON. I offer a substitute for that. If it can be amended, it can have a substitute offered. The CHAIRMAN. There are three amendments to it, and we will perfect the substitute first. ' Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to amend that by way of substitute. The CHAIRMAN. The substitute will be taken up section by section. Mr. BRONSTON. tion now. The CHAIRMAN. No, sir; we have not perfected the substitute yet. The Del- egate has a right to perfect his substitute. Mr. BRONSTON. I offer a substitute which Iwant considered in its order. Of course he has a right to first perfect his work. Mr. BLACKBURN. So that we can be sure we are right, I would like to ask a question. These published slips show that on Friday, October 3d, the Delegate from Marion offered a substitute for the report of the Committee. On October 3d, the Delegate from Scott offered a substitute to declare the Preamble of the present Con— stitution the Preamble for the Constitution we are to adopt, and the present Bill of Rights, save the third section, the Bill of Rights for the Constitution we are to adopt. Four days afterwards we find that the Delegate from Marion offer- ed a substitute in lieu of the substitute theretofore offered by him. Now, I want to know if it is proper for the Dele- gate, four days after the substitute was offered by the Delegate from Scott, by simply saying I offer this as a substitute to the substitute I offered four days ago, to dispossess the Delegate from Scott of his prior right to being heard on his substi- We are on this sec- ,tute ‘? The CHAIRMAN. That was done by unanimous consent. He withdrew the first substitute and offered the second, which ' has precedence over that offered by the Delegate from Scott. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I would like to have the Clerk state exactly the facts about that. , The CLERK. The Delegate from Ma- rion, on October 3d, offered an amendment to the report of the Committee. It wast the first amendment offered. Then, on the th, he asked leave, and unanimous consen 9 BILL OF RIGHTS Friday,] BLACKBURN—BULLITT—BECKNER. [October 31 , was given, to offer this substitute in lieu of the amendment theretofore offered. Mr. BLACKBURN. That was on Oc- tober 7th. Mr. BULLITT. When did the gentle‘ man from Scott offer his amendment? The CLERK. October 3d. Mr. BULLITT. Which comes first, then? The CLERK. The Delegate from Ma- rion offered the first one on October 3d, and the other was offered in lieu of that. Mr. BECKNER. When you all 'get through with this, I want to say a word. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary_in- forms me that by the record the substitute of the Delegate from Marion has prece- dence. Mr. BECKNER. I desire to offer, as a substitute for'the amendment of the Dele- gate from Marion, the words inserted in the report of the Committee as originally adopted in reference to that matter com- pelling one to send his children to a school to which he is conscientiously opposed. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend by adding, “ or send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed. ” Mr. BECKNER. That raises the ques- tion as to whether we can have compul- sory education in the future or not. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. The question under discussion is the substitute of the Delegate from.Marion to the fourth section of the Committee’s report. The Delegates who are talking seem to be talking about the substitute for the whole. Mr. KNOTT. That is exactly what we are on, and I always thought the person offering a substitute or resolution, or any thing, hada right to perfect.it by putting in what he had inadvertently omitted be- fore there was any other amendment of- ' fered. The CHAIRMAN. I heard no objec- tion to the gentleman perfecting his substi- tute. It was understood, by unanimous consent, he might do so. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Substitute to what? For this section of the Committee’s report, or for the whole report‘? The CHAIRMAN. The whole Bill. Mr. BRONSTON. No one will deny the distinguished gentleman the right to insert in his substitute that which pleases the gentleman. That is a conclusion which this body has arrived at. As I under- stand, he wishes now to amend that section which has been adopted in lieu of the sec- tion of the Committee’s report. The CHAIRMAN. This is the situa- tion. The gentleman offers a substitute for the entire report of the Committee-— Mr. BRONSTON. Let me remind the Chair that that is true; but this morning he took out a part of his substitute and offered it as a substitute for section 4 of the Committee’s report, and on that proposi- tion tellers were demanded and a vote was had, and it was adopted. Now, that is not part of his original substitute, because he has cut it out. The CHAIRMAN. He offered that as an independent proposition. We are through with that. The gentleman, by unanimous consent, had leave to perfect his substitute. Mr. MACKOY. Is not the question whether the section offered by the Dele- gate from Marion shall be adopted in place of section 4 of the Committee’s report? The CHAIRMAN. That has already been done. Mr. CLAY. As I made the point of order, I would like to make a remark or two on this question of order, and I think I can present a solution which will be con— sistent with the rules. My impression, and the impression of a good many, was that we were proceeding to consider the report of the Committee under this rule, viz: that each sec- tion or paragraph of the report of the Com- mittee, which contains matter to be inserted in the Constitution, and which referred to BILL OF RIGHTS. 7 Friday,] PETTIT—MCHENRY—KNOTT. [October 31 . .a separate and independent subject, should be treated as an ‘independent proposition, subject to debate, amendment, postpone- ment, committal, etc. I supposed we were proceeding under that rule, and after we "took up each section which contained [an independent proposition, and had a vote .upon all these amendments and substitute, we would then have a final vote upon the .adoption of that section as amended, and that that finally concluded the matter, so far as the Committee is concerned, and I :think that position is upheld by the rules. I understand a good many gentlemen do not understand it that way, and suppose the substitutes will still come up and be perfected. Therefore, I ask that Gov. Knott and Mr. Askew be allowed to per- fect their substitutes, and have a vote taken on them. The CHAIRMAN. By unanimous con- .sent, the Delegate from Marion can perfect his substitute. ,Mr. PETTIT. I want to call the atten- tion of the Committee to this simple fact. I have no objection to Governor Knott or Mr. Askew or any one offering a- substitute to the report of this Committee, but I would like for that substitute to come be- fore the House itself and not before the Committee. We have been laboring upon this substitute for a week or ten days, and now, just upon the eve of adjournment, ‘with a slim House, we are about‘ to take the reverse course to what has been the action of the Committee. This morn- ing the fourth section has been struck out because of the slim vote here in this House, when, if we had a quorum present, the re- port of the Committee on Bill of Rights would be the action of the Committee and not the substitute proposed. I simply de— sire to call attention, and ask that we leave this matter to the House itself, and that the gentleman from Marion and the gentleman from Scott may both have the privilege of “offering their amendments as a whole. Mr. STRAUS. I make the point of order that there is nothing before the House. The CHAIRMAN. He is going to make the motion to rise. Mr. PETTIT. I move that the Com- mittee now rise and refer this matter to the House, with leave to the Delegate from Marion and the Delegate from Scott to dffer their amendments. The CHAIRMAN. The question is that the Committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. Mr. MCHENRY. No; the motion is to rise and report the Committee’s report to the House, with instructions that the gen- tleman from Marion and the gentleman from Scott be allowed to offer their substi- tutes, and that the Committee be discharged from the further consideration of the sub- ject. . Mr. KNOTT. I would be extremely grateful for the courtesy of offering my substitute in the House. if it was not my right to do so. I maintain that I have a right to offer this as a substitute for the whole Bill, as agreed to in the Committee. Mr. MCHENRY. Provided you get the floor, and there is no motion for the previous question. Mr. KN OTT. I am speaking about the House. I maintain that it is a matter of Parliamentary practice; but whether the question has ever arisen before, I maintain, as a matter of common sense and reason, that I have the right, that after the Com- mittee has perfected its scheme I may offer a substitute for the whole. It may be the concensus of opinion that that may be pre- ferred; but I certainly have a right to offer mine. 4 Mr. McHEN RY. I think .the rule is well understood, that a motion for the pre vious question will cut off any amendment as well as debate. Suppose we go from the Committee, and ask to be discharged from the further consideration of this matter, and when we get in the House the Delegate from Warren, who is entitled to the floor, 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] PETTIT—BLACKBURN—KNOTT. [Ogtober 31 . moves the previous question on the propo- sition, which he ought to do, and which the House ought to sustain. Otherwise, we will lose the work of three weeks. The mo- tion of the Delegate is, that in that event it shall not cut off these two substitutes, and the House will take a vote on them. I think it is a question of courtesy, and not a matter of right. Mr. PETTIT. My motion was that the Committee rise and report the report of the Iommittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, as perfected, to the House, with the recommendation that the Delegate from Marion and the Delegate from Scott should have the privilege of offering their substi- tutes to be voted upon. Upon a vote, the motion for the Com- mittee to rise was'lost. Mr. BLACKBURN. I want to know whether other Delegates are cut off from offering amendments in the House‘? Mr. BECKNER. And I want to un- derstand if the amendments proposed by the gentleman to his own substitute awhile ago concluded the matter? Mr. KNOTT. Not at all. My under- standing is this: That before my substi- tute was read, I should have the privilege of amending it, so that when it came to be read before the Committee of the Whole, it would read as I desired. Then, when it was taken up, it would be subject to amendment, as though Ihad not inserted it. Any gentleman can offer amendments to any portion he sees proper. Mr. BRONSTON. You now desire to perfect your substitute for the whole report of the Committee. Mr. KNOTT. Yes, sir. Mr. BRONSTON. I wish to know if you desire to amend the section already adopted as section four of the Committee’s report. Mr. KNOTT. This substitute and the Committee’s report are two entirely dis- tinct things. The Committee’s report, being amended in the manner it is, has nothing whatever to do with this substi-- tute of mine. The adoption of the amend-~ ment to the Committee’s report does not preclude it from being in my substitute. Mr. BRONSTON. There is no misunder- standing between the Delegate from Marion and myself, and I desire to make this point: Section 4 of the Committee’s report has been stricken out. The Delegate- from Marion has offered a substitute to that which was adopted. The question has never been taken as to whether that substitute so adopted shall be considered a part of the: Committee’s report, and it stands now in this attitude: That the Committee’s sec-- tion number 4 has been stricken out and. nothing has been sustituted, and the gentle-4 man desires to perfect that part of his- report which he has had adopted as a sub- stitute. If I am correct in that statement of fact, I insist that this House has a right to determine whether it will accept either of those two or another in lieu of both. The CHAIRMAN. Nobody is talking of that. Mr. BRONSTON. Have we not aright. to offer as a substitute the second section of the old Bill of Rights? The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate has unanimous leave to offer his substitute; when it is considered seriat'im, amendments or substitutes can be offered to the differ- ent sections. Mr. BRONSTON. I am not speaking‘ of perfecting his substitute. I do not want to interfere with that. I don’t want him to perfect his substitute though, as a whole, and not have a chance to perfect the old Bill of Rights as a substitute. I want a vote of the House on that. The CHAIRMAN. That is made part of the Committee’s report—the section which was substituted for section 4 of the- Committee’s report. more to do with that. Mr. BRONSTON. The Chair rules that. We have nothing the Committee’s report contains this pro-- BILL OF RIGHTS. 9 ‘I Friday,] BRONSTON—STRAUS—BURNAM. [October 31 . vision of the substitute of the Delegate from Marion. The CHAIRMAN. Unquestionably. Mr. BRONSTON. And you refuse to allow us to offer, as a substitute for that, section 2 of the old Bill of Rights? The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand you to move to substitute the second sec- tion of the old Bill of Rights for section 4 of the report of the Committee on Pream- ble and Bill of Rights, which is the substi- tute of the Delegate from Marion, adopted this morning? Mr. BRONSTON. Exactly. The CHAIRMAN. I decide that is out of order. Mr. STRAUS. I do not understand that the last amendment sent up by the Dele- gate from Marion has ever been voted upon. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Marion offered a substitute. By unani- mous consent, he was allowed to perfect that substitute. His substitute is now per- fected, and we will take it up section by section, and consider it as we did the report of ‘the Committee. When that is per- fected, the vote will come between the re- port of the Committee and the substitute of the Delegate from Marion. Mr. STRAUS. I am not talking about the substitute of the Delegate from Marion for the whole report. I am talking about the substitute adopted this morning for the section 4 of the Committee’s report. Since it has been adopted he has sent to the Clerk’s desk some other words that he wants added to it. The CHAIRMAN. He has not offered any words to that. That was adopted. He is perfecting his substitute for the whole. Mr. STRAUS. Not after it was adopted? The CHAIRMAN. The mistake is, he does‘ not offer it as a part of the substitute for the fourth section of the Committee’s report, which was adopted. He offers it to the substitute for the report of the Com- mittee of the \Vhole. unanimous consent. . Mr. BRONSTON. I object. The CHAIRMAN. It was done ten minutes ago. It is now too late to object-- Mr. BECKNER. ‘I objected at the time. The CHAIRMAN. Not when it was- stated the second time. Mr. BECKNER. I was trying to say I objected, and would not withdraw my ob~ jection until I could understand it. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair decides. that leave was given, and the gentleman has perfected ‘his substitute. The Clerk will report the substitute for the whole re- port. The Clerk read the substitute offered by the Delegate from Marion county for the report of the Committee. Mr. BURNAM. ‘I do not know much about parliamentary law, and I do not sup- pose I ever will, but lthere is this proposi-- tion which is very clear in my mind. There are in this House three parties, one- wanting to adopt the report of the Com- mittee on Preamble and Bill of Rights; another for the substitute of the Delegate- It was done by from Marion, and still another in favor of ' the old Bill of Rights with the slavery clauses stricken out. I see no reason why we cannot go into the Convention and vote upon those three propositions, with. leave to the gentleman from Woodford to offer his amendments. Mr. BLACKBURN. I have no amend- ments, but I do not want to see Delegates deprived of their rights. Mr. BURNAM. If I can get a second, I will move the proposition originally made by the Delegate from Daveiss, that the Committee rise, and that we come to a vote- upon one'of the three propositions, allow- ing any gentleman to propose any amend- ment he sees fit. Any one of the three- propositions would be a good criterion. Mr. PETTIT. I second the motion. Mr. JOHNSTON. I make the point of 10 BILL or RIGHTS. ' ~ advantages for their pet theories. .all wrong. I do not belong to any .party. Friday,] 6 DURBIN—BRONSTON—KNOTT. [October 31 . order that no business has been transacted .since that identical motion was made and voted down. The CHAIRMAN. The motion is out ‘of order. Mr. PETTIT. This is not the identical motion. Mr. BLACKBURN. Why should we not assist the Delegate from Marion in per- fecting his substitute, as we did the Com- mittee’s report ‘? Mr. DURBIN. I have made but little racket in this Convention. My mother taught me, when I was a little boy, that empty wagons made the most noise; ‘and since I have been here, and most especially this morning, I have learned it more thoroughly. Some say there are three parties here contending for three different Bills of Rights, and some are trying to get This is We have perfected the Committee’s report; now let us make the substitute of the Dele- gate from Marion as good as we can make it. Then let us take up the present Bill of Rights and make a few changes in that. Then we have three good bills to choose ‘from; and then let us have no prejudice, but select the very best one. Mr. BURNAM. I move that the Com- mittee rise, and report the Committee’s report and the substitutes to the Conven- tion, with leave to the Delegate from Marion and the Delegate from Scott to offer amendments to their substitutes as they see proper. ' Mr. BRONSTON. If that is done, we will not get an opportunity to vote on the report of the Committee, because the Chair- man has held that section 4 has been elimi- nated, and a section offered by the Delegate from Marion substituted. The motion to rise was lost. Mr. MARTIN. I offer the following ‘resolution : Resolved, That it is the sense of this Committee that while the Delegate from Marlon has a right to perfect his substitute, no part of it shall apply to the report of the Committee, and that the report of the Committee is not changed by any section already adopted. The CHAIRMAN. Does the Delegate desire to press that resolution? Mr. MARTIN. It seems to me that it is reasonable, if he has a right to perfect his substitute, that he should have no right to dismember the report of the Committee. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair decides that out of order. There must be some misunderstanding in reference to this mat- ter. When we went into it, it was with the understanding, if not the agreement all around, that parties ofi‘ering substitutes should have the right to have them per- fected; that then they would be put against the report of the Committee and voted for, and the Committee of the Whole would report whatever was adopted to the House. Mr. BRONSTON. The paper just read by the Clerk is the perfected substitute; so far as the Delegate desires it to be per- fected. The CHAIRMAN. stands. .. Mr. KNOTT. I may accept some of the amendments offered. The CHAIRMAN. to the substitute. Mr. KNOTT. I offered no preamble. Mr. RODES. I do not want to act in the dark. I want to know exactly the attitude in which the original report of the Committee and these substitutes stand. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Bourbon will please answer the question. Mr. CLAY. The opinion of the Dele- gate from Bourbon is, that each amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole has to be written on a separate piece of paper, and has to be reported to the Con— vention in lieu of the original section re- ported by the Committee. Each original section has to be reported back to the Con- vention, and, of course, the whole matter is in the hands of the Convention. The Chair so under- Read the preamble BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 _under the rule. Friday,] RonEs—KxoT'r—MeHENRY. [October 31 . Mr. RODES. And when that is done, I can offer any amendment I choose. Mr. CLAY. That is at the pleasure of the Convention. If the previous question is moved and sustained, all amendments not offered at that time are cut off; but it is in the power of the Convention to vote down the previous question. Mr. KNOTT. All amendments offered heretofore in the Convention are still pend- ing in the Convention, and cannot be cut ‘off by the previous question. Mr. CLAY. Perhaps you are right :about that. I am not sure. Mr. MCHENRY. I want to know the necessity of going over this section by sec- tion, in Committee of the Whole, if any gentleman can offer any substitute or amendment he pleases‘? Mr. L. T. MOORE. I do not care par- ticularly about it being reported section by section now, but when we come into the Convention I propose to offer some amend- .ments. - Mr. MACKOY. What is it proposed to ‘do now? The CHAIRMAN. To take up the substitute of the Delegate from Marion .section by section. Mr. MACKOY. That was not the un- derstanding of the resolution passed. That was, that the Delegate from Marion be per- mitted to perfect his substitute and offer it in Committee of .the Whole in place of the report of the Committee. It seems to me we have been doing a useless thing if we are going to retrace our steps and help each gentleman perfect his report. I do not see the necessity of going through this same thing again. It is contrary to the under- standing and agreement. Mr. CLAY. I asked unanimous consent, and it was upon my motion that the pro- ceeding was gone into. I made the point that the whole thing was out of order That rule stated that each section was to be acted upon as a separate proposition,and when acted upon, that pre- cluded further action in Committee of the Whole. But I said, in view of the fact that there was a misapprehension o the part of a great many members I asked unanimous consent that those two gentlemen who had offered sub- stitutes be allowed to perfect their substitutes, and that they be voted upon in Committee of the Whole as a whole. " Mr. BURNAM. If there be any rule requiring us to vote section by section, in order to save time, I move to dispense with it, and as soon as the Delegate from Marion completes the perfection of his sub- stitute, we then take a vote on it as a whole. Mr. MACKOY. I ask that the action of the Convention be read. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair holds that the Delegate from Marion has the right to perfect his proposition as a sub- stitute for the report of the Committee. Mr. RODES. I understand then that this matter comes up, according to the rule. section by section. I propose to offer amendments to each section, so that it can be perfected like the report of the Commit- tee was. If it is a parallel case, let the par- allelism be carried out, and don’t let us have any further discussion about it. Mr. MCHENRY. Under the rule, we have gone on and perfected one Bill of Rights. Now, it is proposed to go on and perfect a second, and then we have to take up the old Bill of Rights section by sec- tion and perfect that. We had better have done that in the Convention ' in the start, and saved two or three weeks’ time. After going over the Committee’s report as we have, if we are going to take up the amend- ment of the Delegate from Marion and let the Committee offer their amendments'to it section by section, it will take a week or ten days to get through with it. The gen- tleman from Marion has a proposition upon which we will have to vote; but when the vote comes between his proposition and the report of the Committee, I want it to be in 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] MAY—KNoTT—BECKNER. [October 31 . the House, where the yeas and nays can be called. Mr. MAY. I move that the Committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The motion was lost. The CHAIRMAN. Does the Delegate from Marion desire to say any thing on his silbstitute‘? Mr. KNOTT. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. amendments to it? The CLERK. Four. Mr. MACKOY. When were they of- fered‘? 4 The CLERK. Three of them a week or so ago and one this morning. Mr. MACKOY. Have they been ac- cepted‘? Mr. KNOTT. I do not know any thing about it if they have. The first amendment, offered by the Delegate from Pike, was read, and is as follows: Are there any Amend substitute by striking from the tenth clause of section 1 the word “injured.” A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. The next amendment, also offered by the Delegate from Pike, was read, and is as follows: - Amend by striking out, on page 7, sec- tion 2, the word “retrospective.” A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. The third amendment, also offered by the Delegate from Pike. was read, as follows: Strike out all after section 4. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. ' The fourth amendment, the one offered by the Delegate from Clark, was read, as follows: Strike out the words “no man shall be compelled to send his child or children to any school,” and insert in lieu thereof “no man shall be compelled to send his child or to read could not. children to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed.” Mr. BECKNER. This makes a square issue as to whether the Legislature in the future shall or shall not have the right to passa compulsory school law. The Dele- gate from Marion this morning added to— his substitute the words I proposed to strike- out, saying that'no'person in the future shall be required to send his child to any school. My proposition was that no one- shall be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed, saving the conscience of those who are opposed to the public school system. This relieves the public schools of the op- position made by a number of good people throughout the land, that it is a Godless system, and they ought not to be required to send their children. This does not pre- vent the Legislature from requiring them to send their children to some school. Mr. CARROLL. Is not your substitute substantially the same as the substitute of the Delegate from Marion ? Mr. BECKNER. No, sir. Mr. CARROLL. If a person says, “I am conscientiously opposed to sending my child to a school,” can he be made to do so?v Mr. BECKNER. I think the Courts would have to determine whether it was a case of conscientiousness. _ Mr. CARROLL. Is not a man’s con- science with himself ? Mr. BECKNER. The Courts would de- cide whether it was a matter of conscience- or whether he wanted to keep his child at home. Under the Census of 1880, Ken- tucky had one hundred and eighty thousand more voters who could not read than she: had in 1870. The Census of 1880 showed that twenty-nine and three-tenths per cent. of the people who ought to have been able Now, if the General Assembly in future should see fit to pro- vide that children should be sent to school during such a period of the year, I should think they should do so, and we should not BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 Friday,] :hamper or prevent the Legislature from passing such a law. that will tie up the law-makers for all time to come, and will prohibit them from doing what the people may desire, and what has been done in some of the most wide-awake andthrifty States in the Union. I do not ask that any thing be put in providing for compulsory education. I do not think the time has come to consider that. I do not think the people are in a condition for it; ‘but I do hope that no provision will be put . in the Constitution which will prohibit the people from having compulsory education in the future, and that is the effect of what was put into this substitute this morning. It makes it so that there can be no compul- sory school law in Kentucky at any time My amendment provides that children may be required to go to school, but parents :shall not be compelled to send them against their conscience. Mr. KNOTT. I am, perhaps, less inter- ested in this question than any other gen- tleman on this floor. It has pleased Providence to withhold from me the crowning blessing of life; the only child I ever had born to me was taken away. But if I had children, and any power in this Commonwealth was authorized to take them from the bosom of my family, ‘to compel their attendance upon any school, I would leave the State. I say every man has a right to educate his children in the bosom of his own family, and not to send them to any school. That is my view about it, and in my substitute I withhold from the Legislature, or any other power ‘on earth, the right of invading the sanctity of a household; of severing, even tempo- rarily, the ties of parent and child; of re- moving a child in its plastic state from the control, nurture and care of the parents through whose instrumentalty it has its being. I may be conscientiously opposed to sending my child to any school. I may want to educate it in the bosom of my family, or to allow it to grow up uneducated. And BECKNER—QKNOTT. But here is a provision. [October 31 . who makes my fellow-man my keeper? In that regard, I am responsible to my God. It is a matter of indifference to me, however, whether the gentleman’s language is adopted or not. Upon a vote, the amendment was re- jected. A vote being taken upon the adoption of the substitute of the Delegate from Marion, it was rejected. The CHAIRMAN. \Ve will now take up the substitute offered by the Delegate from Scott, which is the old Bill of Rights with part of the third section stricken out. The following amendments were offered to said substitute: By the Delegate from Grayson county: Amend the first section by striking out the words “ in consideration of public serv- ices,” and inserting “ except as provided in this Constitution.” By the Delegate from McCracken: Amend section 1 by adding thereto, at the end thereof, the following: “All of which shall be subject to amendment or re- peal by law.” By the Delegate from Nicholas: Substitute for section 1 the following: “That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and no grant of exclu- sive or separate public emoluments or priv- ileges shall be given to any man or set of men, except in consideration of public services. No property shall be exempt from taxation except as provided in this Constitution; and every grant of a fran- chise, privilege or exemption shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amend- ment.” By the Delegate from Madison: Amend by adding an additional subsec- tion, as follows: “ That neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punish- ment for crime, shall ever be permitted in this State.” Mr. BRONSTON. We accept that. The amendment of the Delegate from Grayson, upon a vote, was rejected. A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from McCracken, thesame was rejected. 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] FARMER—KNOTT—BODES. [October 31 , A vote being taken on the substitute of- fered by the Delegate from Nicholas, the same was adopted. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Henderson was read, and is as follows: Amend by striking out of section 23 the ‘ words “but in cases where persons shall destroy their own lives, no forfeiture shall take place by reason thereof.” Mr. FARMER. I am in hopes that gentlemen will accept that amendment. No man has ever yet given me a good reason why it should be inserted in the Constitution. I am opposed to inserting any thing with positively no meaning. You may say it does no harm, but we should be opposed to inserting any thing in the Con- stitution without it has a meaning. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark county was read, and is as follows: Amend by inserting after the word “consent,” in the fifth section, these words: “Or send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscientiously op- posed.” On a division, the amendment was re- jected by a vote of 17 ayes to 37 noes. Mr.‘ KNOTT. I make the point that there is no quorum. The CHAIRMAN. Thirty-seven and seventeen makefifty-four; that isaquorum. M r. KNOTT. It is not aquorum. The CHAIRMAN. It has been so held. Mr. KNOTT. Then it was wrongly held. In the printed rules of the Conven- tion it is prescribed that two-thirds shall constitute a quorum. Another rule of the Convention is, and an indispensable one, that no business shall be transacted without a quorum. Another rule is, that the rules of the Convention shall apply to the Com- mittee of the Whole. Now, there is noth- ing further said anywhere in the rules about a quorum. If that rule applies to the House, that you must have a quorum‘ before you can transact any business, the same rule must apply to the Committee of the Whole. I ask you where you get your authority for saying a majority constitutes a quorum. You need not say you get it from general Parliamentary law; there is no- such thing as general Parliamentary law. The rules of the British House of Com- mons, or of the Senate or House of Repre- sentatives of the United States, or of any State Legislature, are not laws to this body at all. We make the rules to govern our‘ own proceedings. There are certain broad principles of common reason that are not incorporated in our Constitution that sug- gest themselves from time to time, but when they come to the essential point of‘ what is to constitute a quorum, if there was no definition, it would take the whole‘ House; but in order to avoid difficulties- that would arise in that contingency, the Convention has determined what shall be a quorum, and have said that two-thirds- shall constitute a quorum, and nowhere else do you find a definition of that kind; and when you say any thing less than that~ quorum can transact business, the whole- thing tumbles to pieces. The CHAIRMAN. That matter has- been raised before, decided, and acquiesced in without appeal. Mr. KNOTT. Then I will appeal from the decision now. The Chairman left the Chair, and desig-- nated the Delegate from Ohio county to- preside. Mr. RODES. (While the Delegate from Marion was reducing his appeal to writing.) I want to raise a question here. I see the Chairman, whenever an appeal is taken, vacates his seat. I protest against any such course of action. I do not think the- Chairman should feel such a delicacy that he should leave the Chair. I think it is establishing a precedent that is not neces- sary or right. The CHAIRMAN. There is no reason ' why the gentleman should not occupy the BILL OF RIGHTS. 10 Friday,] )IACKOY—GOEBEL—RODES. [October 31 . Chair, and I so stated to him when he asked me to take the Chair. ’ Mr. MACKOY. The rules require it. Mr. GOEBEL. It is certainly an inva- riable Parliamentary usage that the per- son who occupies thfie Chair vacates it on an appeal. It is a custom I have never known to be departed from. Mr. RODES. It may be Parliamentary usage of late, but it was not formerly. Mr. GOEBEL. The Chairman may want to get on the floor to defend his de- cision. Mr. YOUNG. Anyhow, I refused to sit. Mr. KN ()TT read his appeal, as followss The Delegate from Marion appeals from: the decisiongof the Chairman that less than two-thirds of the Delegates constitute a quorum of the Convention, when sitting as a Committee of the Whole of the Conven- tion, because said decision is in violation of rules 10 and 57. Mr. KNOTT. These rules read as fol- lows: 10. A quorum shall consist of at least two-thirds of the Delegates elected, but ten Delegates of the Convention may adjourn from day to day wl". en a sufficient number has not met to proceed to business, and fif- teen Delegates, together wlth the President, may call the House, send for absent Dele- gates, and make an order for their cen- sure. 57. The rules of proceeding in the Con- vention shall be observed in Committee, so far as the same are applicable; but no Delegate shall speak twice ‘to any question until every Delegate choosing to speak has spoken, nor shall the previous question be called. Mr. BRONSTON. I rise not to argue the question, but to tell the House the pres- ent status of this aii'air. The same ques- tion was made by the Delegate from Daveiss when we were considering a very important matter on the report of the Com- mittee, and the matter was referred to the President of this Convention, and he de- cided that in Committee of the Whole a majority constituted a quorum. The reason given for that decision was, that it was necessary and important to expedite business, and because this Committee was considering merely what they would report to the Convention. I submit that, while this same matter is under discussion in the Committee of the Whole, it would be un- just to the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, it would be unjust to the gentleman whose substitute has passed fire, to apply that rule now. Whether right or wrong, the Committee ought to adhere to the precedent until they get through the consideration of this matter. Mr. WHITAKER. It seems to me that, so far as this matter is concerned, Parlia- mentary usage has very little to do with it. Every public body has the right and power to make rules to govern itself. This body has done so, and it has adopted a rule that two-thirds shall be a quorum, and that rule governs the Committee of the Whole, as far as applicable to it. Where there is a positive rule to govern a public body, Par- liamentary usage has no application or effect as against it. Wherever there is a doubt as to what a rule means, Parliament- ary usage comes in to solve the doubt. Then every thing centers in this: Is the rule which makes two-thirds a quorum ap- plicable to the Committee of the Whole? Why not? Can any gentleman upon this floor tell me why it is not applicable to the Committee of the Whole? Mr. BRONSTON. It would defeat the business entirely. Mr. WHITAKER. Whose fault is that but the Convention’s? I am going to sus- tain the Chairman by my vote; but while it works good to the people of Kentucky it is wrong. I make this point. that the Committee on Rules shall correct this fault which they have fallen into, and say that a quorum in Committee of the Whole shall be a majority of the Delegates. The CHAIRMAN. If the point is sought to be made as to whether the appeal 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] lVIACKOY—PETTIT—RAMSEY. ‘I: October 31 . is properly taken, the Chair decides that the Delegate from Marion has the right to bring the matter up, although it was heretofore decided that fifty-one constituted aquorum, and that decision was not ap- pealed from. Mr. MACKOY. I desire to address my-- self to the point as to whether the appeal should be sustained. I want to relieve the conscience of the Delegate who last spoke, in order that he may vote in favor of the ruling of the Chair without doing violence to his conscience. To me it is very clear that in Committee of the Whole a majority is a quorum; and for this reason, that there is no reason ‘why the rule applicable to the Convention should apply to the Committee of the Whole. The reason has ceased, and ' the law therefore failed. The reason why the rule was adopted for the Convention was that we might have at least two-thirds of the Delegates present at all times, in order that we might make a Constitution acceptable to the people of Kentucky; in order that we might have as many minds as possible to agree on the propositions to be submitted to the vote of the people. But when you come into Committee of the Whole, it only determines questions which are afterwards to be submitted to the Con- vention. Therefore, there is no reason why the rule, which has been laid down for the guidance of the Convention, should apply to the Committee of the Whole. Cessante z'ratvlone legis, cessat ipsa. law. Mr. PETTIT. I made the point the other day. Now, it presents a more diffi- cult question. I think the decision is wrong; but had I been in the Chair this morning, after the Committee the other day determined that a majority should consti- tute a quorum, I should have decided the question just as the Chairman did. I would 'consider, that ‘inasmuch as no appeal had been taken, it had become at least a tempo— rary rule of the Convention. I regard the rules not lightly. I believe it is better to do'business under a bad rule than to be continually changing. Rules 10 and 57 have been read, and I leave it to your judgment if the rule as to a quorum is not applicable to the Committee of the Whole‘. I think it is especially applicable. The Convention has determined that you must have two-thirds of the Delegates to deter- mine what shall go into the Constitution. The practical effect of this majority rule here to-day has been the overturning of every thing that has been done by less than a quorum of the Convention. I shall, therefore, out of respect for the rules, vote against sustaining the Chairman, although I believe I would have ruled the same way if I had been in the Chair. Mr. RAMSEY. In support of the same view suggested by the gentleman who has just taken his seat, I desire to call attention to arule adopted by the House of Repre- sentatives of the United States. There the rule is that a majority in the House consti- tutes a quorum. The question has been cle- cided there, and it is stated in Jefi'erson’s Manual that a quorum of the Committee of the Whole House is the same as of the House. Mr. PETTIT. That is true; but our rule here is that it takes two-thirds to make a quorum of the Convention, and, there- fore, I say that it takes the same number to make a quorum of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. RAMSEY. I was about to say, that by parity of reasoning, it would take two- thirds here. Mr. GRAHAM. The rule of the Con- vention ‘requires sixty-six and two-thirds, and it seems to me, that when they say fifty-one is a quorum, they abrogate a rule established by the Convention. If the Chairman violated the law, and it was ac- quiesced in for a day or'so, when an appeal comes it brings us back to the law, and we have to acknowledge the law. If we per- mit a Chairman to overrule a law, the next Chairman may make a different rule, and the Chairman will be making the rules for O . BILL OF RIGHTS. 1'7 Friday,] us instead of the Committee on Rules and the Convention, A vote being taken, the decision of the Chair was sustained—34 against Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I make the point of order that there is no quorum. The CHAIRMAN. It hasjust been de- cided that there is. Mr. McHenry here resigned the Chair to Mr. Young. The CLERK. The Delegate from Ohio moves to amend by striking out the Pre- amble“ of the present Constitution, and in- serting the Preamble reported by the Com- mittee. Mr. ASKEW. We do not offer a Pre- amble. We accepted the Committee’s Pre- amble. Mr. MOHENRY. Then there is no neces- sity for my amendment. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Woodford was read, and is as follows: Amend by substituting the word “ State” in lieu of the word “ community,” in the fourth line, and by adding at the end of the section the words, “ the State or a munici- pality may exempt from corporate taxation corporations entirely within the munici- pality.” Mr. BRONSTON. That evidently re- fers to the first section of the old Bill of Rights, which has been stricken out, and in its place the section offered by the Dele- gate from Nicholas substituted. Mr. BLACKBURN. I think not. Mr. BRONSTON. I call for the read- ing of the first section as it now stands. The Clerk read the substitute of the Del- egate from Nicholas as adopted. Mr. BLACKBURN. That does not reach the point I am aiming at. ‘ Mr. BRONSTON. Then you want to amend the substitute? Mr. BLACKBURN. I want to call the attention of the Delegates to the fact that under this first section the citizens of the State have been more efi'ectually robbed of their property than under any other section in the Bill of Rights or in the Constitu- 151LLEN— Bao xs'ron BLACKBURN. [October 31 . tion. It is true that at this moment there exists in a dormant state in this Common- wealth from one hundred and fifty to five hundred railroad charters that maybe re- vived. by any parties who‘ choose to organize under them, and under this vicious system other counties may be brought into a condition of absolute bankruptcy and penury. It is to stop that that I ask this Convention to adopt my suggestion, or some suggestion that will‘ curb this vicious legislation. We are promised, “wait and we will do it in the report of the Committee on Corporations or Railroads and Com- merce.” I say if it is right to do it, let us do it here and now. Let us say that the peo- ple of the Commonwealth shall not be plun- dered longer by these reckless corporations that are scattered broadcast all over the couhtry. Put it here in the Bill of Rights, and if the Committee on Corporations insert such a provision in the Constitution as to render this surplusage, we can strike it out when we come to make our work sym- metrical. I would dislike for this Conven- tion to adjourn without some check being put on the licentiousness growing out of this section, because‘I believe the people of the Commonwealth are tired of being rob- bed and plundered by such vicious legisla- tion. Mr. BRONSTON. I do not know the exact purpose of the gentleman’s eloquent speech this morning. We all agree with him, and the Committee has adopted a sec- tion which covers exactly what he de- mands. I do not know what his substi- tute is. Mr. BLACKBURN. Then I will ask the Clerk to read ‘it. Mr. BRONSTON. I will tell you what you are getting at, I guess: that no ‘exemp- tion shall be allowed-— Mr. BLACKBURN. For furnishing, water or gas or electric light or any thing like that. Mr. BRONSTON. I agree with the gentleman fully, and the substitute adopted 1s BILL or RIGHTS. , Friday,] BLACKBURN—BRONSTON—GARROLL. [October 31 _ has been submitted to some of the best legal talent in the State. It is intended to meet this point. It says that no property shall be exempt from taxation except as provided in this Constitution. Mr. BLACKBURN. Does that tell 'us when we will know it, whether to-morrow or next day. Mr. BRONSTON. I don’t see how it can be any stronger. If no property is exempted in the'lConstitution, this prevents any exemption whatever. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected, Mr. BRONSTON. I do not rise for the purpose of making an argument, but to call the attention of the Convention to the condition of the substitute. In the first place we have the Preamble of the Com- mittee. . In the second place we accept the provision of the Delegate from Madison prohibiting slavery or involuntary servi- tude except for crime. In the third place that great bone of contention, section 1, has been stricken out, and it has been relieved of objection by the substitute of the Dele- gate from Nicholas. After that has been done we have the old Bill of Rights with its construed words, with all of its provis- ions clearly understood. With that simple statement, we submit the question for the consideration of the Committee. I desire to say one thing else, that we will support heartily the provisions as to lotteries when presented to this Convention to be inserted under the head of General Provisions. I believe I can speak for each man who has acted with me in support of the old Bill of Rights in ‘saying that we will unanimously support that provision; so that you will be deprived of nothing, but will get the old Bill relieved of all its objections. I see no reason why we cannot accept it as a solution of our difficulty. The vote being taken on the substitute of the Delegate from Scott, as amended, for the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, the same was rejected- yeas, 28; nays, 41, on a digision. Mr. CARROLL. Is it in order to move to reconsider an amendment to the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights adopted the other day? I think the Committee wil1 do it if its attention is called to the matter. The CHAIRMAN. State what you want. Mr. CARROLL. Section 6 of‘ the re- port of the Committee, as it was reported by the Committee, reads: “That the ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, subject to such modifications as may be authorized by this Constitution.” It was precisely the same language as was used in the old Bill of Rights. The amendment adopted the other day, and which was offered by the gentleman from Crittenden, strikes out from that section the words “ ancient mode,” and inserts in lieu thereof the word “right; ” so that, as the section now stands, it reads: That the right of trial by jury shall be held sacred, subject to such modification as may be authorized by this Constitution. I desire to ask if there is any Delegate upon the floor of this House who is prepared to say that the Legis- lature of this State may provide that five persons shall constitute a jury in a murder trial, and that three of them may return a verdict sentencing a man to be hung? I desire to inquire if any gentle- man upon the floor of this House is pre- pared to say that the Legislature may provide that three persons shall constitute a jury in a felony case, and that two of them may render a verdict sending that man to the penitentiary for life‘? I desire to inquire if there is any gentleman upon the floor of this House prepared to give the Legislature the right to say that two persons may constitute a jury in a civil case? I think I may safely answer for all of you in the negative; and yet that is precisely what we have done, by striking out the words “ancient mode,” and insert- ing in place thereof, “the right of trial.” BILL OF RIGHTS. 19 Friday,] CARROLL—BURNAM—MCHENRY. [October 31 . Every lawyer knows that the words “an- ' cient mode of trial” are the only words in that section, or in the Constitution, that guarantee the common law right of trial by jury, and that secure to every person a trial by twelve men. The CHAIRMAN. Has the gentleman a motion to make‘? Mr. CARROLL. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Make the motion. Mr. CARROLL. My motion is to re- consider the vote by which the Committee adopted the amendment offered by the gen- tleman from Crittenden, in order that the section may be restored as reported by the Committee. The CHAIRMAN. I will have to de- cide the motion out of order, Mr. BURNAM. I move that the Com- ‘ mittee rise and report to the House as the expression of opinion of the Committee, that the report of the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights should be adopted by the Convention, and also that it recom- mend the printing of the said report,together with the amendments and substitutes. And the vote being taken on the said motion, it was declared carried. THE CONVENTION. The Committee thereupon rose, and the President, Mr. Clay, resumed the Chair. _ Mr. YOUNG. The Committee of the Whole have been in session and had under consideration the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. They re- port the completion of their consideration of said report, together with certain amendments, and ask that the same be printed. They further ask that the Com- mittee be discharged from further consid- eration of the report. Mr. MCHENRY. I move that the re- port of the Committee, as amended by the Committee of the Whole, the substitute offered by the Delegate from Marion, as amended, and the substitute offered by the gentleman from Scott, as amended, be A printed, and that they be made the Special Order for half after 11 o’clock on Monday, the 10th day of November. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state for the information of the Conven- tion that the rule requires that the amendments adopted by the Committee of the Whole shall be kept separate from the original report as referred to the Committee of the Whole, and that alhthose amendments will have to be adopted separately or in the aggregate by the Convention. Mr. McHENRY. I will modify my motion to that extent. My object was to have the whole thing before the House at that time. Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point that the Chair cannot properly hold that, under the report as made by the Committee of the Whole, the Committee of the Whole did not report back to this House the sepa- rate amendments. The Committee of the Whole reported back to this House the report and recommended that it be adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Committee of the Whole have no right to change the law governing the Convention, and the Committee of the Whole must make their report in a Parliamentary way. The Chair understood the report of the Com- mittee. The motion of the Delegate from Ohio is in order. As a matter of course, it is in the pleasure of this Convention to print any matter, whether it be reported by the Committee or not. If a gentleman moves that a certain communication be printed, it is in the power of the Conven- tion to have it printed. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to offer this as a substitute for section 6 of the report and have it printed. The Reading Clerk read the substitute, as follows: ' The ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof re- main inviolate, subject to such modifica- tion as may be authorized by this Constitu- tion.” 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] McHENRY—BURNAM—BECKHAM. [October 31. Mr. MoHEN RY. I make the point, we are not considering this question now. It is not before the House for considera- tion. I made the motion to make it the Special~ Order of the day for a certain day, and can amendments to any section of the report, or of the substitutes, now be offered ? I think it is not in order now. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that the report of the Committee of the Whole is before this Convention, and that it is subject to amendment whenever gen- tlemen can properly get the floor to offer amendments As a matter of course the amendment will not be voted on now. Mr. BURNAM. I suppose the motion before the House is, will the Convention receive the report of the Committee as made, and discharge them? The- PRESIDENT. In order to bring the matter before the House, the question should be put upon receiving ‘the report and discharging the Committee. And a vote being taken on said question, it was declared carried. The PRESIDENT. The whole matter is before the Convention, and the report is subject to amendment. Mr. MCHENRY. I renew my motion now, if it was premature before, that it be made the Special Order for Monday, N o- vember 10th. Mr. KENNEDY. I offer an amendment by way of substitute for section 2 of the Report of the Committee on Bill of Rights. Mr. BECKHAM. I move an amend- ment to the motion of the Delegate from Ohio, that it be made a Special Order for Friday, the 7th of November, instead of Monday, November 10th. I think we ought to finish this matter before we go into any other matter. I would make the motion for Thursday, the 6th; but, per- haps, some gentlemen will not be here that - day, and as there ought to be afull House, I _ move to substitute Friday, November 7th, instead of November 10th. Mr. McHENRY. We have wasted a good deal of time. Those gentlemen who live one hundred or two hundred miles take a day or two to go home, and probably will not get back here Thursday or Friday. It is not important that I should be here, but I do not expect to be here on either of those days, and I think I can safely say we are not going to have a quorum of this House either on Thursday, Friday or Sat- urday. We will have a quorum on Mon- day. There is a good deal of difference between those gentlemen who can run home every Saturday evening, and stay until Monday morning, and those who live at a distance; and I think there ought to be some liberality shown to those gentle- men who live at a greater distance. We are all going home, and some of us will not likely be back on Friday. We all want to have our votes on this important matter. We have other business that we can take up, if there is a quorum to do business, but you are not going to have it. Mr. BECKHAM. Upon consideration, I will withdraw my motion in deference to gentlemen who live far away. The PRESIDENT. The question re- curs on the motion of the Delegate from Ohio, that the report of the Committee, the substitute offered by the Delegate from .Marion, and the substitute offered by the Delegate from Scott, and other pending amendments, be printed, and that the whole matter be made a special order for M011- day, November 10, at half-past 11. Mr. RAMSEY. I would like to offer this amendment to section 6 of the report of the Committee, and insert: “The right of trial by jury, as heretofore, shall be held sacred,” instead of the “an- cient mode.” The PRESIDENT. The motion of the Delegate from Ohio has precedence. Your amendment can only come up by unani- mous consent. BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Friday,] BLACKBUBN—RAMSEY—RODES. [October 31 . Mr. BLACKBURN. I have an amend- ment to the report. The PRESIDENT; I hear objection to the amendments, and they are both ruled out of order. Mr. RAMSEY. I object to the other substitute that came up to that section. Mr. RODES. Do I understand that nothing can be raised when this question comes up except such amendments as may be in now? The PRESIDENT. When the matter comes up, on Monday. November 10, it is certainly open to amendment, unless the Convention orders the previous question, cutting off amendments. And the vote being taken on the motion of the Delegate from Ohio, it was declared carried. Leaves of Absence. Leaves of absence were granted to the Delegate from Russell and the Delegate from Warren until Saturday, November 8th. Mr. BURNAM. I move that the Con- vention do now adjourn. The motion being put, it was carried, and the Convention thereupon adjourned. Convention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. ‘V01. 1.] Thursday,] FRANKFURT, NOVEMBER 6, 1890. HENnRIoK—BURNAM—MAcKoY. [No. 45 [November 6 . The Convention was called to order by the President at 11 o’clock A. M., and the proceedings were opened with prayer by ‘the Rev. Mr. Blayney, of the Presbyterian Church. The Journal of last Friday was read and .approved. Communications, Resolutions, etc. The PRESIDENT. Before proceeding ‘further, the Chair will lay before the Con- vention a communication from the Ser- geant-at-A rms. The communication was read. It re- quested leave of absence for the Sergeant- at-Arms,'and asked that Maj. Alex. Grant be permitted to act in his stead during his :absence. Mr. HENDRICK. I move that the re- quests be granted. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the requests will be granted. The first thing in order will be the reception of petitions. If there are no petitions, reports from .Standing Committees. If none, reports from Special Committees. Motions and ‘resolutions are now in order. Mr. BURNAM. I move that the Con- vention resolve itself into a Committeeof the Whole for the purpose of considering the ‘report which was made some time since by ‘the Joint Committee on Executive Affairs. The reports have already been laid on the 'tables of the Delegates, and I feel quite .sure that to-day, to-morrow and Saturday will enable us to finish the whole work. Mr. MCCHORD. I ask the gentleman to withhold that motion until I can offer a resolution, which I desire to have referred :to the Committee on Legislative Depart- ;ment. I will not ask the reading of it. The PRESIDENTT. The resolution will be so referred. Mr. QUICKSALL. I desire to file a statement of the indebtedness of the coun- ty of Breathitt, and have it referred to the Special Committee of which the Delegate from Anderson county is Chairman. The PRESIDENT. The communica- tion will be so referred. Report of Joint Committee on Executive Afai'rs. The motion that the Convention resolve itself into a COMMITTEE or THE WHOLE Was then put and carried, and the Presi- dent designated the Delegate from Bullitt county (ATP. Straus) as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I have a resolu- tion which I desire to offer. It is in refer- ence to the subject that is up before the Committee of the Whole. The resolution of the Delegate from Louisville was read, and is as follows: Resolved, That in the consideration of the report of the Joint Committee on Ex- ecutive Affairs, the following order shall be observed with a view to the systematic con- sideration of the subject: The Articles of the present Constitution upon said subjects shall be taken up and read section by section, with the cor- responding sections in the Committee’s re- port, and each section of the said reports shall be so considered, discussed and voted upon before any other section is consid- ered. Mr. ZACH ‘PHELPS. I desire to ex- plain what I am trying to reach by that resolution. I offered a similar resolution when the report of the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights was about to be considered, but the idea prevailed that it 2 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Th ursday,] PnELPs—H ENDRICK—BURNAM—L ox. [November 6 .. was some sort of effort to take advantage of the Committee. As I have the honor to be Chairman of one of the Committees whose joint report is now being considered the same motive cannot be imputed. The object is this : When we considered the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, we first had a promiscuous discussion of the subject, one member getting up and discussing section 1, then another discussing section 8, and another section 20. Then, after we completed the general discussion, we took it up section by section and rediscussed it, and consumed twice as much time as was necessary. \Vhat I propose in discussing the reports of these two Committees is to read the first section of the present Article on the subject, then read the language as reported by the Com- mittee on that subject, so that when we come to consider the matter we have them side by side—the present Constitution and the provision reported by the Committee- so that we will know exactly the effect of the section reported by the Committee on the present Constitution. Thus we can get the views of all upon it, and vote upon it and dispose of it in a regular and system- atic and time-saving way. Mr. HENDRICK. I call for the read— ing of the resolution. The resolution was again read. _ Mr. BURNAM. I think the resolutio is eminently proper. But in a large num- ber of these sections there have been no changes from the section of the present Constitution, and I suggest that when the suggestion is made that the provision of the Committee is identical with the pro- vision of the present Constitution, we need not have both sections read, thereby saving considerable reading. Mr. PHELPS. My idea is, that when a section is read and the Committee announce that no change has been made, that then the vote can be had on that section. A vote being taken, the resolution was adopted. _ Mr. COX. ment to the report of the Committee. The amendment was read, and is as fol-- lows : Amend the report of the Joint Commit~ tee on the Executive Department by add-.- ing the following sections: 1. There shall be elected by each county in this Commonwealth a County Treasurer, by the qualified voters at the elections to be held for the election of County Judge, whose term of office shall be the same as that of Judge of the County Court, but he shall be ineligible to fill said office during any part of the ensuing term. 2. The County Treasurer shall be a citi- zen of this State, more than twenty-one years of age, and shall have resided in the- county in which he is elected more than two years next before his election to said. office. 3. The County Treasurer, before he enters- upon the duties of said office, shall take an oath before the County Court of the county ‘in which he was elected, which shall be the- same required by law to be taken by all other county officers, and he shall enter into bond with the Commonwealth, with sufificient security to be approved by said" Court, for the faithful. discharge of all the duties of said oflice; and that he shall ac- count for and pay over all moneys and other property which may come into his‘ hands by virtue of said oflice. ' 4. The County Treasurer shall keep his office in the Court-house of his county or near thereto, and to him shall be paid all the State revenue and county taxes, and all other public funds which may be directed by law to be paid into said ofn‘ce. His- duties, compensation for his services, and liabilities, shall be regulated by law. Mr. BURNAM. Before that branch of ' the report of the Committee is reached, there will be ample time to have the- gentleman printed. The matter first to be passed on is the re-- port of the Committee on the Executive— amendment of the Department. The CHAIRMAN. Will the Delegate from Carroll county indicate to which of‘ the reports he offers that as an amend- ment? Mr. DEHAVEN . I would suggest to the Delegate from Carroll county that perhaps- I desire to offer an amend-- ‘ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 3 Thursday,] COX—"DEHAVEN—BURNAM. [N ovember 6 . we had better take up the report of the Joint Committee on Executive Affairs for the State at Large, and read it section by section; and when the proper time comes he can offer his amendment. He can offer it as an independent section, and make it section 28 instead of offering it now. Mr. COX. I desire very much that my amendment shall come in at the proper place and at the proper time, and be con- - sidered by the Convention. About the last thing that occurred to me yesterday even- ing at home concerning this matter, was that quite a number of prominent gentle- men assembled to bid me farewell, and they urged upon me to secure, if possible, the creation of the office of County Treasurer, saying that it would save the State of Ken- tucky from twenty-five to fifty thousand dollars every year. That is the reason I offer this amendment. . Of course, I desire it to come in at the proper place and the proper time. The CHAIRMAN. Read the first sec- tion of the report. I The Supreme Executive power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Chief Magistrate, who shall be styled the Gov- ernor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Mr. DEHAVEN. The first, second and third sections of the report are identical with the present Constitution. The CHAIRMAN. But we will have to take a vote on each section. Mr. BURNAM. I think. at an early day there was an amendment proposed by some gentleman to strike out the word “Commonwealth ” and insert the word “ State.” Mr. T. H. HINES. I offer an amend- ment to the first section. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: ' Amend section 1 by striking out the word “Commonwealth” ‘wherever it oc- curs, and insert in lieu thereof the word _“ State.” The CHAIRMAN. Does the Delegate desire to be heard ‘? Mr. T. H. HINES. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Does the Chair- man‘? _ Mr. DEHAVEN. I do not know that that change is material, but as we have had the word “Commonwealth” in all the Constitutions that have been in force in this State, I am not able to perceive the necessity of changing it now. I think “Commonwealth ” is more expressive than the word “State,” and I prefer to have it. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. In addition to the remarks of the Chairman, I desire to call attention to the fact that, in the Bill of Rights, the word “State” was stricken out and the word “Commonwealth” inserted. Mr. MACKOY. I think as a matter of economy it would be well to make the change. The word “State” is a word of only one syllable, while “Commonwealth ” is one of three: it is therefore more easily written and more easily spoken; and in the mere matter of printing, in the course of. one hundred years or more, there would be a very considerable saving to the public in that respect. Therefore, I shall vote for the amendment to strike out the word “ Commonwealth " and insert the word “State.” ' A vote being taken, the amendment was declared rejected. A vote being taken, section 1 was de- clared adopted. Section 2 was read, and is as follows: Q2. The Governor shall be elected for the term of four years, by the qualified voters of the State, at the time when, and places where, they shall respectively vote for Representatives. The person having the highest number of votes shall be Gov- ernor; but if two or more shall be equal and highest in votes, the election shall be determined by lot, in such manner as the General Assembly may direct. A vote being taken, section 2 was adopted. ' Section 3 was read, and is as follows: A Q 3. The ‘Governor shall be ineligible for the succeeding four years after the expira- 4 ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' Thursday,] L tion of the term for which he shall have been elected. A vote being taken, adopted. Section 4 was read, and is as follows: 5 4. He shall be at least thirty-five years _section 3 was "of age, a citizen of the United States and of this State, and have been an inhabitant 'of this State at least six years next pre- ceding his election. Mr. DEHAVEN. The only alteration ‘made in that section is this: The present Constitution reads: “ He shall be at least thirty-five years of age, and a citizen of the United States, and have been an in- habitant of this State at least six years next preceding his election.” We require that he should not only be a citizen of the United States, but a citizen of this State. The CLERK. The Delegate from Cald- well ofi'ered the following amendment: Amend Committee’s report by striking from section 4, line 1, the word “thirty- ‘five” and insert the word “thirty.” The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman desire to be heard on the amendment? Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I desire simply to say that a man of thirty years has been a voter for nine years,'and if he is qualified at thirty-five, he would be qualified at thirty. I think it wise ‘to draw largely from the young men of the Commonwealth, and for that reason I desire to have thirty instead of thirty-five. Mr. DEHAVEN. I think thirty-five years is young enough-for a man to be Governor of the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky. There are very few men who are fully developed until that age, and I think it would be unwise for us to reduce the age ‘ from thirty-five to thirty, and I hope the report of the Committee will be permitted to remain as it is. A vote beingv taken, the amendment was rejected. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. . Section 5 was read, and is as follows: DEHAVENflALLEN—KENNEDY. [November 6 . Q 5. He shall commence the execution of the duties of his office on the fifth Tuesday succeeding the day of the general election on which he shall have been chosen, and shall continue in the execution thereof until his successor shall have taken the oaths or affirmations prescribed by this Constitution. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. ' Section 6 was read, and is as follows: Q 6. No member of Congress or person hold- ing any office under the United States or minister of any religious society shall be eligible to the ofiice of Governor or Lieu- tenant-Governor. Mr. KENNEDY. amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: I desire to offer an Amend section 6 by striking therefrom the following words: “or minister of any religious society.” Mr. BURNAM. I move that that sec- tion be passed for further consideration. It will be a matter of grave debate, and we should have a full House. Upon a vote, the motion was carried. Section 7 was read. and is as follows: Q 7. The Governor shall, at stated times, re- ceive for his services a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the term for which he was elected. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. Section 8 was read, and is as follows: % 8. He shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of this Commonwealth, and of the militia thereof, except when they shall be called into the service of the United States; but he shall not command person- ally in the field, unless advised so to do by a resolution of the General Assembly. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. Section 9 was read. and is as follows: Q 9. He shall have power to fill vacancies that may occur by granting commissions, which shall expire when such vacancies shall have been filled according to the provisions of this Constitution. ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 5 Thursday,] MooRE—Oox—DEHAvEN. [November 6 , A vote being taken, the section was adopted. Section 10 was read, and is as follows: Q 10. He shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, commute sentences, grant reprieves and pardons, except in case of impeachment. In cases of treason he shall have power to grant reprieves until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, in which the power of pardon- ing shall be vested; but he shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sheriff or Commonwealth’s Attorney in penal or civil cases. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to amend section 10 by inserting after the word “pardon” the words “ after judgment.” Mr. COX. I move that further action upon this section be postponed until a future day. We had this subject up, and discussed it at length before the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. The Chairman is not here this morning, and we have a small House. These are important changes suggested, and I would be glad to have a full House to consider them. Mr. NUNN. I want to know if there is not a mistake in the printing. Mr. DEHAVEN. It should be “crim- inal ” instead of “ civil.” A vote being taken, the motion of the Delegate from Carroll was carried. Section 11 was read, and is as follows: Q11. He may require information, in writing. from the oflicers in the Executive Department upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective oflices. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. Section 12 was read, and is as follows: Q12. He shall, from time to time, give to the General Assembly information of the state of the Commonwealth, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he may deem expedient. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. Section 13 of the Committee’s report was read, and is as follows: Q 13. He may, on extraordinary occasions, convene the General Assembly at the seat of government or ata different place, if that should have become since their last ad- journment dangerous from an enemy or from contagious diseases; and in case of disagreement between the two Houses with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not exceeding four months. When he shall call them together it shall be by proclamation, stating the objects of the call, and none other shall be considered. Mr. DEHAVEN. The only amendment made to the present Constitution by this section is this: In the fourth line of the section we have the word “diseases.” The present Constitution uses the word “disor- ders.” Then we add the last three lines, “ when he shall call them together it shall be by proclamation, stating the objects of the call, and none other shall be considered.” The Committee thought that when the Governor called the Legislature together in extraordinary session, he ought to be re- quired to state in his proclamation the objects he has in view in calling them to- gether, and when the Legislature comes together that they should consider no other subjects than those embraced in the procla- mation. This section is designed to hold the Legislature to the consideration of the subjects for which they were called together. Mr. HENDRICK. I_am not prepared to give my views on this matter at length; but -I deem it my duty to suggest to the Committee my objections to the last clause which has been added by the Committee. Limitations upon Legislative power is quite a “fad” with modern Constitutional Con- ventions. According to my view of Con- stitutional government, the power of the Legislature should not only not be further abridged, but should be enlarged and ex- panded. For that reason I cannot vote for this limitation upon the power of the Leg- islature when called in extraordinary ses- sion by the Executive. Legislative power in this Commonwealth, as is known to gentlemen on this floor, has been for years limited and controlled by the Executive di- 6 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] HENDRICK—BURNAM. [November 6 . rection, until upon this floor the Legisla- ture of Kentucky assembled and a Revenue Bill dictated to that Legislature by a Bureau of the Executive Department. I believe in raising, elevating and dignifying the repre- sentatives of the people, putting them closer to the people than they have ever been put ; but when they come here as the represent- atives of the people, we should give them the scope and the power indicated in the most liberal‘: Constitutions for legislative action. Let the Governor call the Legis- lature together, but when it is called to- gether, it is a separate, distinct, co-ordinate Department of the Government; and let it, in its wisdom, fix the bounds of its ac- tion—always, of course, subservient to the Constitution, and not to the Executive power, already extended beyond its normal limits. The very structure of our govern- ment contemplates that the Legislative De- partment shall be a co-ordinate and equal branch of government. Under the prac- tices which have grown up lately, the Leg- islature has been constantly diminished in power and dignity, and the Executive ex- alted. For that reason, and that alone, I am opposed to the change made by the Committee. The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand you to make a motion to strike out those words? ~ Mr. HENDRICK. Yes, sir; that is my motion. ' Mr. BURNAM. I have great respect for the representatives whom the people of Kentucky—— Mr. MCCHORD. Will the gentleman yield while I send up an amendment, so that he can address himself also to the amendment ? Mr. BURNAM. Certainly. The amendment of the Delegate from Washington county was read, and is as follows: Amend section 13 by adding the follow- ng : “And such other matters as the Gov- irnor shall recommend during the term of ehe special session.” Mr. BURN AM. I was remarking that I have as much respect for the representa- tives of the people who assemble in the Legislatures, from time to time, as any man can have. Since the adoption of the Constitution of 1849, the Legislatures, in- stead of assembling as theretofore annually, have met biennially in this and the other hall. By the provisions of that Constitution they were limited to a session of sixty days, un- less by a vote offitwo-thirds of both Houses the time should be prolonged. After it has once been prolonged by that vote, I be- lieve the rule has been that a bare majority of both Houses can extend the session. This Committee thought that this Consti- tution would probably retain these bien- nial sessions, and the people would then habituate themselves in their wants before the Legislature to that period of time, and would look forward to it; and if there shall be, as I trust there will be, a limitation put upon the power of the Legislature to pass local bills, which could be as well accom- plished through the Courts, and with more safety to the people, we may have great hopes that these bodies, when they do meet, will adhere to the time fixed for their ses- sion. My experience from having served in the Legislature of Kentucky is adverse to the views of the Delegate from Fleming. I was in the Legislature during the years 1859, 1860, 1861, 1862 and 1863. Those were fearful years to remember. We were called in repeated sessions by Governors Magofiin and Robinson in proclamations asking the Legislature-to assemble in view of the relations which the State of Ken- tucky maintained to the Federal Govern- ment; and when we did meet, instead of ' being confined to those matters, which we had been specially called to consider, the tables of members were crowded every day with motions and bills of every kind and character, all that could have been accom- plished at the regular sessions of the Legis- lature theretofore; and as I have said, my EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. '7 - Governor, Thursday,] BURNAM—MACKOY—MUIR. [November 6 . experience has been that that was a very pernicious ,system of legislation. Now, after the Legislature shall have served out its full term as provided for by such Con- :stitution as we may adopt, and it becomes necessary on account of some great and im- portant matter that the Governor shall call them together again, it seems to me that this provision, which has been reported by the Committee, which limits their action to those subjects-which they were called to- ;gether by the Governor’s proclamation to ‘consider, is eminently proper. I cannot conceive by saying that in the making a proclamation of that kind by the Governor, .and calling not only the attention of the representatives of the people, but of the whole people themselves to the matters which he desires the Legislature to discuss and about which he needs the advice of those who are more nearly connected with the people themselves than he, there can be :any possible reflection upon the character ‘of the representatives of the people. I cannot see that in passing such a section as - this we are expressing any want of confi- dence in the character and ability of those representatives whom the people select as legislators. I think the provision as re- ported is a wise one and should be adopted. ‘Mr. MACKOY. I agree very heartily with all the gentleman who has preceded me has said. I think the provision is a wise one, and should be incorporated-in the Constitution of Kentucky. It is to be pre- .sumed, I think, when the Legislature is convened in special session, that it is so called in pursuance of: some emergency of some public demand that is urgent, and'that the knowing the wishes of the people and understanding fully the emer- gency, will call the Legislature in special .session only when it is absolutely necessary that it shall be done. I think, therefore, that it is eminently proper that only those matters should be considered by the Legislature at this extraordinary session “which are submitted to them by the procla- mation of the Governor, or which are in- cluded in the proclamation when the call is made; otherwise, when there is no public demand, no necessity, you assemble a body of men here composed of one hundred in the House of Representatives, and thirty- eight in the Senate, and upon the spur of the moment, without consideration, they will, unless we prohibit local legislation, take up local matters or matters of trivial importance, appertaining to their counties and neighborhoods, and the State will be put to an expense by a long and continued session of the Legislature. I think, therefore, the provision is extremely wise; but it does seem to me it is out of place in this sec- tion; that it would be more appropriate to insert the provision in the article with reference to Legislative Department, and provide there that no business shall be transacted at any called session of the Leg- islature other than that included in the proclamation of the Governor. I do not know whether it would be competent for the Committee of the Whole—I do not suppose it would, but I stand open to cor- rection if I am mistaken—to refer the matter to the Committee on the Legislative Department. It seems to me that would be for the Conven-I tion, and not for the Committee of the Whole. Mr. MUIR. Could not the Committee on Arrangement place it‘? The CHAIRMAN. It is competent for the Committee of the ‘Whole to recom- mend where it should be placed. Mr. MACKOY. If it is proper, I make the motion that we recommend that the latter part of the last clause, “and none other shall be considered,” be referred to the Committee on Legislative Department, with the recommendation that it be incor- porated‘ in the Article relating to the Legislative Department of this Govern- ment. I understand from the Delegate from Henry county that the Committee on Legislative Department has already ap- 8 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] HENDRICK— M ACKOY—PETRIE. proved of that portion of the report, and will incorporate it in the report they will make to this Convention. Mr. HENDRICK. 1 wish the Dele- gates from Madison and Covington to understand distinctly the ground of my objection. It is a provision such as has always been made in fear of the people and the people’s representatives. Now, I say that in the broad historic sense, and not, of course, with reference to the Com- mittee, or any member of the Committee, but this provision, which limits the power of the Legislature to consider certain sub- jects, is in the general trend of modern legislation on that subject. Mr. MACKOY. May I ask the Delegate a question? Mr. HENDRICK. Certainly. Mr. MACKOY. Do not the Bill of Rights, and all the restrictions embodied in the article with reference to the Legisla- tive Department, show some apprehension with regard to the propriety of intrusting the Legislative Department with full and untrammeled authority, and if the gentle- man is correct, would not the conclusion be that the Legislature should not be tram- .meled in any way? Mr. HENDRICK. I think I can answer that. The object of the whole Constitution is to put a restriction on the power of the different Departments; otherwise there would be no necessity for a Constitution. It is to the extent you put restriction on the representatives of the people that I object. It is in the same spirit of fear and opposition that climbs from the Tribune to the Consul. It is precisely the same. There is a gradual encroachment on the Legislature and the Judiciary that has gone forward for years. The Delegate from Madison refers to the Legislature of 1859-60, and those troublous times. Those were great Legislatures. The “Bureaucratic System” at that time had not grown to the proportions it has since assumed, and that is the system I object to. I insist that there shall be some latitude left to the Leg» islature; that you shall not takeaway from them every vestige of power which is- placed in that co-ordinate branch under the; Constitution. I ask you to stop before you take it all away. You give the Executive the power to say, “Come here and consider- this or that measure.” I say that we are to presume that these sovereign representa- tives of the people, coming upon the floor as their representatives, in their aggregate wisdom are the equal co-ordinate of the Executive, the Judicial or any of the other- Departments of government, and when you seek to thus limit them, as you do by this- clause in the Constitution, it manifests a. distrust and a fear of that body which ought not to be placed in the Constitution. The Constitution is full of limitations. the- Delegate from Covington is right about. that. We are limiting the powers of all the Departments, but the very .force of my objection is that you shall not go too far in that limitation; that you shall not mani-- fest this fear of the people and their repre- sentatives by insisting that the Executive Department shall mark the limit within which their action shall be had. Mr. PETRIE. This _is an important. question, and some of us have not fully made up our minds on it, and would like to» hear discussion in a full House. I there-- fore move that this section be passed. Mr. MACKOY. Before that is passed I want to insert an amendment to correct- the phraseology. Insert after the word “call,” in the seventh line, the words,.. " the General Assembly,” and strike out the word “them.” It would then read:- “ When he shall call the General Assem- bly together, it shall be by proclamation, stating the object of the call, and none- other shall be considered.” The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will send up his amendment and let it go over- with the section if it is passed. The motion of the Delegate from Todd; county was carried. [November 6 , i EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 9 Thursday,] ALLEN—DEHAVEN. [November 6 . Section 14 was read, as follows : Q 14. He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I would like to ask some information of the Chairman with reference to the meaning ‘of that. Unless there is some power given to the Governor to enable him to compel officers to do their duty, it is utterly meaningless to me. Mr. DEHAVEN. In answer to the in- terrogator‘y ‘put by the Delegate from Cald- well, I would say that is the identical provision, if my recollection. serves me right, that is in the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State. Iapprehend that that means that all the executive power witn which the Governor is vested shall be exercised when- ever an emergency arises making it neces- sary to execute the law. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Suppose a Sheriff in a county of this State were to refuse to do what the Governor directed him to do, or requested him to do, what would be the remedy ? Mr. DEHAVEN. I do not know that the Governor has any right to direct a Sheriff to do any thing. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. Section 15 was read, and is as follows: Q15. A Lieutenant-Governor shall be chosen at every regular election for Gov- ernor in the same manner, to continue in oflice for the same time, and possess the same qualifications as the Governor. In voting for Governor and Lieutenant-Gov- ernor, the electors shall state for whom they vote as Governor, and for whom as Lieutenant Governor. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. Sectioii 16 was read, and is as follows: Q16. He shall, by virtue of his oflice, be Speaker of the Senate; have a right, when in Committee of the Whole, to de- bate and vote on all subjects; and when the Senate is equally divided, to give the cast- ing vote. (A vote being taken, the section was- adopted. Section 17 was read, and is as follows: Q 17. Should the Governor be impeached,. removed from office, die, refuse to qualify, resign, or be absent from the State, the- Lieutenant-Governor shall exercise all the power and authority appertaining to the‘ ofiice of Governor until anotherbe duly elect- ed and qualified, or the Governor, absent or impeached, shall return or be acquitted.. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. Suppose the Gov-- ernor should have a long spell of sickness,. and would be actually physically as well as mentally unable to attend to the duties of his office, then who would attend to them?’ The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman. desire to offer an amendment? Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I have an amendw ment. The amendment reads as follows: Amend section 17 by inserting after the word “State” the words, “or be from any cause unable to discharge the duties of his of‘fice.” Mr. DEHAVEN. I think we are get‘ ting into some confusion by adopting that amendment to the 17th section. If I un-- derstand the amendment, it is to insert after the word “State” the words “ or be‘ otherwise unable to perform the duties of ' his ofiice,” or something of that sort. Who is to determine the question as to when the Governor is unable to perform the duties of his office‘? Is he to do it or is the Lieu-x tenant-Governor to do it? You may get up some squabble between the Governor and. the Lieutenant-Governor as to the capacity‘ of the Governor to perform his functions. Mr. ALLEN. I will ask the gentleman who determines now when he is absent from the State? Mr. DEHAVEN. Of course, when he is absent from the State, there can be no question about it. Mr. ALLEN. Who decides when he is absent? _ ' Mr. DEHAVEN. He notifies the Lieu- tenant-Governor himself when he is to be 10 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] ALLEN—DEHAVEN—YOUNG. [November 6 , absent; but if this amendment is adopted, you will have to put in another amend- ment at the latter part of the section. Mr. ALLEN. Yes, there will have to be added these words, “or be able to dis- charge the duties of his oflice.” Mr. DEHA'VEN. I cannot see the necessity of the amendment myself. Mr. YOUNG. Suppose the Governor should have a long spell of sickness, ex- tending through several months, and could not sign abill. I think it is very necessary. Mr. DEHAVEN. As a matter of courtesy, he would send for the Lieuten- ant-Governor. 'Mr. MACKOY. I would like to ask ‘the gentleman from Caldwell how he would determine the question as to when the Governor was unable to discharge the duties of his oflice, whether he ought not to provide for some Board of Commissioners who might determine that case. It seems to me that difficulty might arise. The vote being taken on the adoption of the said amendment, and a division being called for, it resulted 32 in the aflirmative, 11 in the negative, and the amendment was adopted. 2 Mr. ALLEN. It will be necessary to add another amendment to the foot of the clause to make it consistent, and I there- fore offer this amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Add at the end of said clause the follow- ing words: “ Or be able to discharge the duties of his office.” The CHAIRMAN. By unanimous consent, the gentleman will be allowed to add those words to his own amend- ment. A vote being taken, amended was adopted. The Reading Clerk read the next section, :as follows: the section as Q18. Whenever the Government shall be administered by the Lieutenant-Gov- ernor, or he shall fail to attend as Speaker of the Senate, the Senators shall elect one of its own members as Speaker for that oc- casion; and if, during the vacancy of the office of Governor. the Lieutenant-Governor‘ shall be impeached, re.noved from ofiice, refuse to qualify,-resign, die, or be absent from the State, the Speaker of the Senate shall, in like manner, administer the Gov- ernment: Provided, That whenever a va- cancy shall occur in the office of Governor before the first two years of the term shall have expired, a new election for Governor shall take place to fill such vacancy. A vote being taken, the section was adopt- ed. . The Reading Clerk read the next section, which is as follows: Q 19. The Speaker pro tempore of the Senate, while he acts as Speaker of the Senate, shall re- ceive for his services the same compensa- tion which shall, for the same'period, be allowed to the Speaker of the House of Rep- resentatives, and no more; and, during the time he administers the Government as Governor, shall receive the same compen- sation which the Governor would have re- ceived had he been employed in the duties of his ofiice. A vote being taken thereon, the section was adopted. Mr. MACKOY. Before the Committee passes from that section, I merely want to make a suggestion to the Committee and to the Delegate from Oldham representing it: whether it is not possible, if the Governor and the Lieutenant-Governor should die at the same time, that there would be an in- terim during which there would be no Ex- ecutive officer. Some time would have to elapse before the Secretary of State could call the Senate together to elect a Speaker, who would then em ojj'icio become Governor of the State; and the emergency might arise in which it would be important that there should be a GOV61'1101‘,8V611 during that limited time. It might be. only a few days, but still it would leave an interreg- num. Have the Committee considered that at all? I do not desire to offer an amend- ment, but merely suggest it to the Com- Lieutenant-Governor, or EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 1 1 Thursday,] MACKOY-—~DEHAVEN——' OX. [November 6 . mittee; and if they deem it proper, after having considered it, they may report an amendment which may be an accordance with their general report. I think that an amendment of that kind should emanate from the Committee, in order that it might be consistent with the rest of their report. The CHAIRMAN. The section has al- ready been adopted. Mr. MACKOY. I understand that, and merely make this suggestion to the Com- mittee. Mr. DEHAVEN. That idea did not ‘occur to us, because that is a contingency, perhaps, that will hardly ever arise, that the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor will both die on the same day. It would be an extraordinary contingency, and one we did not think it would be necessary for us to provide for, and I hardly think so yet. Hr. MACKOY. Still the Delegate will admit that in the administration of the Federal Government a great many contin- gencies have arisen that were not antici- pated, and which have placed the country at times in rather an awkward dilemma. Might it not be well now, before this matter is reported to the Convention, that the Committee should prepare an amendment vof that kind? I think it would be proper for the Committee to take the matter into consideration and ofl’er an amendment ather than for a person who is not a mem- ber of the Committee to do it. I make it as a suggestion to the Committee. The next section was read, and is as fol- lows: @220. If the Lieutenant-Governor shall be called upon to administer the Govern- ment, and shall, while in such administra- tion, resign, die, or be absent from the State during the recess of the General As- sembly, it shall be the duty of the Score— tary of State, for the time being, to con- vene the Senate for the purpose of choosing :a Speaker. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. The next section was read, and is as fol- lows: % 21. Every bill which shall have passed the two Houses shall be presented to the Governor. If he approve, he shall sign it; but if not, he shall return it, with his objections, to the House in which it orig- inated, who shall enter the objections at large upon their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsidera- tion, a majority of all the members elected to that House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent,>with the objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be considered, and if approved by a majority of all the members elected to that House, it shall be alaw; but in such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the members voting for and against the bill shall be entered upon the Journals of each House, respectively. If any bill shall not beweturned by the Governor within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, it shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the General Assembly, by their adjourn- ment, prevent its return; in which case it shall be a law, unless sent back within three days after their next meeting. The Governor shall have power to disapprove of -any parts of appropriation bills em- bracing distinct items, and the portions disapproved shall not become a law unless re-passed, as in case of a bill. Mr. COX. I move that we postpone any further action on that section, for the rea- son that the Committee upon the Legisla- tive Department has had that whole matter up and discussed it lengthily, and I think have prepared, or will be prepared after their next meeting, to make a report upon it, and I think it but due to our Committee that a postponement of it should be had. Mr. DEHAVEN. It seems to me that that section is peculiarly within the prov- ince of this Committee, and, as far as we are concerned, we would rather have it disposed of now. The only addition that is made to that section at all is the last three or four lines, in which it is said: “The Governor .shall have power to disapprove of any parts of appropriation bills em- bracing distinct items, and the portions disapproved shall not become a law unless re-passed, as in case of a bill.” The Com- mittee thought that, as it has very often 12 ‘ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] CARROLL—MUIR—DEHAVEN. [November 6 . occurred in appropriation bills, that a great many items were embraced in them, that the Governor would take the liberty of vetoing parts of them if he had the power to do so, without vetoing the whole bill; and those of us who have had any Legislative experience at all, know that it very often occurs that claims are inserted in an appropri- ation bill which, if left to their own merits, would not pass either House, and we thought it best here to insert this provis- ion, that the Governor should have the power to disapprove of any separate item in appropriation bills and approve the balance, and we think it an admirably good measure. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to offer an amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Insert two-thirds in place of a majority, in the ninth line. Mr. CARROLL. ~Under the section as reported by the Committee it only requires a majority of the members of each House to pass a bill over the Governor’s veto. The Committee on Legislative Department have approved, and will report, whether it be adopted by the House or not, a measure providing that no bill shall be passed at all unless it shall receive a majority of the votes of all the members elected to each House. I If that report is adopted, the veto power will practically be taken away from the Governor, because a bill cannot pass, in the first place, unless a majority of all those elected vote for it; and hence the Governor’s veto will be of no effect. Mr. MUIR. It seems to me that if the Governor has that power over bills, he could prevent any legislation at all, unless there be two-thirds for the bill. He might disapprove of any bill, and thereby require a two-thirds vote and prevent a majority of the House from passing even a proper bill. Mr. DEHAVEN. It does occur to me that it would be placing too much power in the hands of the Governor. I think it is sufficient for him to have the power to veto a bill, and then that that bill cannot become a law unless it is passed by a ma- jority of both Houses; but to say it should not become a law unless two-thirds of both Houses vote for it, seems to me would be lodging too much power in the hands of the Executive. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I merely desire to call the attention of my friend from Henry to an error made by him in his statement. The Committee on the Legislative Depart- ‘ ment did not agree that a majority of the members elected to each House should be required to pass a bill. That was voted down twice, and the Committee preferred that a majority of the members present should be able to pass a bill. Mr. CARROLL. I stand corrected on’ this point. Mr. MEDERMOTT. If you require two- thirds majority to overcome the veto of the- Governor on every important matter, the Governor will have the Legislature in his power. Mr. L. T. MOORE. ' win the gentleman permit a question ? Mr. McDERMOTT. Certainly. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Has not that Com- mittee adopted an amendment by which they require that all laws shall be passed. on a call for the yeas and nays? Mr. MCDERMOTT. Yes. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Then it seems to me that this part in regard to voting by yeas and nays ought not to be in this pro- vision here. It makes a distinction really, when no distinction can be made. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I am somewhat in the position of the gentleman from Flem- ing. I admit that on some matters—those ‘ matters, for instance, that concern the elec- tion of the members of the House and Senate—the Constitution ought to limit their powers and be specific; but in ordi- nary matters we ought not to take it for granted that the Legislature is not fit to be trusted. We ought to presume that the - EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 13 Thursday,] CARROLL—D’ICDERMOTT—BIACKOY. [November 6, ‘representatives of the people, coming direct from them, have, in general matters at least, some fairness and intelligence. To .say that no act shall become a law unless ‘two-thirds of the members of the Legisla- ture are opposed to the Governor, is, it seems to me, to infer that the Governor is very much above the Legislature in intelli- gence and in patriotism. Mr. CARROLL. Will the gentleman permit a question? Does not the Consti- tution of the United States require a vote ‘of two-thirds to pass a bill over the Presi- dent’s veto. Mr. MCDERMOTT. That is true; but it does not necessarily follow that we should repeat that provision in our State Constitution. Whenever the State Legisla- ture is really wrong, and the Governor sets forth good reasons for his veto, you cannot get a majority of the Legislature to differ from him. The Governor has vetoed bill .after bill, and has been sustained; but it was generally because the bill had not been properly called to the attention of the Leg- islature—because some bill had been practi- cally slipped through—and it was only necessary to call their attention to the bill to defeat it. To' say that two-thirds of the members elect shall be required to pass a 'bill over the Governor’s veto, is practically to say that three-fourths of those present :shall be required to pass it, for you cannot have any Legislature in which there will not be some members absent. ‘ If, in con- sidering general‘ laws, you require three- fourths of the members present to pass a bill against the dissent of the Governor, you practically annihilate the power of the Legislature. It is very rare that so large -a majority can be gotten for any disputed bill. , Mr. MACKOY. I think the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Henry "is a wise provision. It protects the people from legislative courtesy. It has occurred frequently in Kentucky that when the Governor has vetoed a measure, the Houses have quickly passed it over his veto, simply because some gentleman, popular in each House, said that it was a measure that vhis constituents wanted, when the fact is that his constituents did not want it, but only a few friends, whom he chose to regard or call his constituents, were the ones who wanted it. I have in mind an instance now in which a previous Governor of this State vetoed a bill providing that the city of Covington should give $600,000 for the building of a bridge between Cincinnati and Covington, the condition being simply that this bridge company should not charge tolls upon its foot-ways, and that it should reduce the toll upon its wagon-ways to one-half the prices charged by the present Suspension bridge between Covington and Cincinnati. That measure was strenuously resisted by a large number of the citizens of Covington. It passed both Houses, and then the Governor was asked to veto it, and he did so; but when it came back to the General Assembly, it was passed over his veto by a majority of all the members elect. Fortunately, it required, before the donation could be made, that the citizens of Covington should vote upon the meas- ure, and when it was submitted to a vote of the citizens of Covington, they, by a majority vote of three-fourths to one-fourth, at least, disapproved of the action of the General Assembly, and approved of the action of the Governor. The reason why the measure was carried through the Gen- eral Assembly, I take it, was simply because the members did not wish to dis- oblige a gentleman who was able and pop- ular; and that has occurred so frequently that I think it wise to give the Governor the power that is provided for by the amendment of the gentleman from Henry. Mr. BURN AM. My opinion is that the proposition as laid downin this Committee’s report _ought to remain unchanged; and I will say to my friend from the county of Boyd that I can see no impropriety in re- taining it here, notwithstanding the Legis- 14 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. '- Thursday,] BURNAM—ALLEN—YOUNG. [November 6 , lative Committee have reported that a call of the yeas and nays should be had upon the passage of every bill. When such a bill has gone to the Governoo of Kentucky for his approval or disapproval, he sends it back with his objections to its becoming a law. The object of the veto is to prevent hasty or imprudent legislation, or legisla- tion that has been surreptitiously or im- properly secured; and my opinion is that when he has done that, and still, on a sec- ond call of the yeas and nays in both Houses, a clear majority say that they wish the bill passed, his objections to the con- trary notwithstanding, that is enough. I belonged, when I was a young man, to what was known as the Old-Line, Silver- Gray Henry Clay Whigs, and instead of making the Constitution of Kentucky con- form to that of the United States, I should greatly prefer to see the United States Constitution conform to ours in this re- spect. The veto which rests in the Crown in Great Britain has not been exercised, I suppose, for a hundred years. The Govern- ment would not dare to do it. An expres- sion by a vote of the House of Commons of a want of confidence in the existing ministry kills the party in power stone dead. There ' is where the power rests, and where it ought to rest. I cannot conceive that any popular gentleman in the House of Repre- sentatives in the Kentucky Legislature - would be more apt to carry a bill than the Governor of the Commonwealth with his great patronage. I think it is proper to leave it as it is. The vote being taken on the amendment, it was lost. The votelthen being taken on the adoption of the section as reported, it was adopted. The next section was read, and is as fol- lows: ' Q22. Every order, resolution or vote, in which the concurrence of both Houses may be necessary, except on a question of ad- journment, shall be presented to the Gov- ernor, and, before it shall take effect, be approved by him; or, being disapproved shall be re-passed by a‘ majority of all the members elected to both Houses, according to the rules and limitations prescribed in case of a bill. The vote being taken, the section was- adopted. The next section was read, and is as fol- lows : Q23. Contested elections for Governor and Lieutenant-Governor shall be deter-- mined by both Houses of the General As- sembly, according to such regulations as may be established by law. The vote being taken, the section was- adopted. The next section was read, and is as fol- lows : Q24. A Treasurer, Auditor of Public Accounts, a Register of the Land Office, Secretary of State and an Attorney-Gen- eral shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at the same time the Governor is elected, for the term of four years, each of ' whom shall have been a resdent citizen of this State for at' least two years next before his election. The Secretary of State shall keep a fair register of, and attest all of the- ofiicial acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and, vouchers relative thereto, be- fore either House of the General Assembly ; and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law; and may ap— point his clerk. Mr. ALLEN. I move that that section be passed. Mr. YOUNG. I second the motion. The motion being- put, was declared car- ried. The next section was read, and is as follows: Q 25. The Attorney-General shall have been a practicing lawyer years before his election. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I would like to have that passed with the preceding sec-- tion as I may offer a substitute for it. I move that it be passed. The motion being put, was declared car- ried. The next amendment was read, and is as follows: EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 15 Thu rsday,] CLARDY—Mxckor; Q26. The Auditor of Public Accounts and Treasurer shall be ineligible to be elected or to hold said oflices for the suc- ceeding four years after the expiration of the term for which they shall have been elected. The duties and responsibilities of these officers and those of Attorney-Gen- eral, .Register of the Land Ofiice and Sec- retary of State shall be prescribed by law. That inferior State officers not specifically provided for in this Constitution may be appointed or elected in such manner as may be prescribed bylaw for a term not exceeding four years. Mr. CLARDY. I offer an amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend the report on State oflicers by inserting the following: A Commissioner of Agriculture and Statistics shall be elect- ed by the qualified voters of the State at the same time the Governor is elected, and for the same term of years, and shall be ineligi- ble for the succeeding term. He shall re- ceive a just and fair compensation for his services, to be fixed by the Legislature, and shall perform such services as are now re- quired by law, and such other duties as may be imposed by the Legislature. The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentle- man offer that as an independent section? Mr. CLARDY. I offer it as an addition to the section providing for the election of State officers. If I had had time I might have arranged it differently; but as these other ofiicers are about being passed upon, I desire to get the amendment in. It is amatter of no consequence to me, whether it is exactly in that form, or whether that officer is already mentioned there, The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will have to indicate some section, or ofi'er it as an independent section. Mr. CLARDY I did not have the re- port of the Committee on my table, and could not foresee what they were going to report, or I might have arranged it difi‘er- ently. Mr. CLAY. Section 24 has already been passed. ' Mr. CLARDY. I will offer my amend- simply added to the ofiicers ment, then, when the matter comes up afterwards. The Reading Clerk read the‘ 26th section again. Mr. MACKOY. I move that that be passed. I would like to state the reason. The other section relating to the ofiice of Treasurer has been passed. This section provides that the Treasurer shall be ineli~ gible for re-election. When the former section comes up for consideration, there- might be an amendment providing for the ap-- pointment of the Treasurer by the Governor, and it seems to me that that section should be passed in connection with the other re- lating to the Treasurer and Secretary of State. The motion being seconded, was carried. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: _ I § 27. The General Assembly may provide for the abolishment of the ofiice of the Register of the Land Office, to take effect at the end of any term, and shall provide by law for the custody and preservation of the papers and records of said office, if the- same be abolished. Mr. MACKOY. I would like to offer an amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Strike out the word “may” in first line of section 26, and insert “shall;” also strike out the words “at the end of any term,” in second and third lines, and insert “at the end of the term of the present incumbent ;” and strike out the words “if the same be abolished” at the end of said section. Mr. MUIR. It seems to me that it would be very much better to have the language just as it is in the report. Mr. MACKOY. My object in introduc- ing this is to make it obligatory on the Legislature to provide for the abolishment of the oflice at the end of the term of the present incumbent. If it has not that effect, I will be obliged if some gentleman will amend it so that it will. As I read this, the oflice may be continued indefi- nitely, but the Legislature may abolish it [November 6 . 16 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday] MACKOY—BLACKBURN—MOORE. [November 6. at the end of the term of any incumbent. The difiiculty with the General Assembly is that they never abolish offices at all. That is a difiiculty with all bodies of that kind. When an ofiice is once created, it continues indefinitely. As an illustration of that, some years ago it was resolved by ‘Congress to move the remains of General Washington from Mt. Vernon and deposit them in a crypt in the Capitol at Washing- ington, and immediately a Custodian of the Crypt was appointed and a salary fixed, and the Custodian of the Crypt drew his salary from year to year. He was presumed to be watching the crypt in which the remains of General Washington were to be depos- ited. One day General Butler had his attention called to it, and began investi- gating and found that the man had been drawing his salary for a number of years, and had no other duties than to watch the crypt. The oflice was abolished. 1 take it that that will be exactly the way with the office of Register of the Land Oifice if we leave it to the discretion of the Legisla- ture. Here is an oflice that should be abolished, and concerning which there are complaints from all over the State. A person makes a survey and takes it to the Land Oflice and has it recorded, entailing on future generations the evil ef- fects we have felt for years. If the Legislature wants to provide for some mode by which those records can be preserved or proper surveys can be made hereafter, it can do so, but let this Convention, while it has the power to abolish the office, not leave it to subsequent Legislatures. Upon a vote, the amendment was adopt- ed. Mr. BLACKBURN. I ask that that section be passed until we have a fuller House. The CHAIRMAN. adopted as amended. It has not yet been Section 28 was then read, and is as fol- lows: % 28. The first election, under the Consti- tution, for Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Treasurer, Auditor of Public Accounts, Register of the Land Office, Attorney- General and Secretary of State, shall be held on . Mr. MOORE. There is ablank in that section which will have to be filled, so I move that the Committee rise, report pro- gress, and ask leave to sit again. Mr. PHELPS. I move as an amendment to that, that the Committee ask leave to sit again this afternoon. The reason for that is that none of the Committees can get a quorum, and we can go on with this mat— ter. Mr. MOORE. I cannot accept that amendment. The rest of this report con- tains sections relating to county ofi‘icers, and many of the absent members are opposed to some features of the report. We have not a quorum of this Committee present, and the remark of the gentleman about quorum applies to this Committee. I do not think we should act on any mat- ters where there is likely to be a contest. Mr. WOOD. I trust that that amend- ment will be passed. We are getting along so nicely to-day. The CHAIRMAN. It is not debatable. On a vote, the- amendment was rejected. The motion to rise was then carried. THE CONVENTION. The President resumed the Chair, and the Delegate from Bullitt county (Mr. Straus) reported that the Committee of the Whole had had under consideration the report of the Joint Committee on the Executive Department. made progress, and asked leave to sit again. The report was adopted by the Conven- tion. Upon motion, the Convention then ad— journed. a Convention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. ~V01. 1. FRANKFORT, NOVEMBER 7. 1890. N0. 46 Friday,] PHELPS—DEHAVEN—KENNEDY. [N ovember 7 The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were ‘opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Blayney. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in ‘order will be the reception of petitions. Leaves of Absence. Leaves of absence were granted the Dele- gates from Hickman, Meade, Third Louis- ville District, Barren, Boyle and Breckin- ridge. The PRESIDENT. Reports from Stand- ing Committees are in order; reports from Special Committees. Resolution. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I offer the fol— lowing resolution: Resolved, That all daily sessions of this Convention held after November 8th, 1890, shall consist of a morning session, begin- ning at 9:30 o’clock A. M. and adjourning at 1 P. M., and an afternoon session beginning at 3 o’clock P. M., and adjourning at 5 o’clock P. M. But on Monday the morning session shall begin at 11 o’clock A. M., and on Saturday no afternoon session shall be held. The PRESIDENT. Under the rules the resolution will lie over one day. The Chair will call the order for today, which is the report of the Joint Committee -on the Executive Department. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move we resolve ourselves in the COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE For further consideration of the report of the Joint Committee on Executive Depart- ment. A vote being taken, the motion was carried, and the President designated the Delegate from Bullitt (Mr. Straus) as the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole. The CLERK. The first section, which was passed yesterday, was section 6. which reads: No member Of Congress or person hold- ing any office under the United States, or Minister of any religious society shall be eligible to the office of Governor or Lieutenant-Governor. The Delegate from the county of Nicho- las moves to amend by striking out the following words, “or Minister of any religious society.” . Mr. KENNEDY. The amendment offered by me yesterday to section 6, is to strike out the words “ or Minister of any religious society.” That language was not in the first Constitution of Kentucky, but appears in the second Constitution and in the present Constitution. It seems to me that if there ever was any reason for that language being in the Constitution, that reason no longer exists; and I have, there- fore, made a motion to strike it out of this section, because it seems to me an unjust discrimination against a worthy class of men. Why we should, in this day and age, say in our Constitution, that a Minister of any religious society shall not be eligible to the office of Governor or Lieutenant-Gov- ernor, or shall not be eligible to the General Assembly, is a proposition I do not fully undei'stand. Asa class of men, every one will admit that they are sober, discreet, honest, industrious, and intelligent, and every one will further admit that, as a rule, they are men of culture and educa- tion, well prepared and equipped for any position in life. They are among the best citizens we have in the community, carefully obeying the laws of 2 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] KENNEDY. [November 7 .. the land, leading exemplary lives, generally approving of right and opposing wrong; and why we should say in our Constitu- tion that we are afraid to give them an equal chance with the ‘drunkard and the gambler, seems strange to me. So long as Ministers do right and live up to the re- quirements of their high calling, we are afraid to trust themin ofiice ; but let them go astray and steal a horse, or be guilty of adultery or some other violation of law, and be dismissed from the ministry because of that fact, and they then become invested with our confidence, and are eligible to any oflice under the Constitution. It seems strange to me that we should place such a restriction on this class of men. It seems to me it is an injustice to them. I am aware of the fact that some will attempt to justify this discrimination by saying that their calling is of such an exalted character that they should take no part in politics, but should stand aloof. In other words, that they are set apart for special work—to look after the spiritual welfare of the people, and, therefore, should take no part in pol- itics. That seems to be a very plausible excuse, but I do not think it is a justifiable one. In our present Bill of Rights we say that all men, when they form a social coin- pact, are free and equal, and by the word equal, we mean equal in the eyes of the law, equal in all civil rights and privileges; and whenever we deny the privilege of a holding oflice to any man or set of men, to that extent is f-"equality denied them. Now, every one will admit that the oflice of Minister of the‘ Gospel is of the most exalted character, that it is high in its aim and noble in its purpose, and IfiYOIllCl not like to see a Minister quit the pulpit for politics, and the true Minister, divinely called and set apart for the work, will not do so under ordinary circumstances; but because we would not like to see a Minister quit the pulpit and enter the field of poli- tics, is no reason why we should take away from him the' right to do so. Nor is it any reason why we should abridge his priviw lege. We say now they are eligible to two oflices under our Constitution. If ' eligible to two, Why not eligible to all? Where is the difference‘? What makes the difference? If you say they are incompe- tent to hold one oflice, why not say they are incompetent to hold all the oflices ?“ The same line of reasoning which has led‘ you to conclude that they should be ineligi-- ble to one office would lead you to conclude‘ that they should be ineligible to all ofiices; and the logical sequence will be to go one step farther and deny them the right of‘ suffrage; for whenever you deny a man the right of holding office, the same reason will prohibit himv from exercising his- choice in the selection of ofiicers. It is. safe to say that Ministers, as a rule, do not. desire to hold ofiices; but whether they do» or not, we should not discriminate against. a worthy class of men, who, so far as their history in this State is concerned, have never yet shown a disposition to abuse their" privileges, but have modestly exercised; them. I submit these remarks on this question for the consideration of the Con- - vention, believing if there ever was a rea- son why we should discriminate against them as a class, that reason no longer ex-~ ists, and those words should be stricken from this section. Mr. WOOD. It is my object to detain the Convention but a few moments on this question. I think it is a question on which we already have our minds pretty thoroughly made up. I think, perhaps, with the light of an experience of forty long years, we are now about ready to have that obnoxious clause‘ stricken from the Constitution of this great State. It does look a little like putting on rather a large measure of audacity for this- Conven'tion to say that we are so pure and good that we are the only men capable of' performing the functions of oflice in our great abundance of goodness and wisdom; that we are able to protect the Minis-- ters of the Gospel; or, in other words, that. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 3 Friday,]’ WOOD. [November 7 . they are incapable of protecting and secur- ing their records as Ministers. It seems like we are fearful that if the preachers of the country undertake to hold office as other freemen, they, perhaps, will lose their relig- ious influence, which is so much needed and desired in the State of Kentucky. Now, we are a nice class of men to under- take to protect men who, in fact, as a class, are our superiors. It looks like we think that we are so good, so profound, so great, and have such foresight, that we must protect that great and good class of men. We are afraid they will fall from the high and lofty position they hold, and possibly lose their religion. It seems to me the highest position a man can hold on earth is that of clergyman, leading men into eter- nal life and salvation. It seems to me to be the highest calling in this life; and it is . absurd, the idea of this poor, weak, feeble Convention undertaking to say to that class of men, “You are not capable of holding office in this‘ State, because we are afraid you will lose your integrity or your relig- ious influence.” As the Delegate who pre- ceded me has well said, here you are willing that the poor, fallen drunkard who spends his time in the gutter, the gambler who spends his time during the‘ midnight hours at the gambling table, to hold the highest office in the Commonwealth, but the minister, the man of learning, of great- ness, of logical training, of good influence, cannot hold the oflice of Governor of this Commonwealth! A preacher can hold the highest oflice in the gift of the American people; but we, the people of Kentucky, do not intend him to hold the highest office in our State. It seems to me this is inconsistent. It is not right; we should cling to the golden rule, which ought to be observed at all times and under all circumstances, “equal rights to all and exclusive privileges to none.” It seems to me that this is enough to induce us to strike that pmhim- tory clause from this Constitution. This prohibitory clause could, with the same propriety, be applied to the lawyers. If thatZwere proposed, whata cloud of indigna- tiqn would immediately rise upon this floor, what a volume of eloquence would fill this hall, and with what alacrity and vengeance the lawyers of this Convention would oppose such amendment and hurl the most wicked epithets upon its author. I was impressed with the idea and thought advanced by, I think, the grandest and brightest light that ever came from South- ern clime, Henry W. Grady. In speaking to a Farmers’ Club of his own State, he said: “You men who work from six o’clock A. M. to six P. M. on your farms, you who are endeavoring to work reform and economy, need the assistance of that great army of men who go every morning with their tin ‘buckets on their arms to their work-shops ; you need the assistance of the lawyer in the legal forum; you need the assistance and aid of the physician who ministers to the sick of the community; but, above all, last though not least, you need the benign in- fluence of that grand army of men who compose the clergy of the country.” That sentiment was uttered by that grand and great young man, who told the people of the South that important fact, which was adhered to by them: “You farmers must make your own provisions and supplies at home, and make cotton your surplus.” That man who, perhaps, did more to bring the Southern people out of poverty, and place them upon a plane of prosperity, than any other man who ever lived or died in the South, he said the aid of the clergy was indispensable to carry out the object for which those farmershad met; and it seems to me that that one idea was enough to immortalize him. The Right Hon- orable W. E. Gladstone, who, on account of his profound learning and superior statesmanship, is loved and honored from one end of this country to the other, and throughout the civilized world, who i represents a district in Parliament hun- 4 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] dreds of miles. away from his own poll, a man who is as great one place as another, said, in speaking in Parliament upon the question of whether they would aljow the ' Jewish element in that country to become voters and hold office: “they are our citizens, they are part of our constit- uencies, and you cannot deny them any privileges. If they are voters, they should hold office. Who makes the law-makers? The voters. If they are proper men to choose who shall sit in Parliament, they should also be permitted to hold the ofiice. But you should not make them hewers of wood and drawers of water, and not give them the honors of the country.” And here we are in the great State of Ken- tucky saying :to the Ministers, “You may go up to the polls, side by side with the gamblers and other classes who contribute their strength to making a cess-pool of politics, and there exercise the highest prerogative of a freeman by casting your vote, but you shall not have the right to run for or hold ofiice.” It seems to me ‘that it is an unjust and unwarranted dis- crimination. It seems to me that it is an insult to the intelligence of Kentucky. What, not allow clergymen to hold ofiice or run for office? It seems to me that is "the most obnoxious clause in the whole ‘Constitution. It is true it has been in our Constitution for nearly a cen- ‘tury past, but the young and pro- gressive States of the West do not have it. I believe but two or three States in this broad Union have that prohibitory clause in their fundamental laws. The Federal Constitution has no such provis- ion, and why should we in the State of Kentucky? It is‘ not because the clergy have not the brains. Some of the most enlightened, logical and most thoroughly cultivated men in the State of Kentucky are preachers. I think the grandest body of men I ever saw assembled in council was a body of Ministers which convened in Louisville. They were. men of great research, fine Woon. [November 7 . mental training ‘and skillful parliamenta- rians—some of them were men capable of filling any office within the gift of the American people. I believe the finest Par- liamentarian we ever had in Kentucky was the immortal Boyce. I think he could handle the gavel with more accuracy and rapidity than any man I ever saw in the Chair. It is not worth while to talk about their competency. We are undertaking to say too much when we say that Ministers shall not hold office in Kentucky. They may be Presidentof the United States, but cannot be Governor of Kentucky. The other day some one said if we did not put in a clause saying that slavery in the State should be prohibited, that it would be the means of losing many votes for this Constitu- tion. If we are making a Constitution to get votes, this clause would drive more men to vote against this Constitution than any other clause you could provide. For men of power and ability as they are, and capable of protecting themselves, would not the Ministers of the State raise their voices against‘ a proposition of this sort, which is to proscribe them and deny them the privileges of other freemen, and would not their influence be felt in the coming election in the vote upon the new Consti- tution‘? As a matter of policy, then, it seems to me that this‘ very obnoxious clause should be stricken out. I do hope that this proposed amendment - will be carried by an overwhelming vote, and that we shall say to the people of Ken- tucky and to that class of men, whom I think, above all others, should be permitted to enjoy all the rights of freemen, that they have the same right to hold office in this Commonwealth as the rich, the poor, the wicked, and even exiles of foreign countries after remaining here a time. And I desire to say further, that I am not afraid of the influence the Clergy might bring into the Executive oflice of the State; nor am I afraid of the effort or inclination to blend Church and State on the part of the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 5 Friday,] WOOD—BROWN [November 7 . Clergy. I do not believe that very many of the good preachers of the country will aspire to these offices, for they are disgusted with the politics of late years. They are not clamoring for this ‘change, but they are entitled to it as freemen. ‘There is no danger of them laying down the man- tle they now wear so gracefully and with so much dignity; but 1 do not think we should cut them off from the privileges of holding any office. They are now performing the highest and noblest work on earth. But there is a class of preachers that will lay aside that minis- terial robe for the time being and enter pol- itics, as we have seen done in the Legisla- ture. I think it should be left free to all. I think the present provision is saying to the best men of Kentucky that they shall be curtailed in their privileges, and shall not have all the rights and privileges of American freemen—rights and privileges which men prize so highly. I do not think it is necessary to detain this Convention longer in discussing the amendment pro- posed in the fundamental law of the State, and would not have said a solitary word, but I was asked about this matter, whether I was in favor of changing the Constitution in this particular by the people at home, and I said I thought the change should, and would be made, and I trust the Con- vention will support it by an overwhelm- ing vote, and say to the preachers of this State that they shall have all the rights and privileges of any other freemen. The argument of John L. Waller and Others on this subject in the Convention of 1849 is exhaustive and unanswerable. ' All power is lodged in the people. There- fore a free and an intelligent people should have the privilege of choosing whom they please to fill the ofiices of the country, who ' are to rule over them. If they make a mis- take, they suffer, and will correct it prompt- 1y. I am in favor of giving the people full latitude in choosing their ofiicials. There— fore, I take great pleasure in voting for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nicholas. Mr. BROWN. I hoped some one of the grandly eloquent Delegates on this floor, who have opinions akin to my Own with reference to this question, would have risen in his place to enter his protest against the amendment introduced by the Delegate from Nicholas. I regret that I am so thoroughly incompetent to discuss this question as not to present it as it should be presented ‘from the view-point I occupy with reference to it. As a religionist, as one who may be said to have been brought up in the odor of sanctity, I say I enter my solemn protest in this wise assemblage of Delegates, elected for the purpose of revising the Constitution of Kentucky, against the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Nicholas. If there is ostracism anywhere with reference to the Ministers, they have sought that ostracism themselves. They have done so upon the grounds set out by Holy Writ itself by that Apostle who, when he made his defense before Agrippa, said he had been set apart to preach the unsearchable riches of the Gos- pel of Jesus Christ to the gentile world, and with a portion of the gentile world, and especially Ministers of the Gospel who have appropriated that language to them- selves, if politically or patriotieally speak- ing there is ostracism anywhere, they have sought that ostracism in ordination, which consecrates them to the service of Almighty God. The Apostle Paul, if I remember correctly, said no soldier went to war at his own charges, and that no soldier, speaking of Ministers of the Gospel, entangleth himself with the affairs of this life. I concur most heartily in the sentiment expressed by the gentleman last on the floor that there is no more'exalted position in this life than that occupied by Ministers of the Gospel. I yield to no man in fidelity to the interests of the Christian religion; I yield to no man in the hearty admiration for those who have espoused the cause of 6 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BROWN—FARMER. [November 7 . religion, and have gone forth to preach the unsearchable riches of that religion. I believe the Apostle Paul knew whereof he affirmed, and believing that he had the au- thority to speak, he did speak in thunder tones which have come rolling down the ages from that day to this. Believing that those who incorporated that provision in the present Constitution acted wisely, I rise in my place to enter my protest against the amendment which seeks to expunge that clause from the report of the Com- mittee. With ‘all due deference to the Delegate last on the floor, I cannot con- ceive how it is that any man, who, on bended knees, has had the hand of his elders and superiors in the church imposed on his head, and had the words of conse- cration spoken in his ear, can wish to see that Minister enter the cess-pool of politics, and degrade the profession he has made before high heaven. It struck me very forcibly that the gentleman was making an argument not in favor of the better class of Ministers of the Christian religion, be— cause he had no idea that the better class would ever seek political preferment. I ask the Delegates of this Convention if it is the object of the Convention to confer upon the worst and poorer class of Ministers of the Gospel these privileges and liberties, and that they should not be conferred upon the other; for if they are conferred, only the worst class will avail them- selves of the privilege. I am not able to see the disfranchisement in this case. I say that preachers have sought this ostra- cism themselves, if ostracisin it be; for, having taken on themselves the vows of the church, they certainly understand the re- sponsibility which grows out of those vows. I, for one, protest against expunging that portion of the report of the Committee which disallows a Minister of the Gospel to become the Chief Executive of the State. I am not going to enter into a discussion of the feature of the question as to whether on account of religious intolerance or fanat— icism the framers of the present Constitu- tion of Kentucky saw proper to incor- porate the provision we have, which pro- hibits any Minister of the Gospel from be- coming the Chief Executive. I am one of those who believe that when they enter the cess-pool of politics they are no longer the pure beings they were ‘before. I hope the Convention will stand by the report of the Committee. , Mr. FARMER. You all know that this idea of excluding Ministers of the Gospel from having any band in the government is of recent origin. Our first Constitution had no such provision. We have had one Governor who was a Minister ‘of the Gos- pel, and no man has ever shown that the incumbency of that Governor was a detri- ment to the welfare of the State. Now, if we go back to olden times, we find that Ministers of the Gospel held ‘positions in governments, and not always to the detriment of the Government. Let us look to history. In the earliest times we find that Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury, was the leader through whose instrumentality chiefly the great Magna Charta was obtained. Coming on down to more recent times, we still find that the clergyman discharged responsible duties, and we find in their ranks many of the noblest advocates of religious freedom. Jeremy Taylor preceded Roger Williams in his great work. He wrote on the liberty of prophesying. Then came the celebrated Bishop Burnett, who made the grandest defense ever heard for human progress and liberty. Coming on down farther, we find Roger Williams, who established the grand Commonwealth of Rhode Island with re- ligious freedom, and almost at the same time the Catholic colony of Maryland was estab- lished also with religious freedom. Coming, then, down to the history of the Revolution in Virginia, the great advocates of religious liberty, the Baptist and the Presbyterian Ministers, were for ' wiping away all re- ligious disabilities, and so were the Episco- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 7 Friday,] FARMER—PHELPS. ' [November 7 , palians mainly. Coming on down, John Leland, a Baptist Minister, a native of Mas- :sachusetts, but an inhabitant of Virginia, .advocated religious liberty. Let us look to him as a politician. He thought the Con- :stitution of the United States needed amendment. He found that religious lib- ierty and some other things were not suffi- ~ciently secured in that Constitution. He was not satisfied with Madison being so :strongly in favor of adhering to the Con- ;stitution as it stood. He was a patriot; he was afriend of the people, and because of that fact he proclaimed himself a candidate for ‘the first Congress. Would you exclude a man of John Leland’s ability from taking :a seat in the Congress of the United States‘? The first time he met Madison, Madison :spoke first. He got up to explain his position. He said he was in favor of taking away .all religious restrictions; in favor of granting .all the things Leland thought necessary. Leland became satisfied with Madison, and "withdrew from the race, and advised his people to vote for Madison. And when we have a man like Leland, when there comes .-some great occasion when we want the best talent, because he happens to be a Minister shall we exclude him‘? It is said that President ‘Garfield was once a Minister. Should that have excluded him from the Presidency‘? N o, sir. The framers of the Constitution :of the United States were wiser than that. They were wiser than those who framed 1the Constitution of Kentucky in 1849. Any Minister may be President of the United States, may represent us in Congress, may hold almost any office. We find that all the ‘States around us have thrown away these illiberal things. Why should we be differ- ent from them? What occasion is there for it? Is there any reason—can anybody _give any good, valid reason—why we should ‘exclude Ministers from holding office? Shall we exclude all Ministers from the Leg- .islative halls because one Minister, who has __.gone to Congress, has become corrupt? "W e have been sent here by our representatives because they have confidence in our integ- rity and honor, and I don’t think any Minis- ter of the Gospel would be degraded by tak- ing a seat in this House. I scorn the insinua- tion that any man who comes to represent a great government could be degraded. We should know no man in politics. We should have full religious liberty, and we should proscribe no one. That is the great principle embodied in our Constitution, equal rights to all and exclusive privileges to none; and to disfranchise any man on account of his religion or occupation certain- ly violates that principle. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I had not thought that I would say any thing on this subject, but I did not expect there would be any thing said on the other side. I thought we had outlived the days of superstition, in which it may have been necessary to sepa- rate Church and State and things of that kind. I thought we were living in an en- lightened age, and when I heard the dis- cussion on the Bill of Rights, which lasted some days, and heard learned gentlemen on this floor claiming equal rights to all, ex- clusive privileges to none, I thought that that settled the question that we would not exclude Ministers from any of the rights we enjoy. I want to say, if this section of the report is passed, it is a serious question‘ with me whether I should ever put my hand to the Constitution or not. It is true it is in the present Constitution; but be- cause past ages have been unjust does not justify me in my mind in repeating that injustice to a class. If you undertook to exclude lawyers from holding oflice, how many lawyers in this House would sign this Constitution; or if you undertook to exclude doctors, how many doctors would sign it; or if you undertook to exclude farmers or any other class than the long-suffering Ministers, who of that class would sign the Constitution? I want 'to say that 1 think that the oflices of Leg- islator, Governor and Lieutenant-Governor ought to be filled by men who have at least 8' ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Er1day,] PHELPs. [November 7 .- a decent regard for the Christian religion, and I do not care whether they preach it or not. Why single out the offices of Gov- ernor and Lieutenant-Governor and mem- bers of the Legislature and disqualify Ministers of the Gospel from holding those offices‘? I have studied, and studied hard, since this discussion has been going on, to know why Ministers would not make good Governors, and I cannot find a reason. I do not care how soon the time comes that we have a Minister for Governor. I do not care if it does exclude the punch-bowl from the Governor’s receptions. I do not care when the time comes that every man holding office is a Christian. I do not mean to say our Governors are not and have not been good men. I believe to-day our Governor is as pure as when he took the oath of office, and I believe the ex- Governor, who sits on this floor, is as pure as when he was first installed. And suppose he had been a Minister, is it presumable that he would have been any more liable to fall than a man who is not a preacher ? If so, upon‘ the same theory you‘ ought to exclude every church mem- ber, because he might lose his religion. You ought to exclude every moral man in the State, because in executing the high ofiice of Governor he might fall from his moral standing in the community. If it is because it interferes with the duties of his calling, you ought to exclude the lawyer, because I know of nothing that disqualifies a lawyer more from performing his duties in the court-house than engaging in poli- tics. If you are going to take care of the different professions and callings, for God’s sake exclude the doctors, for human life de- pends on their skill, and nothing so dis- qualifies a man for the duties of that pro- fession as engaging in politics. I do not think a man who has been in politics ten years would ever be fit to go back to prac- ticing medicine. So with the farmer. I do not want this Convention to set itself up as guardian of any class as though they were infant children. I want to see the Minis-— ters freemen. I believe as a class, with a. few lamentable exceptions, they are the- best class of men the country affords, and I am not willing to go to my church and sit. down by my preacher and say, “I have de- prived you of privileges I assume myself.” I cannot do it, and I won’t do it, so far as my vote is concerned. A man might de- sire to devote a part of his life to the min- istry, and the remainder to something else,. and he might not want to degrade him-- self by resigning or surrendering his ere-- dentials as a Minister, but you force him to do it. I have seen Ministers of the Gospel in the Legislature; at least I saw one when I was here. I heard it hurled at him, in no very complimentary way, that he had thrown down his credentials, and degraded his position as a Minister of the Gospel. If the Constitution had guaranteed him the right to a place on this floor without- resigning his trust, and let him stood equal with the liar, the profane swearer and the- whisky drinker, that could not have been done. You Delegates to the Constitutional Convention undertake to compel preachers- to remain pure by depriving them of the- rights of a citizen. If there is any thing in the world I do not want to do, it is to- a guardian for the set myself up as preachers. I would rather they would look to a higher power for help to maintain their pure morals and religion. I know that is the ground taken by this body—a. body of men that stands as high on moral questions as any body of men who ever assembled in the'Capitol. I do not think we have any need to restrict the Ministers. I think if you leave it to them and their- God they will get along better on this question. Some say that Ministers will claim exemptions for their churches. How many members here are members of the I have not heard of any trouble-a church? arising from church members wanting ex- emptions for their churches. I would suggest, if you really want to protect. 4 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 9 Friday,] PHELrs—BURNAM. [November 7 . Ministers, and keep them from being cor- rupted, strike out the words “Governor and Lieutenant Governor,” and insert in their place “ State Treasurer.” You might put the Ministers in some danger by allow- ing them to take care of your finances. They might be seduced; but I see no reason why the office of Governor or Lieutenant-Governor should seduce him. I only wish now to refer to a single remark made by my worthy friend, when he said in substance that the Ministers were the guardians of our souls. Now, I want to say if we don’t look any higher than the Ministers as guardians of our souls, we are getting in a bad condition religiously. The Ministers do not look to us to take care of their souls, and for that reason we have no right to deprive them of the rights of other citizens of the State of Kentucky. The black and the white, the young and the old, the rich and the poor, all, except the Min- isters of the Gospel, have equal rights. You declare in the Bill of Rights that all men shall be equal, and you turn right around and except out of that Preachers of the Gospel, because you want to take care of their morals and religion. Isay it is, and has been a question in my mind ever since I have been here, whether I would sign the Constitution which should exclude any class of people in Kentucky from the right to hold office, except on account of crime. Mr. BURNAM. I will say a few Words, not ambitiously, not as coveting the reputa- tion of an orator, but rather in the way of grave discussion. I read last night in the debates on the Constitution of 1849, the speech of Rev. John L. Waller, who was a Delegate from Woodford on that floor, and I declare to you that I regard his argument as perfectly unanswerable. The reply of Taylor, of Mason county, seemed to me the veriest twaddle. I then took up Poore’s book, and commenced with Alabama and went down to Wisconsin, and I think the only State in the Union that has a Consti- tutional provision similar to that which prevails in Kentucky is the State of Mary- land. All the States North and South leave the ofiice of Governor open to Ministers just as to all other people; and I think the Constitution of Maryland which contains this provision is almost as far back indeed as our own. Gentlemen have asked how this clause came to be re- ported, and I felt that it was my duty to say something, because in the printed bill which has been laid on the table it appears to have been presented by me. The honor- able gentlemen who form this Committee on Executive Affairs had agreed upon this provision before I first met them on its final ratification in Committee. I voted against this clause, and, therefore, have felt it my duty to say that I adhere in the House to the Opinion I entertained in the Committee room. Against the sentiment that Ministers shall be excluded from ofl‘ice and every public trust of a political character, I think the wisest and most enlightened thought of this age is almost unanimous. When Girard gave his mag- nificent benefaction to the city of Phila- delphia, about two millions, with which to have erected for the education of children a great college, he provided that no Minis- ter of the Gospel should go there and lec- ture or even as avisitor. and I am not sure that it does not apply to persons who profess religion. That was a great mistake, it seems to me; but it is akin to this very provision in our Constitution. If you will look over the colleges of learning, the great universities that mould public opinion, that train the scholars who are to elevate soci- ety and to ennoble mankind, you will find, generally, I think, that they are under the control of those who are at the head of religious institutions, and who are distin- guished in the clergy. I am not sure that it is so at all places, and has been so at all times. Harvard, where the Unitarian re- ligion has sway, has not unfrequently called statesmen to the head of the Uni- versity. Mr. Everett presided there, and 10_ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BURNAM~BUCKNER—VVHITAKER. [November 7 . John Quincy Adams was one of its most distinguished professors at an early day; but generally it has been presided over by some man who has taken high rank as a clergyman. I know at Yale, beginning in 1701 and coming down, a period of nearly two hundred years, there has never been a time when that great University has not been under the rule and presidency, chiefly, of an illustrious clergyman. I was there last summer and heard Dwight, the grand- son of the Dwight who in 1817 was Presi- dent, deliver an oration on his predecessor, Woolsey. I was struck with the tremendous power of the man, not so much as Minister, but as a- scholar and statesman. The University, which was founded at Bethany, Va., a number of years ago by the great Alexander Camp- bell, has always been under the control of men in his line of thinking; and I want to say, in the last Convention which framed the Constitution of Virginia, there was no man of greater ability and more exemplary character, of higher reach and stretch for the advancement of the liberties of man, that that great divine, the founder of a great church in this country. I am aware it has been said if you allow preachers to become Governors of the State, and permit them to go and mix themselves in politics, that the sacred ermine that covers their shoulders is apt to be dragged into the mire, and the standard of religious thought and action falls among the people with the fall of the clergy. Why should it be so? They have now in Arkansas a Governor who is a Minister of the Baptist Church. I remember him because his accomplished wife is a native of Madison county, as I am reminded by the Delegate from Lexington. They tell the story on Hon. Mr. Colquitt, of Georgia, who is a Senator in Congress now, that he was a Methodist preacher, a Senator, a blacksmith and a magistrate; that on one day he made a political speech, preached a sermon, married a couple and shod a horse. That is a remarkable speci- men of versatility of genius. I cannot think there is going to be any serious op- position to striking out this clause. It ought to be done. Mr. BUCKNER. I have but a few words to say on this subject: We have adopted, or soon will adopt, a section of the Constitution which, in effect, says that no man’s condition in the State shall be affect- ed in any way by his religious belief. That means, as I understand it, that no man in consequence of his religious belief or pro- fession in that belief shall have his political condition enlarged or diminished in conse- quence of that profession. That is my idea of free government. I think we can safely leave to the people themselves the choice of those who can best represent them. If, in their judgment, a person who is a Minister of the Gospel will best suit their views, I think they should have the privilege of electing him. I think no dan- ger can result from that at all. We have certainly in that profession some of the ablest and most liberal men in the whole country; and if it be not the Wish of the people, I think the profession themselves will curb the unnecessary ambition of preachers of the Gospel who seek political honors. I see recently in Tennessse, con- trary to the wishes of the congregation, a Minister entered the field of politics. They excluded him. He made his selec- tion. He preferred politics. He had a right to go there, and I think we should apply this section of the Constitution to all cit- izens alike, that no man, be he Minister or be he layman, should be excluded frdm any benefits of politics or be relieved of any portion of the burdens devolving upon other citizens in consequence of his relig- ious belief or professions. Mr. WHITAKER. I have no notion of making a speech on this subject, for I have no voice this morning to do it. This is an important question. I have read the speech of the Rev. John L. Waller and heard him several times in debate, and I acknowledge EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 11 Friday,] WHITAKER. [November 7 . his great power. He came near capturing me and converting me to his theory and doctrine. But after that I took the His- tory of the Church by D’Aubigne, and began at the time when the keys were de- livered to St. Peter, upon which was es- tablished a great Church, and I found it soon ran into giving them secular power. Power to control outside of the doctrines of the Church soon took possession of them at the expense of religion itself. It became such a power that when Luther thought he saw dawning upon the human intellect what had been concealed from the world in the way of religion, every one who is familiar with the History of the Church knows the great tribulation he and his compeers went through to take from the Church and give back to the people re- ligious liberty. In England we find that trouble arose/between the Church which claimed to be the Apostolic Church and Henry the VIII., and Henry the VIII. established a Church. What kind of a Church did he establish‘? A very good one, I grant you, but it has to have tem- poral power and the Church soon got the temporal power back, and the people were compelled to bow to that power. Religious liberty, was religious liberty if you believed with the ruling power. Political liberty was subordinate to the Church. It ran along and finally John Wesley seemed to think the Episcopal Church was not exactly right. He did not agree with all its cere- monials, and he broke away and establish- ed a Methodist Church. The Presbyte- rian Church came out of the’ Catholic Church farther back because they fell out about some doctrine, and they attempted to .assume temporal power and control. And so it has been with every Church. They have lived but a few years in Europe or Asia without assuming or attempting to exercise temporal power and subordinating everything to the Church. The whole ‘thought underlying our government is freedom from persecution on the part of the Church. Our forefathers in 1620, in little frail barks, crossed the ocean and landed on the bleak rocks of Plymouth and at Jamestown to escape religious per- secution. They had not subdued the wil- derness here before they commenced perse- cuting, and drove Oglethorpe through the wilderness into Georgia. That may have been a good thing, for he established the Baptist Church. And so on, until Massa- ' chusetts commenced burning witches, you will find that temporal power has been in- terfered with in every Church in some por- tion of its history. What. have We in our Bill vof Rights, and why did our forefathers put it there? Why do we say that the right of conscience shall never be interfered with? It is because the right of conscience from time immemorial, from the establish- ‘ ment of the Church whose head was St. Peter, had been abridged. Persecutions have sprung up, and the Churches have attempted to‘ assume temporal power. For that reason. we put'in our Constitution that the right of conscience shall be beyond the reach of all. Do you think human nature is any different to-day from what it was in ages past ? Do you think we are any better to-day than we were two hundred years ago ? You take any one church and make them powerful enough, and they will begin a sys- tem of religious persecution. They have done it in all ages. You cannot read a page- in history on the subject of the Church, when they gained power over those who disa- greed with them, that they have not perse- cuted them for conscience sake. Now, they say a preacher is better than other people. He- ought to be. Let us take it that he is ‘as good. I am willing to concede that he is better, because his thoughts are on better subjects. They are more calculated to ele- vate him above the transactions of this life, and make him look beyond and up to a higher morality and higher religion. Do you want to keep them there? You would like for them to stand above and point his followers, those who believe in religion, to 12 ‘ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] ' higher thought and higher morality. Do you want to take them down from that lofty space which they occupy, and ought to occupy, and put them in secular political position? Let us look for a moment. Sup- pose you make a preacher of any denomi- nation Governor. He has some power, although I believe the Governor’s oflice under the law, is the smallest in Kentucky. He has hardly any thing to do except to ‘extend hospitality and entertain people when they come to see him. Do you not think it would be natural for a Preacher- Governor to fill the offices with members of his own Church? Is there a man here who as Governor, as between men of equal ability, would not give an office to his own ‘? His inclinations and feelings would be that way. I believe I would give it to a man who believed and thought as I did. i Then that would be building up political power inside the Church, and making the Church begin to dominate in politics. When that is done, they will go farther and farther. Suppose you elect one of the best preach- ers in the land vas Governor. He has purity and political honesty beyond any cavil, but how would you like to see him presiding at the punch-bowl; and if he did not give entertainments the people would be down on him and say he was penurious. necessarily have to do many things that grate harshly on his conscience and lower the standard of the preacher, who is sup- posed to point us upward and onward to that realm of bliss where I hope all may enter. We have seen preachers in politics in our country. One from a near county to mine I renounced his high calling and finally got in Congress. He fell from his high estate and lost his life in the Capitol. Go to Ten- nessee. During the troubles of the country one of the most brilliant men the‘country ever had left the ministry and entered poli- tics. However pure and good he may have been in the better part of his life, when he followed the precepts of the Most High, WHITAKER—J OHNSTON—BRONSTON. You would find that he would - [November 7 . point me to a man who has a dark and as da-mnable record as Brownlow after he went into politics. No man can review his life without looking on him as one of the apostates of the earth. When I cast my vote to-day against putting preachers in politics, I do it because I do not want to degrade them. I do not want to drag them down. They have for ages been trying to climb above the secular world and I desire that they shall maintain that position and be the lights of the world. I want their example, their precepts through out this life, that when we approach the dark river we shall be sustained by the- faith they teach and have no fear, but look beyond with hope that grows brighter and brighter. Keep preachers out of politics. Keep them from giving treats to get votes; keep them from all temptations; for there never was anything grander or better than was uttered by him who passed from death to life, when he said “ Lead us not into temptation.” My vote will never be given to lead preachers into temptation and de- stroy their usefulness. Mr. JOHNSTON. I would like to offer an amendment, so that gentlemen can pay their respects to it: Amend section 6 by striking out the word “or,” in the third line, and by adding to the section “or Superintendent of Public Instruction.” Mr. BRONSTON. My distinguished friend from Mason turned and whispered to me, and asked that he be permitted to speak first, in order that I might answer him. I hesitated, because I knew his ability. I did not know that he had come from his several days’ ‘recreation with a set speech on this subject; that he had been during that time reading the History of the Church. I congratulate this Com‘ mittee that they have furnished him an excuse for reviewing such history. I find him on this floor, as I have found him in the court-room, ingenious, astute and dangerous. But the argument he made- this morning, according to my conception, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 13 Friday,] BnoNsToN. [November 7 . is based upon a ‘false hypothesis. He starts out by saying he is opposed to any I would like for the distinguished gentleman to answer interference with conscience. why does he wish to impose a restriction on the Minister’s conscience. He com- mends, in the highest language, the pro- vision in our Constitution which has been approved by the Committee on Preamble .and Bill of Rights, as well as by the unanimous vote of every Delegate on this floor, that no man shall be interfered with in the free exercise of his conscience. Yea, and more than that, he approves of this provision, to which I call the very careful and thoughtful attention of every Delegate on this floor. It is incorporated in the present Constitution. It isin the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. It has been endorsed. It is in the‘substi- tute offered by the distinguished Delegate from Marion, and it is in the heart of every Delegate on this floor. This is the lan- guage, “ that the civil rights, privileges or capacities of any citizen shall in‘ nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion.” Do you endorse it? Do you wish that the civil rights of any citizen shall be enlarged or diminished because of his religion‘? And yet you say that if his religion carries him far enough to make him ascend the rostrum and proclaim ‘the Gospel to benighted nations, that he shall not hold the ofiiee of Governor, Lieutenant-Governor or member of the General Assembly. We misconceive the issue. The question is not’ before us as to whether we shall elect a Minister of the Gospel to ofiice. The question is whether we shall prescribe and limit his civil liberty by saying that he shall not hold a civil office within the Common- wealth of Kentucky, that he shall not be Governor or Lieutenant-Governor or Su— perintendent of Public Instruction. What reason does the gentleman give? He says it will bring about a union of Church and State. I deny it. This provision in the report of the Committee does not bring about any union of Church and State. \Ve start out with the broad assertion that we will abridge no man’s civil rights, and yet we say that when a man assumes the garb of a Minister, that his civil rights shall be abridged. Is that not a union of Church and State? Why the gentleman voted the other day earnestly, Over and over again for the provision in the report of the Commit- tee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, which undertook to invest the Legislature with the power to say what acts were contrary to public good, and, as I construed it and the Committee afterwards acknowledged, what form of worship should be adopted in the Commonwealth ? Does not that do the same thing? Why say that a Minister of a religious society shall not exercise as much civil liberty or as many civil rights in this Commonwealth as a man who is an atheist? If Bob Ingersol should become a citizen of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and spread his atheistic doctrines all through the Commonwealth, leading souls to de- struction and damnation, if you please, he could hold the office of Governor. His civil rights would not be prescribed nor limited; but if he should change his doc- trine and stand by the meek and lowly Jesus he could not hold office in Kentucky. I appeal to the Delegates upon this floor not simply as Kentuckians, but as free men, as liberty-loving men, not to longer allow this to remain a blot upon the fair name of Kentucky. You say you will drag him down, you say it would degrade the Minis- ter, and my distinguished friend from Mason has cited two instances. I take a little dif- ferent view from the two gentlemen who have spoken upon this question. The most troublesome study in my short life has been to answer satisfactorily to myself the ques- tion what am I, whence came I and whither am I going? Why was this beautiful earth~ of ours made, and why was man placed here? Was it to be a mere time- server ? Are we put here merely to gratify 14 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' the eye Friday,] WHITAKER—BRONSTON. [November 7 . the tastes of the flesh, the lusts of and then pass away to be lost forever? The answer I give to that is, No. I believe there is a purpose in our existence, not simply as individuals, but as citizens; not simply as men but as govern- ments, and that the same wise Creator, who fashioned this earth of ours, has placed within our hands the keeping and that keeping is not simply as men but as citi- zens; not merely as individuals but as gov- ments, to glorify and magnify His name. If that be true, why is it not as much our duty to introduce purity of life into the government as into the family circle? Why say that we will drag the Ministers into the murky pool of politics? I say it is the highest duty of the citizen to remove the filth from the pool in order that it may not be called a murky pool. The gentleman says he will be tempted to dish out liquor and pay money for votes. I say let us raise and elevate politics so that it shall no longer be a murky pool. Let us purify it so that votes cannot be obtained by liquor and money. Let us have the manhood to stamp out the belief that Kentuckv politics is a murky pool and if it has been a murky pool, mark my words, it has been a murky pool because in the past we have lost sight of the fact just stated by me. Shame upon my distinguished friend, shame upon any man who says that because one unfortunate man by going into this murky whirlpool has fallen. that no other Minister should be allowed to enter. He fell not because he was a Minister, but because of that weak- ness which attaches to each and all of us. Mr. WHITAKER. It was because he was a politician. ,Mr. BRONSTON. It was not because he was apolitician, but because men who have advocated the views of the distin- guished gentleman have made it impossi- ' ble for a Minister of Christianity to obtain and hold political office in this country of ours. If I be correct in my views here expressed—if it is our duty to maintain the dignity and glory of Him who has per- mitted us to live and form governments— why should we thus place a stigma on one who believes it is his duty to proclaim his views? I go further than that. Men may live and worship in a particular form.‘ A man may prefer to be a Baptist, or a Metho- dist, or a Catholic. or a Presbyterian, but I believe there is a religious society which is far higher and broader than can be con- tained within the confines of either. I be- lieve this whole world ought to be com- posed of one grand religious society. I be- lieve each and every one of us, as we walk out and cast an eye to the beautiful sky above us, as we look at the babbling brooks and the grass and hear the chirp of the birds, can then and there worship the great. God and preach His Gospel to each and every'one who may come in contact with us. If that be true, let us wipe from this Constitution the words that have been placed there by a man for whom I entertain the very highest regard, but for whose want of respect for God and his Ministers I have- never been able to appreciate. One thought more and I have done. You will not degrade the Ministers of the Gos- pel by saying to them this simply: “We do not make you politicians; we do not drag you into the mire, but we say that it is no disgrace for a man to be a Minister of the Gospel in Kentucky. To the atheist, the agnostic, the disbeliever and the in- fidel, we open wide the door. Now, when you say to a Minister you shall not hold office, do you not degrade him? You say to him you are the only class of citizens within the Commonwealth of Kentucky that we believe should not hold the oflice of Governor or Lieutenant-Governor. My friend says if a Baptist was elected Gov- ernor of the Commonwealth, he would want to appointall Baptists to ofiice; and if a Methodist was elected, he would want to appoint all Methodists; and, therefore, you would begin to unite Church and State. I deny that that would be any union of EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 15 l__ Friday,] BRONSTON-—CLARDY. [November 7 , Church and State, because the Constitution provides against any such union, and I admit if you had all Baptists appointed to ofiice, for the time being, ‘that particular denomination might enjoy the emolu- ments of the ofiices, but they could not abridge your civil rights or interfere with your freedom of worship. They could not make you worship according to their mode, nor me; nor is my friend exactly right about that. If you elect a Deacon or an Elder to the oflice of Governor, why should not he be actuated by the same motives as the Minister to appoint his par- ticular followers? I believe we had some- thing of that sort in Kentucky once, but at the same time this provision of the Con- stitution did not bring it about. Why not as well say if ‘you elect my distinguished friend here as Governor, as the representa- tive of the bar of Kentucky, he would fill the ofiices by appointing all lawyers? Why could you not say if you elected a doctor he would fill all the offices by appointing doctors, or a farmer appoint farniers, or a blacksmith appoint blacksmiths‘? -Would that be any worse than the other‘? Would a gentleman be in any way disqualified because he was either? The argument de- stroys itself. If we mean that all men are to have equal rights; if we mean that no man, because of his religious belief, is to have his civil liberty abridged, let us ex- press that meaning unqualifiedly by wiping out this provision, and saying to the civilized world that no longer in Kentucky is it de- grading for a man to be a Minister of the Gospel. Mr. CLARDY. It is not my purpose to make a speech on this question. If it were, I am physically unable to do so to- day. But I do desire to enter my appro- val of the first amendment which has been offered to this clause of the Constitution, and to enter my solemn and earnest pro- test against the restriction which has been incorporated in this clause by the Commit- tee. We read in the report of the Com- mittee on Bill of Rights that the civil rights, privileges and capacities of any person shall in nowise be diminished or en- larged on account of his religion. Now, I want to say that this restriction, according to my understanding of the meaning of words, is diametrically in opposition to this clause in the Constitution. If that clause means any thing, it means just what it says, that these civil privileges shall not be diminished or restricted on account of a man’s religion. You say, if he has just a little religion it will not affect him at all; if he has just religion enough to be a mem- ber of some Church in the country, it will have no influence upon him at all; but if he has just a little more religion, religion enough to teach this doctrine to his neigh- bors, to his friends, to the community in which he lives, why then it does restrict his rights as a citizen of this great Common- wealth, and says that he shall not hold the ofiice of Governor or Lieutenant-Governor, or as amended, the oflice of Superintendent of Public Instruction. The argument of the Delegate from Mason, if his argument means anything, or proves anything at all, proves that he should apply this restriction not only to Ministers, but to all the members of Churches. His argument, I say, applies equally to every member of the Church, and it would then be that no professor of re- ligion at all should be elected to any civil office in the State of Kentucky. One gen- tleman says that this puts a restriction upon the Ministers. They are the parties themselves who have put this restriction upon, and ostracized themselves by going into this profession. You might as well say that a man who goes into any other profes- sion ostracizes himself. Why would he select this one profession and exclude its members from holding ofiice and allow all others to do so from the consideration that they might induct into ofiice, naturally, those of their own particular denomination. I say all these arguments, and all these re- strictions, would apply equally to every 16 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] CLARDY_—YOUNG. [November 7 . professor of religion of any denomination whatever. No restriction at all is put on a man without any religion; he can teach agnosticism; he can teach atheism; he can teach infidelity; but you do not say he shallbe excluded from any oflice in the State of Kentucky on that account; but you wish to restrict just simply one class of our citizens; and there is no better class; there is no more useful class of citizens in this country than the Ministers of the Gospel. Let us leave it to them. They have their law, and this Constitution does not make it either. It is written in one Book, and that is the Book of all Books. That is the law which governs them. Let us leave them to the arbitrament of that law. For a Convention like this, composed largely, as I suppose, of irreligious persons, or to some extent at least of irreligious persons, to undertake to dictate what rule shall govern the ministry, I say it looks very much like the devil teaching the Son of Mary the principles which should govern Him in His teachings on this earth, lest He should become contaminated by intercourse with the people. You know he took Him up into a high mountain and tempted Him, and he offered him all the Kingdoms of the earth if He would fall down and worship him; and this Convention, or any other human Convention, undertaking to lay down rules to govern the ministry, looks very much like this teaching that I have spoken of. I do not wish to make any ex- tended remarks on this subject. I have never heard, so far as I recollect, a single sensible reason why this restriction should be continued in our Constitution. We have heard many reasons why it should not be, and I hope that this Convention will adopt that amendment, and wipe this re— striction out. This is supposed to be an age of the very highest civilization that has ever existed at any time. Let us wipe this relic of barbarism from the record that we desire to leave to our posterity. When we finish our work at this place, let us leave all of our citizens with the liberty to hold any office that their constituents or the people choose toicall them to occupy, Are the people competent to elect ofiicers to rule over them, or to discharge the duties which devolve upon any office in the State‘? If so, they are certainly able to say whether they want a Minister, or whether they desire a layman to fill any office. Let the people have a right to judge for themselves, and if they believe it would be to the interest of this Commonwealth to have a Minister as Governor or Lieutenant- Governor, or to fill any other oflice, let them havethe right to do so without re- striction by this body, or by this Constitution. Mr. YOUNG. I rise with some hesita- tion to make a speech to weary the patience of the Convention, as the question seems to have been thoroughly discussed; but I desire to put myself upon record on this subject. I think it is disgraceful to the Constitution of the State to have this inhi- bition against the ministerial calling; that the mofnent a man devotes himself to the highest profession on earth, the moment he determines to lead a life of self-sacrifice and denial, the State of Kentucky shall thereby put the political brand of Cain upon him. I do not think it can be justi- fied either in reason or expediency. The experience of the State of Kentucky with men who have been Ministers has not been so unfortunate after all. Robert J. Breckinridge brought no discredit to the State of Kentucky when he acted as Super- intendent of Public Instruction, nor did John D. Matthews, nor did Howard Hen- derson, nor did they fall from their high positions as Ministers of the Gospel because they had discharged these oflicial duties. The two instances to which the distin- guished gentleman from Mason refers are unfortunate ones, but they are unfortunate for him, because these men renounced the ministerial profession before they entered upon the discharge of political duties. One, as I recollect, had killed his man; the EXECUTIVE ‘DEPARTMENT. 17 Friday,] Youxe. [November 7 . -other had held other oflices before he went to Congress, and had thereby given up his clerical duties. This comes about because if a man should feel it his duty to his State, 'to his community, to enter politics, he must degrade the ministry for the reason that, under the Constitution, he must renounce the ministerial ofiice before he can hold office. I think the wiser plan is to say that a man can hold an oflice in the State of Ken- tucky without renouncing his ministerial calling. It is not necessary, because a man holds office in the State, that he becomes unworthy of duties which devolve upon the Christian man. I entered no bar—room in my canvass. I do not see why if a Min- ister should become a candidate he should enter abar-room. If I should be elected Governor of Kentucky, for which I have no aspirations at present, I would feel that the people elected me with a full knowledge of my views and my principles upon this ‘question and I should carry them out whether in the Gubernatorial Mansion or my own house. Let us see what would be the result and ‘the operation of this Constitutional pro- vision. Who made the great fight against the flood of atheism which swept over the whole civilized country twenty-five years .ago? James McCosh, one of the greatest philosophers this world has ever known. Who stood up against John Stuart Mill and his school in England? James Mc- Cosh. Bring James McCosh into Ken- tucky to-day, and John Stuart Mill could ‘go into your General Assembly and could enjoy the ofi‘ice; and yet James McCosh, a man who has always been a greater philos- opher, and who has done fifty times for the human race what John Stuart Mill did, when it comes to the inculcation of these great doctrines which concern the preserva- tion of man’s political and religious rights, would be excluded from office. There is no reason or philosophy in it. These gen- tlemen fear a connection of the Church and .State. Why, that is an impossibility under our system, under the very Constitution and the clause in the Bill of Rights, which we have already passed; but, on the other - hand, you simply say that if a man should hold a political oflice, before he does so, he must degrade his calling or renounce the vows he has made, simply because be de- sires to serve his fellow-citizens. I can make a far better argument, I think, for the exclusion of doctors from holding ofiice than was suggested by the gentleman concerning Ministers. These men who are to apply remedies to our human ills, to save us in emergency when our lives are involved, when an artery may be severed, when hope of life demands instant help, that these men shall be taken from their calling to go to the Capital to make laws, could justly be argued as a great social and civil wrong. I can make a far better and more popular appeal that these men should be kept at home. What I dislike is, that these men who, by their very profession, are bound to be men of intelligence and men with the very highest moral attributes, they alone, of all the citizens in this Com- monwealth, shall be inhibited from the holding of certain oflices. Public opin— ion is the best corrective. I do not believe a Minister could be elected Governor of the State of Kentucky under the religious feelings of our com- munity, but if the people want a Minister for Governor, they should have the right to elect him Governor; and if he wants to be Governor, he should have the right to occupy that position without renouncing his ministerial obligations, and without thus bringing discredit upon his calling. There need be no fear of bad results. Pub- lic sentiment will take care of this thing. These difficulties, which the distinguished gentleman from Mason discusses, were only felt upon American soil before that great principle had been announced of absolute religious freedom. Human nature has changed. The ideas and principles of hu- man liberty have changed, and men, at the 18 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] close of the nineteenth century, will look upon these questions in a far different way from what they did one hundred years ago. You can never again, with the intelligence, with the learning, with the culture of our race, thus destroy the liberties of the peo- ple. One of the objects I had in coming to this Constitutional Convention was to use my humble influence to remove this stigma from the grandest and noblest calling which men can ever pursue, and take this relic of barbarism (for that is what it is), this reminder of superstition, out of Ken- tucky’s organic law. To say we are afraid of any man because he is a Minister, that we are distrustful of his influence on our liberties, is an insult to our manhood. I, for one, hope the motion of the Delegate from Nicholas will prevail, and this relic of superstition and fear will be eliminated from the new Constitution which we propose for adoption by the people of the State. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I speak with great reluctance, and would not speak at all if I could reserve the right to speak later in the Convention, or if more gentlemen had spoken on the other side. I differ from the majority of those who have spoken. I would not speak merely to reiterate what they have said. There are ‘two forms of policy in gov- ernment. One form in which the Church and State are united, and the other in which they are divided, whether wisely or not I will not now discuss. We have chosen one form, that in which ‘the Church and State are totally separated. If, therefore, a man in England or in Italy, or in Germany, considered the question whether Ministers of the Gospel should be members of his Legislature or not, the problem presented to him would be some- what difl'erent from the question presented to us to-day. In those countries religion enters into politics. There the whole form of government is so associated, so con- structed that religion as religion is a politi- cal factor, and therefore it is very proper YoUNe-McDERMo'rT. [N ovember 7 N that Ministers should be in the Legislature, to represent themselves, and to protect their politcal interests. Consequently Eng-- land has the'clergy in the House of Lords. For years they sat there and had a real in— fluence in the political welfare of En gland. What is the status to-day? They have no- real weight in the House of Lords, because‘ the House of Lords simply has a veto power now; the, clergy in England have- practically ceased to sit as members of that. body; but in this country, where government is altogether different, where- religion as religion is expressly excluded from the domain of politics, the right of' the clergy to hold oflice appears in an en- tirely different light. I shall not be put in the position in which some gentlemen on the other side wish to put those who vote against their amendment. Cur opponents would have you believe that they are the special champions of Christianity-that they are struggling for the elevation of the Ministry of the Gospel—while we seek to- degrade the Church. A greater misconcep- tion could not exist. I dare say no man that votes in favor of the report of the- Committee as it stands will yield to them in enthusiasm for the Christian religion, or in a high appreciation of its Priests and Ministers. The ‘report simply provides that as long as a man continues to perform his functions as a preacher he shall not be a political ofiice-holder. That is all. The moment he chooses to surrender his special privileges and his clerical power he be- comes eligible. I want to ask you this question: Is it not true that no man can discuss politics long without losing his patience or without having some passion excited? I ask you to point out in this assembly a single man who, if he professes any religion, can discuss it fairly and temperately. I ask you to point out to me a man who can mix both poli-r tics and religion and discuss‘ them with calmness and discretion. What are poli- tics? Let us take things as we find. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 19 Friday,] McDERMoTT. [November 7, them. A man is about to be nominated even than he, great champion as he is of by a political convention. Two caudi- the Christian religion? And yet I dare dates are up. A delegate Wishes to say that the gentleman himself would not recommend his friend. What does he say in his favor? Something like this: “ Gen- tlemen of the party, you may like it or not, but the fact remains that the candi— date whom I nominate is a member of the largest denomination in this State. He will get votes which no other candidate can get if you nominate him. We can elect him by a triumphant majority because the members of his denomination will vote for him, even though they belong to the opposite political party.” Don’t you know that that argument would be irresistible? Does anbody deny that James A. Garfield won a great many votes from the Democratic party simply because of his religious associations? Will not this subject be always considered in nominating candidates? What is an elec- tion? What is oflice-holding in our day? I should like indeed to see that beautiful era approaching—that millenium—when, as the gentleman from Lexington would have it, we shall have no murky pools in politics —-when politics shall be as pure as a moun- tain brook, and shall reflect the counte- nances of only the noblest and most pious men, like the gentleman from Lexington— when in politics there shall be no treating, no solicitation, no buying of votes, no selecting of candidates on account of avail- ability, but only fair dealing and the eleva- tion of the ablest and best. When that millenium comes I shall cheerfully vote in favor, not only of allowing the clergy to hold ofiice, but also of allowing women to vote and to aspire to oflicial station. I beg you to give me a single reason why Ministers of the Gospel should have the right to hold office that would not equally apply in favor of women? Are they not, in the language of the gentleman from Lexing- ton, better than we are? Are they not more moral than we are? Do they not stand up for the Christian religion better vote in favor of allowing to women, the special lay champions of religion, the right to vote in Kentucky. And why ? I can see him rising, with flashing eyes and resonant voice, and exclaiming: “Gentle- men, will you drag these angels down into the murky pool of politics? (Laughter and applause.) Will you allow them to. lose that sanctity—that high station which always hitherto they have enjoyed in our grand old Commonwealth?” I wish I could emulate his tones and his diction while I picture to you with what fervid words and strong reasoning he would thunder agairst any report of that sort brought in by our Committee on Elections; and yet he and his associates turn upon me and my friends and’ say: “ Why would you put a stigma upon religion by excluding the preachers from oflice—seeking? You would admit an atheist; you would admit a John Stuart Mill, and yet you will not admit a Minister of the Gospel.” Why, gentlemen, on the other side, you totally misapprehend the reason which the framers of the Constitution had when they excluded the ministry. Our fore- fathers made this exception, not because they wished to degrade the clergy, not because they had a contemptible opinion of the clergy, but because they had a most exalted opinion of the divine calling—because in the opinion of those old statesmen the Ministers of God were so far elevated above us that they were entitled to an hon- orable distinction. We have given them a distinction—a patent of nobility—which we have granted to no other men on earth; and the gentleman from Lexington would snatch it from them, and say: Gentlemen of the (‘hurclnyou are like us, no worse and no better. You shall have no privileges we do not have. You shall have every burden that we hear. You shall have no special dignity. Your great influence over 20 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday] BRONSTON— M oDEnMo'r'r—Y OUNG. [November 7 . your flocks is vanishing. You can nolonger lead them. We do not consider you any more exalted or any more influential than anybody else.” Besides, gentlemen of the Convention, the preacher can now resign his pulpit if he wishes to hold office. Mr. BRONSTON. Should not that be left to the conscience of the individual Minister ? Mr. MCDERMOTT. I believe that by leaving that to his conscience you would tempt some Ministers to use their high calling as a stepping-stone to oflice. At present he must unfrock himself and sur- render much of his undue influence before he can enter the political arena. We only say that a Minister of God shall not stand at the altar of his Church or in his pulpit, and for one-half hour preach the religion of the Divine Nazarene; and then for the‘next half hour preach a sermofi on the tariff, or on pensions and subsidies. We simply say to them, the clergy: You have a a power over those who look up to you in your exalted station, and shall not use that extraordinary power for the sake of your political ambition or for the success of your party. In other words, we wish simply to protect ourselves and our neighbors against the natural and great influence of some of your ambitious associates. The gentleman who preceded me said that if a Minister of one denomination were elected Governor, he would appoint only those persons to oflice who were of his denomination. Is not that the theory of a large number of men in the United States to-day? Is not the spoils system advo- cated by many able men? I believe even my friend from Lexington and the gentle- man from Louisville, perhaps, would say that when a Democratic President was elected he should have only Democratic spoilsmen around him; and that when a Republican President was elected, he should give all the oflices to the followers of the Republican party; and how long would it be in Kentucky before you would have the principle carried out, that if a Methodist were elected Governor, we should have a Methodist Secretary of State, and a Meth- odist Superintendent of Public Instruction, and that at another time, if we should have a Presbyterian Governor, we would also have a Presbyterian Secretary of State? Such things should be impossible. One gentleman who preceded me said that preachers are men of great ability. I freely concede it. Nobody denies it. I for one am glad to see them at the head of the great educational institutions of the country. That is where they belong. They are our teachers. They lead us up to life eternal. We do not want them to come down into the political arena. At the present time you do not compel them to serve on juries or to take up arms like common soldiers. Why don’t you do it ? You say to them: On account of your high calling, we do not let you hold office; and we do not re- quire you to sit as jurors or to march in the ranks in time of war. If you give them the right to hold office, why shall you not make them sit on juries? Mr. YOUNG. You do not make doctors sit on juries. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I have a profound respect for the profession of medicine, like the gentleman from Louisville; but I do not look up to the doctors with a reverence which would prevent me from exercising freely my right of suffrage. The doctors do not occupy any separate station. They do not rise every Sunday in the pulpit and teach to us and to our wives and our chil- dren and our parents the doctrines of eter- nal life. They have no such power over ordinary men. I leave it to you as a prac- tical question if, in the city of Louisville, a Presbyterian Minister was running against a Methodist Minister for the Legislature, would the good of the government be con- sidered by all the people who voted, or would the prosperity and the glory of the Church be consulted? Answer me that fairly. Would one man out of ten vote EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 21 Friday,] MCDERMOTT—BRONSTON. [November 7 . against the preacher of his Church because the preacher of his Church differed from Would he not always give undue weight to the man that he looked up to every Sunday as the expounder of the Word of God? gards his Priest as greater in ability than him on a political problem? He re- himself; purer in character, more disin- terested in life. Yes, you have given to the clergy privileges which no other man in this community has, and will you let them retain that peculiar distinction ? The speakers on the other side prove too much. What position are they in? The member on my left who stands up so valiantly for the dignity of the preachers, and my eloquent friend from Louisville, say what? “Gentlemen, you treat these Ministers horribly. You wont let them hold office. It is true they could not be elected to office if you did let them run, and perhaps they ought not to be elected to office under any circumstances; but you are horribly tyran- ical when you deny them the right to run. Public sentiment would always exclude them it is true, but don’t make this princi- ple a part of your law.” The member from Louisville, and the rest of them know per- fectly well that’ the moment you had a Minister of the Gospel running for ofiice you would have people who had been friends before taking each other by the throat. In many parts of this State, if you started out two Ministers of the Gospel to beat each other for the Legislature, or for the place of Governor, you would have the old feuds of the war time. Such feelings as ex— isted then would exist here again, and you would have the voters ready to fight each other in a minute, and instead of having your ward meetings at the street corners or in a public hall, you would have them in the Churches. I can see the pulpit of the Minister bedecked with the flowers of the ladies of the congregation, and I can see the ladies pinning badges on the men, as the ladies in the olden time pinned the Red Cross on the soldier that marched to the Crusade. I can see the ladies pinning on their badges and telling their sweethearts, husbands and sons to go to the polls and work and fight there all day long—to win a glorious victory for Brother Barnes, or I‘ Brother Jones or Brother Smith. I can see even the ladies distributing, not beer, perhaps, but coffee and sandwiches, and ice cream and all the delicacies of the season. Mr. BRONSTON. Don’t you think that would be an improvement? Mr. MCDEBMOTT. In some respects it might be; but I want to protect you against both evils. I would like to see two Ministers of the Gospel in Lexington run- ning for the Legislature, and see six ladies around the gentleman from Lexington giving him bouquets and compliments, and asking him for his vote. Mr. BRONSTON. They would get it. Mr. MCDERMOTT.- They mlght get the promise of it, but when seven other ladies, a little more beautiful, and with a a few more badges, came around, he would wabble. They would have to handle him like a floater is handled in Louisville—that is, they would have to hold on to his elbow till his vote was cast. They tell us a great deal about the liberty of conscience. Nobody would take away from Ministers the right to vote. That is all well enough, but we only protest agains taking away from the Minister of the Gospel that peculiarly honorable distinc- tion which they now enjoy—Qthat distinction which, under this Constitution, sets them apart from all other ~men, and, in effect, says: You have the noblest calling of all, and so great is the power of your virtue, your intelligence, your station as a Minister of God, that we cannot allow you to unduly influence others in the exercise of the right of suffrage, and we cannot let‘ you soil your gown in the mire of politics. We will not require you to shoulder your musket and fight, to work on public roads, or to sit on juries. We will continue these honorable exemptions and exclusions which you enjoy above all other men. 22 ‘ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] PHELPS—BRONSTON—BIRKHEAD. [November 7 _ Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I would like to ask the gentleman one question: I desire to know which the Delegate thinks would have the worse effect on the Delegate from Lexington, to have seven ladies pinning, bouquets upon him or to have saloon keepers pouring whisky down him ‘? Mr. BRONSTON. I object. ~\lr. McDERMOTT. I cannot answer that question, but I would free him alike from both unfair and dangerous influences. He, like the rest of us, is only human and few of us could withstand such temptations. I may be wrong in my theory, but I cer- tainly err from no want of reverence for the clergy. They are far above my sphere. I look up to them with unbounded respect and hope and I should not like to see them show the weaknesses that affect us in our worldly pride and ‘petty ambitions. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I simply want to say a few words, and I feel a little embar- rassment in view of the fact that so many distinguished Delegates have occupied the floor, and claimed our attention this morn- ing. It occurs to me, however, that those who are opposing this amendment do not seem to be very consistent. It seems to me they ought to have held a little private caucus and had some understanding as to the position they were going to occupy, and the arguments they were going to adduce. I see one very distinguished gentleman, who has already been answered, takes the position, and gives that as a reason why Ministers should not be eligible to ofiice, that they have fallen in politics. I want to ask that gentleman if Ministers have not fallen in the pulpit; and if you use that argument to keep them out of politics, the same argument might be applied to keep them out“ of the pulpit? It occurs to me that that is no objection at all. If they base it upon the idea that a Minister is going to degrade himself, then I say if he has within his bosom a. disposition, a spirit to do this, and if he is already inclined to degrade himself, I am in favor of uncloak- ing him, removing this obstruction, re- moving this restriction, and making him come out and stand in his true manhood. If our Ministers are to be held to their ex- alted position by reason of Constitutional law; if it is a fact that Constitutional law alone keeps them up to the exalted posi- tion that they occupy at present, let us remove the obstruction. If the ministerial office is a myth and a farce, those Ministers of the Gospel have been perpetrating a fraud, and carrying it out upon the people, and there is no sacredness in their calling. Let us remove this obstruction, and let them stand out in their true manhood, and let them be an open letter known and read of all men. It seems to me that the arguments are inconsistent. They degrade a Minister of the Gospel, and they take him down into the cess-pools, into the slums; they bring them down with the meanest while they are engaged in the canvass, and just as soon as they get into ofi‘ice, ‘they pull their clerical robes around them, and begin to use their opinions and their religious per- suasions to. carry out their views by appoint- ing those of their religious creed to political oifices. It seems to me that that is incon- sistent. If the preachers, when these restrictions are removed, when the oppor- tunity is given them, are going to become as other men; if they are going to resort to chicanery and trickery and intrigue to get positions, how is it when they get into the . ofiice they are going to rise above all these things, and turn around and become great men and use their ministerial power to carry forward the peculiar ends and views to which they are attached? It seems to me that we ought to remove the restriction and give our Ministers the right to hold ofiice. But it has been argued that if this restriction is removed and this amendment adopted, Ministers will come pouring in, asking for many positions, and will necessarily occupy all of these positions. I think that a false idea that is presented to EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. _23 Friday,] MARTIN. a [November 7 . "this Convention. I do not believe that our Ministers will desire to fill oflices unless .they believe they can be eflicient and make .good oflicers. I am willing and in favor of removing this restriction and giving our preachers the same privileges that we enjoy .as common citizens of our country and Commonwealth. Mr. MARTIN. I have listened with a great deal of interest to the views of gen- tlemen upon this floor, and more particu- larly to the Delegates from the Fourth Dis- .trict of Louisville and Lexington. I think that I can endorse every word that they have said, and in passing, I will merely :say that I am truly gratified that the Dele- gate from Lexington is willing to make one amendment to the present Constitution. This question was fully discussed in the canvass made in my county during the last summer, and I must say that their almost unanimous verdict was that this clause should be wiped out from the Constitution. I heard the expression in favor of retaining it from but two men. Therefore, a sense of duty to my constituents compels me to protest in the Committee of the Whole against retaining that clause in the Constitution rendering ineligible to the ‘ofl'lce of Governor more than twenty-five hundred of the best citizens of the Com- . monwealth of Kentucky. I do not flatter myself by supposing that anything I can :say will change the opinion of any Dele- gate upon this floor who has already deter- mined to vote for the section as reported by the Committee; but I do hope that nothing I may say will extend the inability to any other otlices. When this section was first "reported to the Joint Committee, the ina- bility only applied to the oflice of Governor. I had the honor of making a few remarks .in opposition to it, and called the attention -of the Committee to the fact that Ministers were eligible to any oflice in the gift of the ‘people of the United States from President down, and also that they were eligible to fill .any of the State ofiices, including that of Lieutenant-Governor, and might thereby succeed to the oflice of Governor. To my astonishment and chagrin, the ineligibility was immediately extended to the ofiice of Lieutenant-Governor. In view of this fact, one might well exclaim, “Save me from my friends.” What are the reasons given here why this stigma should be cast upon the Minis- ters of any religious society‘? That it is a stigma none can deny. Are they less patriotic than any other class of citizens? Do they not bear the burden of taxation, equally with the lawyer, the physician, or the mechanic? Then I ask why should they not share in the honors also ? Gentle- men say they will drag religion down into the scum of politics, and instead of eleva- ting politics, they will debase religion. If you make Ministers the exclusive guardians of morality and religion, can you not trust them to guard what you have committed to their care? Or do you want to act as guar- dians over the guardians? This seems to me an absurd proposition. I say, let every man render unto “Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that belong to God.” Whenever you make the calling of any man so high and so holy as to prevent him from mixing with the peo- ple in all the walks of life, you curtail and limit his influence to a great extent. Min- isters are neither better nor worse than other men. And I am opposed to any law that makes a distinction in their favor, or denies them any of the rights and priv- ileges enjoyed by any other citizen. A right guaranteed unto them by that section in the Bill of Rights, which reads, “ That ‘the civil rights, privileges or capacities of any citizen shall in no wise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion,” and so well called to your attention by the Delegate from Lexington. Let us be con~ sistent, and either strike that section from the Bill of Right, or this clause from the report of the Committee. I do not propose to argue the point that 24 ’ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] M ARTIN—DEHAVEN. [November 7 a when a man becomes a candidate for the high and responsible oflice of Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, that he must leave his religion, if he have any, in his closet, and delve down into the very hot-beds of political corruption. I leave that to gentlemen who have had more experience in politics than I have, and to gentlemen who have filled that office, and more of them that have aspired to fill it. I would not like to see Ministers taking an active part in politics, but I would not deny them the right to do so. Kentucky stands alone in that respect. I think the Delegate from Madison has said that Mary- land has that clause in her Constitution. If so, I overlooked it. Louisiana had it in 1866, but in 1868 left it out of her organic law. I think the Delegate from Gallatin misunderstood the argument of the Dele- gate from Taylor. I understood the Dele- gate from Taylor to make the point that it only excluded the better class of Ministers, while the other class could and would resign their robes to become candidates. I believe it is a recognized fact that the pecu- liar institution was the cause for this clause being incorporated into the present Con- stitution. That cause for such a clause has long since passed away, and now let the clause go too. Let it not be said that Ken- tucky alone, of all the States of this Union, contains such a clause as was only applica- ble to a condition of religious affairs as existed one hundred years ago. There are many denominations now, and there is .no danger that any one denomination will gain an ascendancy over all other denomi- nations, as was alluded to by the Delegate from Louisville. We have for time incorporated the name of the Almighty into our Preamble. Now, let us strike out this clause, and have a Constitution reflect- ing the enlightened views of Christian civilization. If there is so much danger in Ministers of the Gospels taking part in politics, why do we not hear of the great harm that has been done in other States? i the first’ If every thing is true that has been said‘. by gentlemen on the other side, we must. believe either that there is no religion in any other State of his Union, or that poli-- tics is much purer every where than in Kentucky. I do hope the amendment of the Delegate from Nicholas will carry, and that the last amendment will be voted down. Mr. DEHAVEN. I have no personal interest whatever in the decision'of the question that we have now before us ;. and if it were not for the fact that. this report emanates from the Com- mittee of which I am Chairman, and by the rules of the House it is expected and demanded of me that we should give some: reason for the report we have made, I would content myself now with keeping; my seat and not uttering one single word. upon the subject that we have now under- consideration. The Committee of which I am a member were somewhat divided upon the question that we are now considering. A very decided majority, however, of the Committee were in favor of the report that the Committee has made, and we- then determined that we would report what. the majority were in favor of to the Con- vention, and then the Convention could do as they saw fit with the report, every mem» ber of that Committee reserving to himself ‘ the right, when we got into Convention, to vote the dictates of his own judgment. And I am certain that I speak the senti- ment of every member of that Committee when I say that we have no personal pride upon this question. That is only the judg- ment of members of the Committee. If we were in error about that—if we were’ mistaken in the provision that we have re- ported-as a matter of course we would be- greatly gratified if the Convention would correct the error into which we have: fallen ; but notwithstanding all that. has been said by the gentlemen in opposition to the report, and in support of the amendment offered by the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25 Friday,] DEHAVEN. [November 7. Delegate from Nicholas,~ my own mind has undergone no change. I think that the in- terest of theministry, I think the interest of religion, and I think the interest of the State demands that we shall stand by the provision in the Constitution as it has ex- isted in this State since 1799. And it is a matter of regret to me that my able and distinguished coadjutor from the city of Lexington should have forsaken us upon the fight that we have made all along this line. It does occur to me that his piety has outrun his political sagacity. Since he has been home to Lexington I apprehend that they have had a sort of protracted meeting there, and that the gentleman from Lex- ington has received new lights entirely. He talks about going out into the morning sunlight, and discarding all the creeds that human ingenuity has ever framed, that he can fall on his knees and raise his admiring gaze to heaven, and there pour out his soul in a strain of devotion that no earthly man ever attained before on God’s footstool. As I said before, I have no feeling in this matter. I yield to no man upon this floor in my exalted estimation of the Christian ministry. I have been familiar with them from my youth up. My own grandfather was a Minister of the Church, and I have now the most pleasant recollections of his purity of character, and I would be the last one to attempt to fix any stigma upon the ministry. 1 would feel un- worthy to have descended from such a source as that, if I were to attempt to fasten upon this or any other class of citizens an unmerited stigma. I do not regard it as such, but when I came here as a member of this Convention I meant to follow the die- tates of my own judgment as to what was for the public good, and wherever the die- tates of that judgment lead me I must go. That the ministry are a pure, upright, and learned class of our fellow-citizens, I will not deny, but most cheerfully admit. My own personal intercourse with them has been of the most intimate character. My house is a sort of head- quarters for the ministry of my section of the country, and I have never enjoyed the society of any men more than I have the sooiety of the Christian ministry, not of one denomination, but of many. But that is not the question [that we have before us to-day. The gentlemen say that we are violating one of the provisions of the Bill of Rights. I do not see it in that light, and I very modestly deny it. What is the pro- vision in the Constitution? Some of the gentlemen have said that this provision never was in the Constitution until it was inserted in 1849-50, but any gentleman who- will turn to the Constitution of 1799, will find the same provision in there that is in the Constitution of 1849, oerbatim elf literatim. I believe, too, that the Ministers of the State of Kentucky occupy to-day a position more’ exalted, perhaps, than the Ministers of any other- State in the Union. They are more dis- tinguished for their piety; they are more distinguished for their learning; they are more distinguished for their efficiency in their ministerial duties, I honestly believe, than in any State in the Union ‘to-day; and I attribute much of it to the very fact that they have for the last nearly one hun- dred years been elevated to such a height that they were not permitted to get down and dabble in the ordinary politics of the- day, and they have been saved from this contamination by the provisions of the- Constitution making them ineligible to office. Gentlemen say that they are better- men than others; that they are purer than others, and why should we exclude them? As I have said, I attribute much of their purity of character to the very fact that they have been, by Constitutional impedi- ments, debarred from entering into the- field of politics. That is their safe-guard, and it is for‘ their protection, as much as for the protection of the people of the State, that I insist upon preserving that provision. of the Constitution here. 26 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday] BRONSTON—DEHAVEN. [November 7 , Mr. BRONSTON. Would it interrupt the gentleman to have me ask him a ques- tion? Mr. DEHAVEN. I think not. Mr. BRONSTON. If the purpose is to keep them out of politics, why single out these three oflices, and say they shall be disqualified to hold those offices, and yet permit them to hold any other office '? Mr. DEHAVEN. The Committee did not feel at liberty to go further than the Constitution of 1799 and the Constitution of 1849 had gone upon that question. I would like to say, in my own judgment, as I just now suggested, that to remove this restriction in the Constitution would be to impose a serious injury both upon the Church and upon the State. There was a great deal in what was suggested by my learn- ‘ed friend from Mason, and although it was somewhat ridiculed by the gentleman from Lexington, it still carries with it great force in my mind. You may go back and trace, as he says, the history of the Church from its dawn until now, and you will find that wherever ecclesiastics are clothed with political authority that that political au- thority is prostituted to the promotion of their ecclesiastical preferences. I lay that down as a proposition that cannot and will not be contested by any one who is at all familiar with the past history of the world, that that has inevitably occurred, and as well said by the gentleman from Mason, human nature is the same to-day that it was one hundred, two hundred and five hundred years ago. If a preacher of my Church should ever get to making political speeches around the country, and running for the Legislature, or running for Gov- ernor, I should like very quickly to go to him and say, “My brother, you are en- gaged in a business now that does not .ex- actly suit my idea of right, that is not ex- actly compatible with my notion of your great office, and you will be kind enough either to quit that or take my name off of your Church book.” Some Churches can not do it. to kick a fellow out, They have no other way except and I think I should be so anxious to get out of ju- that I would be apt to perpetrate something in or- risdiction of that sort, der to make him turn me out of his Church. But let me suppose a case: Sup- pose you get up in the county of Fayette, or the county of Mason, or the county of Scott, or the county of Oldham, or any other county in this State, a heated controversy upon some question. Two parties meet to- gether, and they nominate a Baptist preacher on the one side and a Methodist preacher on the other; and these two men will go before the public, and they will dis- cuss these issues, and they will upbraid one another, and they will abuse one another, like politicians nearly always do. I am afraid, with all the piety of my distin- guished friend from Lexington, that he oc- casionally indulges in a little thing of that sort, and if he was running against a preacher to-day for the Legislature in the city of Lexington, he would get off all sorts of puns and anecdotes and all that sort of thing against the preacher; and the preach- er, as a matter of course, would have to fight back. But don’t you see, as soon as you start a Methodist preacher and a Bap- tist preacher in any one of the counties in this State as candidates against each other, that they forget all about the political issues that are involved in the race, and they each stick to his man like a little brother? And I would like to know from my pious friend from Lexington, after a preacher had been in one of these political meetings of a Saturday night, on a street corner, perhaps, and may be in a corner grocery (and I have seen these meetings in a bar-room‘), I do not suppose he would ever go there. A man of his sanctified feelings would have convulsions if he approached a bar-room. (Laughter.) I would like forhim to tell me, after a preacher had been on the hustings on Saturday night, discussing all these questions, his friends pulling and EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 27 Friday,] BRONSTON—DEHAVEN. [November 7 . hauling and treating to get men to vote for the Brother (a little money now and then slipped to a weak-kneed brother in order to strengthen him up a little); I would like to know how his re- ligious nature would feel on the next Sun- day morning when he went into that ‘Church and saw that same man that been \wrestling with him in all the dirty anecdotes that a politician can conceive and tell, and being guilty of all the little tricks that poli- ticians willinevitably indulge in, how he would feel when that man got down from that sacred desk to administer the broken body and shed blood of Our Savior. My God! Every religious emotion that ever pulsated through my heart would revolt at seeing a Minister at such a place like that. Mr. BRONSTON. Does the gentleman want my answer now? Mr, DEHAVEN. No. You can an- swer when I get done, if I do not wear the subject out. I think we have pretty well worn it out now. But, as I said before, I am ‘satisfied that the exalted character of our preachers is to be as much attributed to the Constitutional inhibition in this re- spect as to any other; and if we remove that, we will have right in our midst in less than twelve months from this time, scenes infinitely worse than those which I have attempted to describe. How are we going to obviate it? Gentlemen say you are cir- cumscribing his political capacity. My dear sir, do not we circumscribe the politi- cal capacity of a heap of other people? Suppose that I wanted to run for Governor and that I was thirty-four years and eleven months old. You are circumscribing my political capacities and aspirations very greatly in the Constitution as it stands now. I have got to be thirty— five years old before I can be Governor. I have got to have various other qualifica- tions, and so in all this Constitution we have gone on and fixed qualifications for different oflicers—qualifications for a Gov- ernor, qualifications for a Lieutenant-Gov- ernor; we will fix, in the Constitution quali- fications for a Judge of the Appellate ' Court, and of the Superior Court, if we have any such thing; for a Judge of the Circuit Court. for a Judge of the County Court; we fix qualifications and requisites for all the oificers that are made by this Constitution. Then why cannot you say with the very same propriety that you are lessening a man’s political capacity and privileges by throwing around him these provisions and requisites? The very same reasoning will land you in the very same place; but I do not propose to take up the time of this Convention in discussing this question any further. As I said at the beginning, we gentlemen of the Committee who are still clinging to the report of the majority, think that the provision of the old Constitution and the clause- that we have reported here are best for our people. They are best for the ministry; they are best for the people. The function of a preacher or a ministry is not to purify politics by just getting down’ and wrestling with politicians. He will never do that while the Lord liveth. There is a field though in which he can purify the morals, and the politics of the country, and that is from his pulpit. I am one of those who believes that that people is happiest and greatest whose moral culture keeps up with their intellectual cul- ture and the only set of men that we have got to look to in the world for the cultiva- tion and development of the moral nature of our people are the preacher and the Sunday-school teacher; and I have the highest reverence almost of any man in this Convention for the young man of talent, and of learning, and of ambition who, believing it his duty to dedicate his services to Almighty God, has deliber- ately gone and taken upon himself the vows of the Church, and surrendered all the fascinations of pride and wealth and fame and distinction, and all that sort of thing, and deliberately taken 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] MooRE—QUIcKsALL—Foimr. [November 7 . upon himself vows that make him eschew all this sort of thing; I say my admiration for that man is unbounded. I want to hold him up in this pure and ethereal air where his views lead him. I do not want to lay temptations in his way. As was well said by my friend from Mason, there is a volume in the portion of Lord’s Prayer that said: “Lead us not into temptation,but deliver us from evil,” and I do not want to lay in the pathway of any young, ambitious, aspiring preacher, or an old one either, any political bait that will call him away from his allegiance to the Holy Man of Nazareth. I do not want to put it there. It ought not to be put there. We ought to pat him on the back, and say: “Well done, thou good and faithful servant; thou art engaged in a good and glorious work. You stick to it. You preach to us the unsearchable riches of the Gospel of Christ. You cultivate our children, and cultivate us in all of these high moral attrib- utes and in this way you can do a grander work than you can possibly do by going into politics and attempting to purify politics, for it is like wrestling with a tar barrel.” I do not care if the Apostle Paul was to be permitted to come down from the realms of bliss, in which I have no doubt he is to-day, and make a race against my pious friend from the city of Louisville, in any of the wards there, you would ruin Paul himself. I do not want to be subject- ed to this sort of temptation, and the only way for us to obviate it is by retaining in our Constitution that we are attempting to form the provisions that were in the old Constitution. The amendment offered by the gentleman from Fayette would per- haps be better in another portion of the re- port that is to be made upon another subject, the subject of education; but I do not desire to be heard upon that now. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I believe that all the exhorters in the revival have con- cluded, and I therefore move that we now have a vote. Mr. QUICKSALL. I only desire to say that I have been requested by my people to support the retention of that clause in the Constitution, and I am in favor of its re- tention. Mr. FORGY. I would like to say the same. All my people were in favor of re- taining the clause, and I want this to go on record in order that my vote may be known. A vote being taken on the amendment, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted 32 in the affirmative, and 23 in the negative, and the amendment was ad- opted. Mr. WHITAKER. No quorum. The CHAIRMAN. You are too late. The result has been announced. Mr. JOHNSTON. In view of the last vote, I will withdraw my amendment. ~ The CHAIRMAN. By unanimous con- sent, the gentleman can withdraw his amendment. The vote being taken on the section as- amended, it was declared adopted. The section 10 was read, and is as fol lows: $120.10. He shall have power to remit. fines and‘ forfeitures, commute sentences, grant reprieves and pardons, except in case: of impeachment. In cases of treason he. shall have power to grant reprieves until the end of the next session of the General. Assembly, in which the power of pardon- ing shall be vested; but he shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sheriff‘ or Commonwealth’s Attorney in penal or civil cases. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I offered an amend- ment on yesterday, which I wish to with- draw and offer this in lieu thereof. The Reading Clerk read the amendment. as follows: Amend by adding after “forfeitures” in- the first line in the 10th section the follow- ing: “Under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed by law, and after con- viction to grant reprieves, commutation or- sentence and pardon.” And at the end of the section the following “He shall indi- cate to the General Assembly at their regula- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 29 Friday,] Moons—BRONSTON. [November 7 , session each case of reprieve, commutation ‘of pardon granted, the reasons therefor, stating the name of the convict, time of sentence, its date, and the day of reprieve, commutation or pardon.” Mr. L. T. MOORE. I propose to take ‘up but a very short time in discussing the amendment that I propose. The provision, :as reported by the Committee, I think, is ‘not acceptable, or will not be acceptable to the people of the Commonwealth. There has been a great deal of discussio’n on this question of the exercise of the power of pardon and remission of fines by the Gov- ernor. The trouble is that there is no system about it. It depends very much upon the emotions of the incumbent at the ‘time, and very much upon his tempera- ment. One man will grant a pardon where another will refuse it, where the circum- stances are precisely the same; and there ought to be some system about this; and it seems to me that the only way we can get at that is to require all remissions of fines _ to be subject to such action as the Legisla- ture may provide, so far as the pardoning power is eo‘ncerned, for the protection of the incumbent of the office of Governor himself. It seems to me there ought to be some change. There ought to be such a provision as I have offered, that he should not pardon before judgment or before trial. It is fair to the Governor himself that he should be protected by such Constitutional provision as that. The representations that are frequently made are not to be relied upon, but are relied upon, and pro- duce the pardon of men who should not be pardoned before conviction; and, in fact, it looks to me like it is inconsistent to say that a man is to be pardoned for an offense which he has never committed; and yet that is the result. He is pardoned for something’ he has never been guilty of, or, at least, never been convicted and found guilty of. Then there is another protection not only due to the people of the State, but the Governor himself, and that is, where- ever cases are presented to him asking for ', pardon or reprieves, that he is to report to the next Legislature the grounds upon which he has exercised that high power. Then he is protected from the appeals that might be made to his better nature, and he can say to them, you must give me good reasons for this, for I must account to the Representatives of the people for it. My ' amendment is in accord with a number of Constitutions of the different States of the Union, and I think it would be better for the Executive, better for the Common- wealth, better for all, that that amendment should be adopted. Mr. BRONSTON. For the considera- tion of the Convention, differing somewhat from the Delegate from Boyd, I desire to offer a substitute for the report of the Com- mittee and amendments. The CHAIRMAN. You offer it as a substitute to this section of the report of the Committee ? ‘ Mr. BRONSTON. Yes, sir. The substitute reads as follows : The Governor shall have the power tov grant reprieves, remissions, pardons and commutations of sentence after convictions for all offenses except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions and with such restrictions and limitations as he may think proper. Upon conviction of treason the Governor shall have power to suspend the execution of the sentence until the case shall be reported to the General Assembly at its next meeting, when the General Assembly shall either pardon, direct the execution of the sentence or grant a further reprieve. The Governor shall communicate to the General Assembly at the beginning of every session every case of reprieve. remission, pardon or com- mutation of sentence, stating the name of the person convicted, the crime for which he was convicted, the sentence, its date, the date of the pardon, reprieve, remission or commutation and the reason for granting the same; but the Governor shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sherifi“, or Commonwealth’s Attorney in penal or criminal cases. Mr, MOORE. I will withdraw my amendment and let that stand as a sub- stitute. 30 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] Mr. BRONSTON. This is the matter reported by the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. The only difference between that and the amendment offered by the Delegate from Boyd is that his amendment proposes to allow the Legislature to impose restrictions and limitations on the granting of remis- sion of fines and forfeitures. I beg to sug- gest, I do not believe that that limitation or restriction ought to be imposed on the power of the Governor. There is another suggestion I would like to make: that this differs from the Committee’s report only in two respects; one is by the insertion of the words “ after conviction,” and the other is by requiring the Governor to keep on file the petitions and letters upon which he grants pardons or remissions, and that he furnishes a statement of those to the Legis- lature at its next session. I am slow at any time to ask that any‘ change be made in the present Constitution, as was suggested by theDelegate from Oldham. He will find that I have not deserted him. I adhere to the proposition made bymyself early in the session, that we should re-adopt the present Constitution, make no changes in it except in these particulars where the experience of our government has taught us a change is necessary. Now, in the position I have oc- cupied, and the careful observation I have made, I believe experience has taught us, for the protection of society, that some change should be made in the pardoning power. The first change, which has evi- dently struck with great force not only the Delegates on this floor, but the citizens at large, is the powers of pardoning before conviction. I It is a power which has been very rarely exercised by the Governor, and I beg leave to suggest in no instance has it ever been exercised except where peculiar personal influences have been brought to bear upon the Executive; it is virtually saying “you will pardon a man of that which, under the law, he is pre- sumed to be not guilty because every man BRONSTON. __ [November 7 , is presumed to be innocent until the contrary is shown.” It is an invasion,so to speak, by one branch‘ of the government into the sphere of the other. It is an invasion by the Ex- ecutive into the Judiciary, because he un- dertakes to say that he will prevent an investigation by the Judiciary of the coun- try of a charge made against a citizen. Now, if that be done, I submit of necessity it provokes criticism and a suspicion of un- fairness. The instances which have come under my observation have been men who have been charged with the serious crime- of murder, but where an entire community has been aroused. The Executive inter- fered by saying this: “ You shall not in- vestigate before a jury of the country the- charge whether this man has been guilty of murder. I acquit him, I relieve him of even a suspicion of guilt.” And by doing that you make of necessity the friends of' the dead men not simply mad, but you al- low them to stand back with folded arms- and say that the laws of this country are not for the poor, but simply for the rich and powerful. You create at once a feel- ing of disrespect for the law. I regard that no State is more deplorable than that. in which you find the citizens do not re- spect the law and its enforcement. Now, on the other hand, experience has taught me that nothing embarrasses an Executive more than to have the power to grant a pardon before conviction, and at the same time he feels the responsibility to the- State demands that he ought not interfere until after the Courts have ex- hausted themselves in a fair and impartial trial; but as long as the Executive has the- power to grant pardons before conviction, you will find that strong influential politi- cal friends will constantly beset him; they will make appeals to him that are hard to resist, and he will feel that it is diflicult to lay down a rigid rule that “I will not. grant any pardons whatever before con- viction,” but if you put it in the Constitu- tion you will relieve him of all that em- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 31 Friday,] barrassment, which is unjust to him. It has been urged that the Governor ought to have the right to pardon before conviction, where extreme cases arise, where a man ought not to be subjected to the annoyance and expenses of a trial. I submit that in this government a defendant charged with crime always, I might say, has the sympathy attaching to him; it cannot be considered by him and his friends any hardship that there should be a fair, calm and impartial inquiry into the facts whether or not he is guilty as charged; and when that has been determined, then the Gov- ernor would have the power, as I think he ought to have unrestricted, of granting a pardon. There may be exceptions—there are necessarily exceptions to all rules— where it would be possible thata man would be greatly inconvenienced to be tried. As was said by a member of our Committee on one occasion there was a boy under twenty-one years of age, who was quite sick and needed a stimulant. Some good friend who was by gave him a drink. The Prosecuting Attorney insisting upon the letter of the law, had the friend indicted, because at that time there was no ex- ception. I acknowledge that in that case it was a great hardship that that man’s trial should go on; but I submit now, as I did in the Committee, that if everybody is to be relieved of a charge of selling liquor to minors because of the fact that it was given to one pretending to be sick, would it not open a wide avenue, a much wider avenue, I might say, by allowing the indiscriminate disposal of liquor in that way? The Governor in that case was appealed to and granted a pardon. I submitted at the time to the gentleman who gave the instance, would the Governor have interfered in that case to pardon before conviction unless that application had been presented by some influential person who could command his special attention? If ‘it had been a poor humble unworthy or ignorant citizen,of the Com- Bnoxs'rox. ' stances the Governors [November 7 , ..-.- \ monwealth who had out of a flask in his . pocket in the wheat field given a drink to a minor, would not the Governor have said let the course of law be followed, and after a trial and the facts ascertained, come to me and I will grant you a pardon. That is the course the Governor should take, and I am glad to say that in a majority of iii- of our Common- wealth have adopted that rule that they will not grant pardons before convictions, but it is the exceptions that I want to get right, and for that reason we have offered this substitute to the report of the Committee. Now, one single suggestion on the other branch of it and that is as to whether or not experience has taught us that there should be some limitation placed upon the pardoning power. Do not the people com- plain that' too often the guilty has been pardoned, and by pardoning the guilty crime has been encouraged. If that has been the experience of the Delegates, the next question is what limitation shall be imposed. It would not be just to the Governor to impose limitations upon him; it would not be just to the Governor to say that petitions should be presented in a certain way, with a certain num- ber of names or letters, that you should get the Commonwealth’s Attorney, the jury, or the Judge to sign the petition before he should grant any pardon. There is but one limitation, in my judgment, that‘ you can impose, and that is two-fold in its nature. It is limitation on the Governor on the one hand, and on the citizen who makes the petition on the other, and that is by inserting the provision that the public shall know the basis of the granting of this reprieve orpar- don. If a man is pardoned by the Governor on a charge of murder committed in the county of Breathitt, the people should know who it was in Breathitt county who wrote the letters and sent the petition which induced the Governor to grant the pardon. It puts the Governor in a position where he acts himself with more assurance 32 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BnoNsTox—ALLEx—PHELrs. [November 7 . because he on which he bases his exercise of that power, and you throw the restric- tions on the citizens who seek to have this power exercised by letting them know that when they send the petition and their letters to obtain the pardon they are going to be placed where every man in the Commonwealth can know on whose recom- mendation the pardon was granted. That will be a great limitation on the citizen. On the other hand, it will be a limitation and restriction on the Governor, because the Governor will hesitate to grant an appeal of a personal friend because he knows that the time is coming when he must show to the world that he granted that on the application of A, B or C, his personal friend, and without sufiicient assurance that the man ought to be pardoned. Not only will it be a re- striction on the Governor, but it will put him in a position where he ought to be,that he will only grant pardons, remissions of fines and forfeitures Where the case is a meritorious one and presents substantial reasons for him to thus interfere. For these reasons I offer that substitute, not coming from myself alone, but coming from the Committee on Crimes, Punish- ments and Criminal Procedure. We with- drew our report, and now present that section as a substitute with the suggestion that I have no personal pride about it what- ever, but only want you to do what is the 'best for the Commonwealth of Kentucky and your constitutents, and I do believe that experience shows that we should re- lieve the Governor of the embarrassment and the community of the danger from giving him the power of pardoning before conviction; that you ought to let the Gov- ernor know that when he grants a pardon he must also show the reasons on which the pardon is granted, thus putting a limitation on him, and further putting a limitation on the citizens to prevent them from sending petitions and letters, by letting them know feels he can show the facts that those communications will be exposed to the public view, so that their neighbors and friends can see upon whose recom- mendation the pardon was granted. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I have an amend- ment to the substitute. Amendment read, as follows: Amend by striking out the words “the Clerk, Sheriff or Commonwealth’s Attor- ney,” and inserting the words “ of any officer.” Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I have an amend- ment to the substitute. The amendment was read, as follows: Amend by striking out the words “after convlction.” Mr. BUCKNER. I do not rise for the purpose of opposing the substitute offered by the Delegate from Lexington, but I think, considering the position I have the honor of holding, it is proper that I make a few remarks, so that the Delegates to the Convention can look atmatters as they are. And I wish to speak on a few points which I do not think have been sufliciently ad- verted to by the Delegate from Lexington. I, perhaps, have less personal interest in this question than any Delegate upon this floor. I am approaching the end of the term of my oflice, and never expect to hold it again, but I do feel an interest as a citi- zen thatgwhen I retire from this position that the Executive who succeeds me should have such powers as may be necessary to maintain the dignity of the office to which the people have chosen him. Personally, the amend- ment offered by the gentleman would be a great relief to the incumbent. I know and he knows, because he is often times very close to the Governor on account of his official position; he knows the importuni- ties to which the Executive is subjected.‘ The considerations of these petitions occupy one-third of the time of theGovernor. It is the great labor of the oflice. As far as my own position is concerned, I accept most heartily his proposition that the EXEcUTIvE DEPARTMENT. as Friday,] BUeKNER—Cox. [November 7 . reason of the Governor’s action shall be reported. Any of you gentlemen who have been over to my ofiice could have found that from the very time I accepted the position I have indorsed on every case the reason for my action in it. At any time in the future any one can see the reason which actuated the Governor during the term of my ofiice. There has been one point which has not been sufiiciently considered. The. gentle- men have talked about relieving the Gov- ernor from responsibilities. I do not think the Governor should be relieved of respon- sibilities. I think that when a man has been elected to an office and accepts the re- sponsibilites,he should discharge them with- out fear or favor. ' , There is another point to which I ddsire to call your attention. There arises in the history of every people at some time ques- tions of great importance.‘ I will mention one so the members will see that in some instances the Governor whom they have chosen should have the power of pardoning for the purpose and with a view to restoring peace and quiet to the whole community. Soon after my inauguration as Governor there was a great disturbance in one of the counties of this Commonwealth. Factions were excited, murders had been committed, shooting from one side or the other. The matter was investigated by a committee of the Legislature. I advised the Legislature of the facts, stating that I, as Governor, desired to act in concert with them, and that I would take no action, though the Constitution gave me the power, until they had acted upon it, because I had established it as a rule not to interfere with the Judicial Department. In this case, after a full examination by a Committee of the Legislature, they unani- mously recommended to the Governor that in order to secure peace and quiet to that community, the prosecution should be stopped by the exercise of the Constitu- tional power given to the Governor to pardon those under indictment. The re- sult was very fortunate. It restored peace and quiet to the community which has. been orderly every since. This is a re- sponsibility from which the Governor should not be relieved. He should be willing to undertake the responsibility and the people who impose the responsibility should hold him to a strict accountability. Mr. COX, I think it is unwise, after the able discussions that have been made, for me to make any further argument; but this is a great subject, and one of vital interest to the people of Kentucky. Crime has been increasing. This is universally ad- mitted; prosecution after prosecution is going on in the Courts of counties where a few years ago we seldom had a prosecu- tion of any importance. ernor of Kentucky has power to pardon or grant reprieves; and when I came to the Convention I was strongly inclined to give the Governor of Kentucky a Board of Par- dons, as they have in "other States. I in- cline to it for the reason, I believe the Gov- ernor should'ha‘ve some aid and some relief from the constant importunities made upon him by the friends and relatives and com- munities where crimes had been committed to relieve parties charged with crime from the punishment for such crimes. I believe he should have some relief, and, believing that when I came here, and my people believed it, for that reason, I think we should organize a Board of Pardons. The only objection urged to that was it would cost the State 's'fof Kentucky a great deal. Now, by the report,’I of the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure, which is offered here as a substitute for this section, we are re- lieved ‘of that expense, and we secure the very purpose for which such a3 Board of Pardons would be created by requiring the Governor to report to the Legislature at its ensuing session the grounds upon which he has granted any clemency whatever. This would'curb theapplieation of others, know- ing their applications would be made public Now, the Gov- ‘ .34 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Fridayg] Cox—Asxnw. [November . There is another point to which I desire to call the attention of the Committee. That is the question of the power of the Governor to remit the fees of officers in any case whatever. I hold it is imprudent for us to give the Governor that power. As soon as that would become a law, the Leg- islature would every session be urged by oificers from different sections, Prosecuting Attorneys and the County Attorneys, Clerks, Sheriffs and other officers to increase their fees, to allow them out of the State Treasury or out of the people for whom they do business a larger amount of fees, and as an excuse for that they would say we are doing a large amount of labor for the State of Kentucky for which we receive no reward ‘and thus it would be economical for us to take from the Governor the power to relieve any individual from the payment of such cost. If an individual is tried, found guilty of a misdemeanor and fined heavily, a com- mission is due to the County Attorney, or under the former law it was due to the Prosecuting Attorney, and if you take that away from them and provide that the Gov- ernor can remit that, then, of course, these gentlemen would come to the Legislature and call upon that body to increase their salaries out of the public treasury. I think this provision is entirely right, and if aman has been guilty of crime, and we must con- clude that he is guilty of crime if he is con- victed, he should be required to pay some- thing. He should not be relieved of all penalties ‘on account of having committed that crime. Consequently I favor the sub- stitute offered by the Delegate from Lex- ington, which comes from a Committee of, which I have the honor to be a member, and before which it was ‘lengthily and ably discussed, and there was hardly-a dissenting voice to it in the Committee. I hope the Convention will adopt the ‘substitute, as I believe it'will give entire satisfaction to the State of Kentucky. ' " Mr. ASKEW. The substitute presented by the Delegate from Lexington presents two things for our consideration: In the first place, he wishes to prevent the Gov- ernor from pardoning before conviction, and in the second place, he wishes to com- pel the Governor, by a Constitutional pro- vision, to report to the Legislature the reasons influencing him in the exercise of the pardoning powerJ Now, let us look at these two things, but before looking at them, let us consider the position of the Delegate from Lexington himself. He is in favor of everything in the old Constitution that he is in favor of, and is in favor of all the new propositions advanced that he is in favor of. That is a pretty broad platform to. stand on. Why should we put a provision in this Constitu- tion requiring that the Legislature shall re- port to the Governor the grounds of his action. - - We are continually saying that it is the philosophy of our Government that there are three co-ordinate branches of our Gov- ernment: the Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Why not, then, require the Legislature to report to the Governor? It seems to me that the reasons given by the Delegate from Lexington for requiring this of the Governor are not good. He says he asks it so that the people may know. There are the public ofiices and the public records, and who stands there now and says we shall not see what is in there? Another proposition of the Delegate is that we should only incorporate these provisions in the Constitution that experience has demonstrated to be proper. That is a good rule, and I am willing to abide by it. I want to know of an instance where a man has been pardoned, and any man, be he high or" low, from any county in this State, who has come to the Executive Office to seek the reasons for the pardon and has been denied access to the records. I challenge any gentleman who knows of a single instance to give it. Mr. L. 'r. MOORE. Is there any law EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 35 Friday,] ASKEW. [November 7 requiring the Governor to show his reasons for granting the pardon? Mr. ASKEW. I know of no statutory law to that effect, but I know of no law which provides for any secret records. The Senate of the United States can have sessions with closed doors, but they write down all_ their doings. ' I still do not depart from my challenge. I want to know of an instance where a citizen has been denied access to any of the records here. I do not cbject to requiring that a record shall be kept by the Governor, but I am against requiring the Executive to re- port to another co-ordinatc branch of the government his reasons for acting. It is to be supposed that the Governor will have, as he has always has had, as much interest in Kentucky as any one,but if you compel him to report to the Legislature, you would compel him, if‘ he had committed malfeasance in ofiice, to furnish the tribunal having a right to prefer charges against him the evidence. I do not object to publicity. I believe in printer’s ink, and would favor any plan to publish, as they' occur, in an official gazette, all acts of the Governor with regard to-par- dons, so that the people may know every- thing that is done. While I have listened with interest to the remarks of the‘ Dele-. gate from Hart, and his views in this instance coincide with my own, yet 1 hold these opinions, with regard to this great oflice, uninfluenced by what he has said. I care not what the opinion of any one is unless it is backed up by right rea- _ soning. It is said that it is necessary to restrict this power which has been found essential in all governments; that its exercise is a usurpation of the func- tions of the Judicial Department. Now, the test of the matter is experience. The experience of Kentucky is against him. The Delegate from Madison referred to the action of Governor Bramlette in ex- ercising this power, by which he added honor to his name and to the party with which he acted. By his benign action we were saved the horrors which visited so many other States. I can cite another instance where this was and should have been exercised by the present Executive. A man was charged with a very grave offense against the laws of another State and he was confined in the jail of some of the counties below here for some very trivial offense. The Governor wisely and properly exercised his authority in this matter, and pardoned the man, and he was turned over to the authorities of the other State. The Delegate from Lexington says that experience shows that this power has been misused. I say experience is just the other way. I have run a good deal with that gentleman in the courts around here, one of us on one side, and the other on the other. He referred to a case that happened in my county. A man killed another for ‘lapping his wife’s jaws, and the Kentucky Senate, unanimously, or nearly unanimous- ly, petitioned the Governor to pardon that man, and he was pardoned. So far as I was concerned, it surprised me, although I never apprehended a conviction; and from a selfish standpoint, as a lawyer, I should be in favor of taking from the Governor the power to pardon before conviction. Why? Because, as a lawyer, it is my interest to compel the de- ’ fendant to stand trial, and employ counsel. As an attorney, I am employed to prose- cute or defend causes in the (ourts, and in such causes I am not retained to go before the Executive. I ask you if the experience of the gentleman is not against ‘that of most of tile members of this Convention. I think it certainly is, and that you should not take away from a branch of the government apower which it has had for so long, and which has been so rarely abused, and which has been found so useful in every civilized country on earth. Mr. ALLEN. I offer the same amend- ment to the substitute that I did to the report of the Committee. 36' EXECUTIVE DEPA R'I‘MEN'I‘. Friday,] BECKHAH—BURNAM. [November 7 _ Mr. BECKHAM. Being a. member of the Committee whose substitute offered by the Delegate from Lexington to the report of the Committee now under con- sideration, it is perhaps proper that I should say something on this question. At any rate I can explain the reasons which' will influence my vote. I regret to have to differ from a majority of the Committee whose report is offered as a substitute by the Delegate from Lexington, but I had some reasons in the Committee influencing my judgment and I will state them now. I have two rules that govern my action in this Convention: When a proposition is made to add a power to any department of the government that has not heretofore existed, it at once occurs to me, has the absence of that power caused any harm to the people of the State. If it has, I am ready to vote for its incorporation in the Con stitution. The other rule I have is when it is pro- pcsed to take from any department a power which has heretofore existed in the de- partment, the question suggests itself to me, has the existence of that power resulted in harm to the people, and has it been open to abuses? Governed by these rules, it seems to me we have a clear way to the solution of the question before us. Has the power of pardoning before judgment resulted in any harm to the people of the State‘? Has that power, as existing, been abused by any Executive to the detriment of the peo- ple of the State? I think not. If it has, it hasnever come to my mind, and there is this additional consideration that has ad- dressed itself I to my mind with great force. Here is a ico-ordinate department of government. We have a section of the present Constitution, and I think it will be a section of this Constitution, that none of the powers of one of the departments of government shall be exercised by either of the others. I do not wish to take from the ‘ Executive Department any power it now’ has, because I do not want to see the ofiice of Governor reduced to a nonentity in Kentucky. I do not want to see the Governor himself reduced to a figure-head, as I believe a provision of this sort will do. He is responsible to the people of Kentucky for his actions. there the people need have no fear of his exercising that power either before or after judgment. In addition to that, the very nature of the pardoning power requires that it should have some flexibility about it. The Execu- tive ought to have some discretion, some range within which to exercise that power, and not be bound by any cast-iron rules. Now, as to this latter branch of the sub- stitute requiring the Governor to report to the Legislature. The Governor of Ken- tucky is not a mere ministerial or clerical officer. He is clothed with a very great power, and he ought to have that power, and not be limited and bounded like a ministerial oflicer, the Clerk of a Court or a Master Commissioner, who has to report to a superior, and this would be making the Legislature the superior of thebExecu- tive Department. Mr. BURNAM. There is a section which provides that he shall, from time to time, give to the General Assembly infor- mation of the State of Kentucky, and recommend that they are considering such measure that he should deem necessary for them to consider. Is there anything wrong in requiring him to give information on this subject? Mr. BECKHAM. There is nothing wrong, but that refers to matters particu- larly within the province of the Legisla- ture. That‘ Cannot be said to refer to the pardoning power. A motion that the Committee rise, re- port progress, and ask leave to sit again, was here made and was carried, and the Chairman reported to the Convention that the Committee of the Whole had been in session, and according to order had under _ consideration the report of the Joint Com- mittee on Executive and Ministerial Ofli- cers, had made progress, and ask leave to sit again, which report was adopted by the Convention. _ THE CONVENTION. Mr. MACKOY. I move that we adjourn. Mr. FARMER. I move that we take a recess and meet again at-3 o’clock. , A vote being taken on the motion of the Delegate from Henderson, it was lost. The motion of Mr. Mackoy was carried. and the Convention then adjourned. if we put a proper man Qonncntion Record ‘ KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1 .] FRANKFURT, NOVEMBER 8, 1890. [NO. 47. Saturday,] MOORE-——PETRIE—GRAHAM—I'IARRIS—WOOD. [November 8 . The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened wlth prayer by the Rev. Mr. Blayney. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings \was read and approved. Communication. Etc, The PRESIDENT. The first thing in "order will be the reception of petitions. If ‘there are no petitions, reports from Stand- ing Committees. If none, reports-from Special Committees. . Mr. J. H. MOORE. I have a communi- cation from the County Judge of Mercer county setting forth the indebtedness of that county. The, PRESIDENT. The communica- tion will be referred to the Special Com- mittee. Mr. PETRIE. I have a similar com- munication from Todd county. The PRESIDENT. The same reference "will be made. Mr. GRAHAM. I have a petition which 'I desire to have referred to the Committee -on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, ‘the petition will be so referred. Mr. HARRIS. I have a communication from the Clerk of the county of Simpson, concerning the indebtedness of that county, and also a communication from the Mayor of the town of Franklin, which I desire to have referred to the Special Committee. The PRESIDENT. The communica- ' _‘tion will be so referred. Mr. BUCHANAN. I have a communi- cation from Whitley county, concerning the indebtedness of that county. The PRESIDENT. The same reference will be had. Mr. WOOD. I offer two resolutions. The resolutions read, as follows: Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the Governor and Attorney-Gen- eral of the State, between the 15th and 30th days of January and July of each year, to go to the Treasury, without previous notice being given to the Treasurer, and make an examination of the cash balance, as shown by the books and records of said oflice; to publish in at least two of the leading news- papers of the State the fact that they have done so, and the exact condition of the Treasury on those days. The resolution was referred to the Com- mittee on Legislative Department. Resolved, That no regularly elected or appointed ofiicer of this Convention shall receive any pay while his duties are being performed by pro tem. oflicers; but that the said pro tem. oflicers shall receive the same compensation per diem that is allowed - the regularly elected or appointed offl- 061‘. Q Referred to the Committee on Printing and Accounts. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move that at 1 o’clock to-day, inst'eadflof adjourning, we take a recess until 3 o’clock this after- noon. ' Mr. ZACK PHELPS. motion. A vote being taken, the motion was lost. Mr. BECKHAM. I move the Conven- tion resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for further consideration of the re- I second the 2 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] AUXIER. [November 8.. port of the Joint Committee on Executive and Ministerial Oflicers. A vote being taken, the motion car- ried, and the Delegate from Bullitt took the Chair as Chairman of the COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the section and the substitute which was under consideration at the time the Committee arose yesterday. The CLERK. The section under con- sideration was section 10: He shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, commute sentences, grant re- prieves and pardons, except in case of im- peachment. In cases of treason he shall have power to grant reprieves until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, in which the power of pardoning shall be vested; but he shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sheriff or Common- wealth’s Attorney in penal or criminal cases. To which section the Delegate from the county of Caldwell moves to amend by strik- ing out the words “Clerk, Sheriff or Comm on- wealth’s Attorney,” and insert the words “of any ofiicer;” to which section the Dele- gate from the city of Lexington has offered the following. substitute: “The Governor shall have the right to grant reprieves, re— missions, pardons and commutation of sentence after conviction for all offenses, except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions and with such restric- tions and limitation as he may think proper. ‘ Upon conviction for treason, the Governor shall have power to suspend the execution of sentence until the case shall be reported to the General Assembly at its next meet- ing, when the General Assembly shall either pardon or direct the execution of the sentence or grant a further reprieve. The Governor shall communicate to the General Assembly at the beginning of every session every case of reprieve, remission or com- mutation of sentence, stating the name of the person, the crime for which he was con- victed, the sentence, its date, the date of pardon, reprieve, remission or commutationr and the reasons for granting the same... But the Governor shall have no power to- remit the fees of Clerk, Sheriff or Common-- wealth’s Attorney in penal or criminal cases.” The Delegate from the county of Caldwell moves to amend said substitute by striking out the words, “Clerk, Sheriff or- Commonwealth’s Attorney,” and insert the words “of any ofliicer.” The Delegate from Russell moves to amend the substitute- by striking out the words, “after convic- tion,” in the second line. Mr. AUXIER. I did not at first intend to speak on this question at all, but after- the discussion took the turn it did, I con- cluded that it was my duty to make some remarks during the consideration of this- question. Although a member Committee on ‘Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure, I was not present at. the time the resolution was adopted in the Committee in reference to the power of the Governor to remit fines and pardon people for crime; it becomes my duty to differ- with the majority of that Committee- Which made the report ofl’ered by the Dele— gate from Lexington. It is either right or not right to vest in our Chief Executive the power of pardon-4 ing. As for myself, if he is allowed any power of pardoning at all, I can see more- reasons why he should exercise it before a conviction than afterwards. There are many instances in which this Executive ‘clemency ought to be exercised before a conviction. Now, it is an error on the part of the gentlemen on the other side of this question to argue, if you pardon a man before conviction it is violating the ancient doctrine‘ that a man is presumed to‘ be innocent until the contrary is proved. I differ Widely with the gentlemen on that question. Whenever a man applies to' the- Chief Executive for pardon, it is tacitly ad- mitting that he is guilty. It is not the innocent man who applies to the Governor‘ for pardon. It is the guilty man; it. of the- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 3 [November 8. Saturday,] AUXIER. is the man who, by the strict and State, Mr. Henry T. Stanton, of our Capi- rigid rule and letter of the law, tal. In his “ Moneyless Man ” he says; has been guilty of some violation of the law; and yet there are considerations I connected with his offense that entitle him to Executive clemency. There are many technical violations of the law where a man has really been guilty of offense against the statute of his State, where he has, under heat and passion, or under excitement, gone farther than the law entitled him to go, and yet there are incidents connected with the offense that the benign principle of ' mercy reaches out and extends to him this pardon which he ought to have. There- fore, it is an error on the part of the gen- tlemen to say, if you pardon before conviction it is a violation of the rule that a man is presumed to be innocent. If he is innocent, he does not have to apply to the Governor at all. It is presumed, if he is innocent, he can go before a Court and jury, and there vindicate himself, and establish his innocence. Consequently, there is no necessity for a pardon for an innocent man. The objection I have to restricting the power of the Chief Execu- tive of this State is, that in doing so you are legislating for the rich, and not for the poor. I ask the gentlemen on the other side why the necessity of compelling a man without means to employ counsel to go before his Judge and jury, be found guilty, incarcerated in jail, humiliated, taking every dollar of property he has to employ his counsel, when everybody admits, under this great and benign prin- ciple of mercy, the pardon-ing power ought to be exercised. I am not in favor of closing the door to the poor people of the Commonwealth, and compelling them to go throughthe legal forms, when Judge, Commonwealth’s Attorney, citizens, neigh- bors and officers of the county all will agree bytheir petitions that the party ought not to be put through trial. In this connec- tion, I will just refer to one clause, written by the poet-laureate of our own beloved “Is there no secret place on the face of the earth Where charity dwelletu, where virtue has birth’! Where bosoms in mercy and kindness will heave, Where the poor and the wretched shall ask and re- Is tlfgi‘iientlo place at all where a knock from the poor Will bring a kind angel to open the door ? Ah, search the wide world wherever you can, There is no open door for a. Moneyless Man.” This measure proposes to close forever the door of pardon to the “moneyless man.” It proposes to open it to the rich, who is able to ‘,employ counsel and go through the legal forms of trial; and yet, at the same time, if the man is poor, this resolution cuts him out from going to the Governor before he employs his counsel, and appealing to the Chief Magistrate of the State, present- ing his letters for pardon. It forever cuts him off, and for that reason I am opposed to it. Why, one gentleman, I will not mention his name, has said to me, “I am surprised you oppose this motion; you are a lawyer. It cuts you out of fees and debars you from the privilege of defending your clients in Court.” Although I am a law- yer, and although there are a majority of this Convention who pursue that honorable profession, I wish to say on this occasion that I came not here to represent the legal fra- ternity any more than the blacksmith, the plowman, carpenter and laborer in the city and in the country. But I am proud to say, as one of the followers of Blackstone, that the country has never been unsafe in the hands of this great profession. I am proud‘ to say that every President of the United States, except four. have been law- yers of distinction and ability. A majority of the Congress and the Senate of the United States, and generally of the legis- lative bodies of the several States of this grand Union, have belonged to the legal fraternity. I have never seen any disposi- tion on the part of the lawyer to oppress the poor, or take from them the inalienable rights that God has given them. I am proud that I belong to _that profession which gives equal rights and equal jus- 4 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. fraternity that we represent. stated, the pardoning power must exist somewhere. Saturday,] AUXIER. [November 8 . tice to the rich and to the poor. I am glad that the profession I belong to recognizes the doctrine that all we have, all we eat, an we wear, all we subsist upon, and the very books we read, are brought out of the soil. We trace nothing we have to any source, except to the production of the soil, and the tiller of that soil needs protection by this Constitutional Conven- tion—by this supreme power of Kentucky to-day" assembled for the purpose of making the Constitution. These poor people, these laboring people, these tillers of the soil, :and these laborers in their shops, are as much entitled to protection as the legal As I have It is either right to have it, -or it is wrong; and I urge it is of infinite necessity to vest that power somewhere. I know of no worthier recipient to wield the exercise of that power than the Governor ‘of our Commonwealth; and, in saying that, I do not pass it as a personal compliment on our present Governor. I speak of the oflice of Governor from the foundation of our State to the present time; and when I consider those excellent men who have oc- cupied’ that Chair from the beginning of the history of this Commonwealth to the present day, I find no great mistakes that they have made. Fallible as the Governor may be, liable to be imposed upon by mis- representations and influences being brought to bear upon him, there are no dangers, no wrongs perpetrated by the exercise of this power of pardoning before conviction but what can be perpetrated as well after con- viction as before. As I said, the Governor may be imposed upon; but that is the fault of the people, and not of him who exercises this power. I believe it would be well enough, although no amendment of that kind has been offered, it might be a good thing to provide that in this Constitution, before any petition should be acted upon by the Governor, that the applicant for pardon should advertise in the county newspapers, where the offense was committed, at least two weeks, that he intended to make an application to the Governor for pardon, or if there be no newspaper in the county, that he advertise on the Court-house door for at least two or three weeks, so that his neighbors and acquaintances and civil authorities should have notice that applica- tion for the pardon was going to be made. Such a restriction as that I would be in favor of. That would give every citizen who is interested the power to send up a remonstrance against the exercise of this pardoning power, if they thought proper to do so. But simply to step in, as Delilah did with her shears upon the head of Sam- son, and take from the Governor the power to remit fines, and grant reprieves and par- dons, simply because the man has not been convicted, is unreasonable. I have never yet seen or‘heard upon this floor a good reason urged for it. As said by the gentle- man yesterday, the Executive is one of the coordinate branches of our State Govern- ment, and there have been reasons urged .why he should be restricted in the use of the pardoning power. Why, sir, have we not already in the history of this Common- wealth had instances in which this power should have been exercised before convic- tion ‘? I remember the day, shortly after the late unpleasantness through which we all passed, the bloody struggle in which so many precious lives were lost; the North and the South, and the East and the West suffered alike; when the Confederate soldier returnedto the State of Kentucky, the Congress of the United States had passed an act by which a Federal soldier, if he was indicted in any of the Courts of the Commonwealth, could by petition transfer his case to the United States Court, and there twelve months‘ limitation bar any prosecution against him. The Congress of this great nation provided protection for her soldier, who in an unguarded moment, while serving his country, violated some laws of this Commonwealth of ours EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] AUXIER. [November 8. Ample protection was shown him, but for the "Confederate no such remedy existed. To. him who happened to be indicted the future looked dark and as misty as the fogs upon the Mississippi river; indictment hanging over him for as some offense which, unthoughtedly, he committed while passing through the country under the command of his ofiicer; arrested by the sherifi‘ of the county, a gloom was Over him, the Walls of the peni- tentiary staring him in the. face. No remedy, no relief, hopeless, restless, and, I may say, desperate was his situation. But all at Once, in looking out, he beheld his Moses, his deliverer, his relief, his guiding star, his hope; and that hope was in the Executive clemency of Bramlette, who was Governor of this Commonwealth. Does any man censure him? wrong in some particular instance ; he may have pardoned a man who ought not to have been pardoned; but is there a man in this Convention who censures him for that great, universal and liberal principle in re- lieving those who, in an unguarded mo- ment, committed Offenses which, in time of peace, they would not have done? Is there a man in this House who regrets the exer- cise of that Executive clemency by Gov- ‘ ernor Bramlette before indictment, judg- ment or conviction? If there be nothing else in the history of this State that would justify the retention of this power to the Governor in the Constitution, that example, as a matter of history, ought to be sufiie cient to determine the mind of every Dele- gate in this Convention to not cut off the power of the Governor. We do not elect bad men to the office of Governor. We elect men of judgment, men of more than ordinary capacity, men who are not law- less or disposed to uphold lawlessness. We must take it for granted that the people in future ‘generations will have as much wisdom to exercise such judg- ment,and be as pure as we have been in the past; and although gentlemen may get up He may have done s. and cite twenty instances, or fifty instances in which the Governor ought not to have granted a pardon, you cannot point to more Instances where he ought to have granted pardon after conviction than you can where he ought to have granted pardon before conviction. N Ow, the Constitution of the United States had a provision simi- lar to ours. In speaking of the President, it says he shall have power to grant re- prieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeach- ment. There is no clause in the Federal Constitution restricting the President to use pardoning power after conviction, and I venture that the day will never come when the people of this great nation of ours will inhibit their President from exer- cising pardoning power before conviction. vjWhy the necessity in Kentucky to-day for putting that inhibition upon our Governor? I see no reason for it under the sun. If he should grant pardon improperly before conviction, the same Governor would grant it improperly after conviction. not the time when the pardon is granted that is material, except that he may relieve the defendant from the penalty of the law. I have been told, since I came to Frank- fort, in one of the counties of this Com- monwealth, not very long ago, a young man was indicted for the offense of abor- tion on a young woman; that afterwards they married ; they lived together in peace; that it was a happy union, and that that young man, in order to cover up the dis- grace upon his wife and relieve, himself after he married the W0- man, went to the Governor and ob- tained a pardon. Is there a man in this body who would censure the Governor for . exercising his clemency in a case of this kind? You would subject him to the in- dignity of a trial, swearing juries, cost the State five hundred dollars, and the moment a verdict is rendered, sign a petition to the Governor to pardon him. Why subject him to trial at all? Why not let the Gov- It is 6 7 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] AUXIER. [November 8 . ernor pardon, in such instances as this, without subjecting the‘ party to judicial I was told by the gentle- man from Woodford on yesterday that investigation. there is a gentleman now here from Padu- cab with a petition to the Governor to pardon a little boy eleven or twelve years old, who one day went to a room and took a dollar and fifteen cents in money, and a policeman was standing on the street and saw every movement, could have pre- vented that boy from committing the crime, but stood by and. waited until he went into the room and came back with the money, arrested him, searched him, and had him indicted. That boy was said to be a weak-minded boy. Would you blame the Governor for exercising power before conviction to save the mother of that boy from the heart-rending pangs of distress which would follow conviction? Under those circumstances, who was most guilty of offense? The policeman who stood by, and could have prevented it, or the little boy who inadvertently went and took that money? I tell you there are circum- stances and instances throughout this Com- monwealth in which the Chief Executive ought to exercise this power. I say no Convention or legislative body ought to take upon themselves the responsibility to declare that, under no circumstances, should he exercise this power before conviction. Are you going to limit the Chief Executive and say he is simply an orna- ment, a passive object to look at, a dummy without discretion or reason? Are you go- ing to deny to the people of the Common- wealth the judgment or discretion of elect- ing a competent man to investigate peti- tions that come before him? I claim for the people of Kentucky the right and ca- pacity of free government. Iclaini that they are able and competent to choose their officers, and in choosing them I believe they will in the future, as they have in the past, select such men as we can trust, and to whom we can confide the powers that have granting pardons. éi’no Governor has been accused of it; but heretofore existed and pertain to the pre- rogative of our Chief Magistrate. the other side have not cited instances of flagrant outrages perpetrated by our Gov- Men on ernors that justify the position they have taken in this case. Because a Governor at some time, in some particular instance, has made a mistake in granting a pardon, is no reason why he should be shorn forever of the right to exercise it. I am rather conservative in my ideas about changing Constitutions, and yet I concede we have a right to make any change we think proper in this document before us; but before it is done, there should be some reason urged why the change should be made. Our present Governor has not been accused of violating law and going to the extreme in With a few exceptions, remember this, that restricting his power of pardon to its exercise after conviction does not deprive him of the right and power to do wrong if he wants to do wrong. If he wants to improperly grant pardons, un- der this amendment all he has to do is to wait until verdict of conviction, and then he can interpose his clemency. He can exercise that great benign principle of mercy and forgiveness after conviction when he ought, in fact, exercise it before, and not impose upon the poor criminal the duty, the responsibility and the hardship of having to employ counsel. If he ought to be pardoned at all‘, he ought to be pardoned before conviction. Why, as a “matter of cost to the State, there are many prosecutions where the offender ought to be pardoned,where it would cost the Common- wealth from one to five thousand dollars; and yet gentlemen Want to impose upon the State that cost, inflict on the tax-payers of the Commonwealth that burden, just simply because they are ‘opposed to pardon- ing a man before trial. All admit he ought to be pardoned; but, no; let us make - him employ a lawyer; let us make him go into Court; let us impose upon him the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 7 Saturday,] AUXIER—AsKEw-Mooan. [November 8 . forms, the hardships, the nerve-straining of :a trial, and then it will be all right for the Governor to give him a pardon. There is no reason for this. On the contrary, the reasons are all against it. ' Now, some men came here with the be- lief that it was better to appoint a Pardon- .ing Board, that they might investigate all questions of pardon; but I am opposed to it. I know of no repository safer wherein to "vest this power than the Governor. The Governor is not going to appoint three Commissioners better than himself; more humane than himself; more just than him- :self; more cautious than himself, to act upon applications for pardons. As the Delegate from Hart yesterday said, we sought not to take all the responsibility from the Governor; confide in him that he will do right, and impose upon him the _re— .sponsibility. Let him act; let him work; let him investigate; and if he thinks a man ought to be pardoned either before or after conviction, give him the power to pardon him. Now, there is one part of this resolution I am not fighting; and when the time comes to vote on it, I think I shall ask for a di- vision of the question. I do not see any .good- reason why the Governor should not report to the Legislature the reasons why he granted a pardon. I do not think that would be subjecting our Governor to humil- iation, but it would allow another co-ordi- nate branch of the government to know the ;reasons that influenced him. I think, when it comes to a vote, I shall support that part -of i the resolution ; but I shall never, as .long as my tongue can speak or my mind can think, as long as I have a purpose in my heart, consent, by my vote, or by any suggestion I shall make, to take the power from our Governor the right to pardon before conviction, when in many cases that .is the only time it ought to be exercised; when in many instances the thing to be .avoided is disgrace, which could not be es- .caped from after conviction. And now, to-day and forever, as long as this question is before us, I shall fight that proposition with all the zeal and energy of my mind, strength and body. Mr. MOORE. So far as the first branch of the proposition is concerned, I have not thought much about it; but it seems to me that the views presented against it are the very strongest arguments that could have been adduced in its favor. If there were no other reasons given why this power should be taken from the Executive, the cases cited by the gentleman last on the floor and the one mentioned by the Delegate from Scott county should be ample and suffi- cient. The idea that a man who has committed one of the most heinous offenses that can be committed, and yet, because he chooses to marry the woman on whom he commit- ted the offense, that that should wipe out the crime, as suggested by the Delegate from Pike, is the most astounding proposi- tion I ever heard of in a deliberative body. It might do for a jury, but it will not do for a Constitutional Convention. Then, as to the case cited by the Dele- gate from Scott county : the Governor did not know under what provocation the man slapped the woman, or any thing about that, and yet it is cited as a case in which the Governor ought to have exercised his right of pardoning without investigating the circumstances. _ Mr. ASKEW. I never used such words. I never said he ought or he ought not. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I never said you said he ought or ought not. It is the case‘ cited that I am talking of. I do not want it to go out to the world that this Conven- tion has decided that if a man slaps a woman in the face it justifies another man in going out and shooting him down; and yet, in a nutshell, that is what it means when it is said that the Governor should have exercised this‘ power in a case of that kind before trial. The gentlemen upon the other side say that We cannot cite cases 8 ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] MOORE. ' [November 8- where it has been wrongfully exercised. I submit, without any reflection whatever upon the Executives who exercised the power in those cases, that the instances they have adduced demonstrate the fault of the sys- tem. ‘The hearing before the Governor is err part6, and consists of the statements of the representatives and the friends of the man seeking the pardon. It is no judicial investigation at all. There is nothing upon which the Executive can exercise his judg- ment, except the simple ea: part6 state- ments, and that of the side interested in obtaining the pardon. There is a wonder- ful apprehension expressed that the Gov- ernor will be shorn of his power—that he will become a dummy. This is the first time in my life that I have ever heard that the Chief Executive of the State was elected for the purpose of granting pardons or reprieves. This is only an incident to the power of the Executive, and one which I doubt very much should be exercised by him without the aid of some Board of Counselors established for that purpose. In some States he cannot exercise it without the_consent of the Senate. I say in no instance should the Governor be allowed to exercise such power before there has been a judicial investigation and the facts of the case are developed upon which ‘he may exercise his judgment. The distinguished gentleman from the county of Pike says that it is in behalf of the poor that he talks; that the poor cannot employ counsel. My observation is that this power has not been exercised in behalf _of the poor always, indeed not frequently. He makes the further statement that no man asks for par- don except he is guilty. I say if he is guilty, he certainly ought to bear the ex- penses of a trial to ascertain under what circumstances he has been guilty. Are we to be told that because a man chooses to come in and confess his guilt, that there must be no judicial investigation of it be- cause it will cost him something, and will cost the State something to find out the facts in regard to the guilt? That is a mostv astounding and startling proposition. It. seems to me a confession of the whole‘ thing when it is stated that no man applies- except the guilty. But they say that there’ are some cases where men are technically guilty; that they ought not to be punished- That may be true; but I say it would be a. good deal better to provide by law for such cases than to make them examples or cite them as reasons why this autocratic power should be placed in the hands of an oflicer who can set at defiance the legislation of the State at any time he sees fit to do so. Talk about taking power from the Execu- tive! I say whenever he exercises this par- doning power before judgment he takes- from the judicial department of the gov- ernment that which properly belongs to it. It is for the judiciary to ascertain all the facts connected with the guilt of the criminal, all the circumstances surrounding it, and it is an assumption upon the part of the Executive—not an assumption, because- it is a power granted to him—but it is grant-- ing him a power to interfere with the judiciary which I say should not be al-> lowed to the Executive. I have as much respect for the Governor of the State of' Kentucky as I have for any man in the Commonwealth, and as much respect for the- ' past Governors to whom allusions have been made, but I am not one who proposes to vest. autocratic power in the Governor, any more than in any one else in the Common» wealth. I do not believe, as a general thing, they are any better than many other men;: I would not be in favor of vesting in any one the autocratic power to interfere' with the judiciary. I am not in favor of allowing it to the Executive of the State. Gentlemen seem to think there have been. no complaints made about the exercise of the pardoning power. If there has been- any one thing discussed more than another- in the country from which I come, it is the: exercise of this power by the Governor. Unintentionally, I have no doubt, but it. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 9 Saturday,] MOORE—ALLEN. [November 8 . has encouraged violations of the criminal law. Offenders against the criminal law, in every branch, have been pardoned, or fines and forfeitures have been remitted, as we all know. Take the history of the Commonwealth in regard to pardons and remissions, as given to us by the news- papers, and that is the only way we can get such information, unless in a case like the present Governor, who has kept a rec- ord of such things; but that has been a matter of pleasure with him, not a duty; but in the past the only evidence we have had of the exercise of this power has been in newspaper reports, where they have pro- tested against the outrages committed on the criminal laws of the State in their par- ticular sections. I want to call the atten- tion of this body to the fact that, as far back as 1849. when that talented and gifted young man who preceded me, the lamented Hood—at least he represented at that time one of the counties I now do— spoke upon this subject. Here is what he said in regard to it at that time: That instead of having been a mantle in the hands of the Executive, to be thrown over the innocent or unfortunate, to shield and protect them from unmerited suffer- ing, it has too frequently been instrumental in rescuing the guilty murderer from that punishment which the malignity of his crime so richly deserved; that instead of operating in particular cases in mitigation of the rigid rules of law, which must be general in its provisions, and may, therefore, sometimes be oppressive, it has been in— strumental in turning lawless felons loose again upon society to commit even more daring outrages. ' That was repeated by the then distin- guished Delegate from the county of Bour- bon, Mr. Davis, who said: I have heard such complaints ever since my boyhood, that the exercise of this power under our Constitution has been subject to some abuse, and some considerable abuse, too. I do not know how the present Executive has exercised this power to remit fines and forfeitures, and to grant pardons, buti a single instance, and that through publications in the newspapers; but for twenty-five years I have heard frequent and constant complaints of the abuse of this power, and especially in regard to the- remission of fines and forfeitures. ' i I know of a case, not occurring during the existence of the term of the present incumbent, where bond had been given to- the Commonwealth, by sureties worth $500,- 000, for the express purpose of letting the criminal escape and paying it; but before- judgment could be obtained upon the bond, the Governor exercised his high power of' remitting every part of it, not even except- ing the fees of the officers. I know of an- other instance where the representatives of' the poor have been absolutely refused clem- ency in a case where they attempted to bring to justice the party they were bondsmen for. You may say that is one- in stance, but that it is an instance I know of. How many more there are in the Common- wealth I do not know. I am not arguing this upon personal ground, but upon prin- ciple; and upon principle I say the power- to pardon before conviction should not exist- in the Governor, and when it does exist, he- ought to be required to show to the people‘ of the Commonwealth upon what he makes remissions of fines and grants reprieves and pardons. Now, my opinion is, that there will be- an ‘open clause in the Constitution we make. It may be found necessary in the future to require the Senate, or some other body, to- act with the Executive; until that time, I say, we want the data upon which action is‘ bad. It is not an imputation 011 the Gov-a ernor to say to him, “you have pardoned I It is no- this man, give us the reason.” intrenchment on his power, but is simply asking him to give the reason why he ex-- ercised that power, and will systematize this matter. For these reasons, I shall support the substitute of the gentleman from Lexington. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I desire to offer a. substitute for section 10. The substitute was read, and is as follows a. 10 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] ALLEN—WHITAKER. [November 8 . He shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, commute sentences and grant pardons, except in cases of treason and im- peaehment. In cases of treason he may ,grant reprieves until the end of the next .‘session of the General Assembly, in which department the power of pardoning shall be vested; but he shall have no power to remit the fees of any officer in penal or criminal cases. He shall keep in his oflice a record of all remissions of fines and for- feitures, commutations of sentences and granting of pardons, the reasons why granted, and the petitions and letters re- ferring to each, subject to the inspection of citizens of the State and the call of the General Assembly. Mr. WHITAKER. The Governor of ‘the State is an officer at the head of the Executive Department. He exercises no powers, except such as have been delegated to him. Now. the question is, what are the powers, and to what extent shall they be delegated in this new Constitution? I have listened to the arguments this morning with some interest. I have heard the argu- ment advanced that it was a discrimination between the poor and the rich. I cannot .adopt that sentiment at all. If the poor are to have immunity through the Execu- tive pleasure and the rich are not to have it, it makes a distinction between citizens as much as to make it for the rich and against the poor. I do not adopt that as an argument in the case at all. The main question here is, shall the Executive be vested with the pardoning power; and if .so, to what extent? What powers is he to ‘exercise? Some take the ground he should have the power t'o pardon after conviction, @but not before. It seems to me if you can trust the Governor to pardon a man after he has been convicted you can trust him as well before conviction. The argument seems to be, that a man is presumed to be innocent by the law (which is true) until he is proven to be guilty; and, therefore, whenever the Governor is asked to pardon before conviction, he is asked to say that the man is guilty without a trial, for none need pardon except the guilty, and that to pardon a man from a charge of crime is re- versing the law, which presumes him to be innocent, because if innocent he needs no pardon. I look on that question in a dif- ferent light from what it has been discussed. No man in the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky can be charged with crime save by a grand jury of sixteen men. That grand jury sit by themselves as an inquisitorial power sworn to do justice and right as much so as a petit jury when they try the ques- tion of guilt or innocence. They accuse a man of crime upon what? Not upon rumor, not upon their own volition, but upon legal testimony delivered to them upon the oaths of witnesses. Upon that they charge a man with crime. Now, let us look at that a minute. Thatis an ex parte hearing. The defendant is not heard in that tribunal. To be sure, testimony in his favor may be heard if the grand jury desires it; but no defense . can be made before- the grand jury. Now,‘ when a person presents his petition to the Governor, what does he present? Not a mere petition to be pardoned. Hesets forth the circumstances that can be shown by re- liable witnesses of the vicinage that there has been a mistake in the charge of crime against him, and he asks the Governor to excuse him. You question the wisdom of allowing the power to pardon before conviction, and yet are willing to give the power to pardon after, conviction. You say he shall not have the power to pardon a man from what? From a charge of crime. That is what he is pardoned from, on proof which is competent and truthful that the man is not guilty. Would not you do it? Who, when a case is made out of that kind, would not be willing to intrust that power to the Governor of the State, a man who has been so upright and has made such a record in the community and in the State that the people are willing to make him Governor and put him at the head of the Executive Department? Who would not trust him upon that question, and would trust him to pardon after conviction? I do EXECUTI VE DEPARTMENT. 11 Saturday,] not adopt any of the ideas about the expense being saved. That is not an argument with me, for I hold that the State Treasury should be exhausted and replenished, and exhausted again, if the good people of the Commonwealth need protection against criminals. They must and should be pro- tected, and the Treasury should be called upon to devote its treasure for the protec- tion of the innocent and the punishment‘ of the guilty. I only throw out these thoughts for others to elaborate for me. I can trust the Governor with the power to pardon before as well as after conviction. I am not willing for it to go out that the people of Kentucky are willing to elect a Gov- ernor and then take from him certain pow- ers, because they are afraid that he will become a criminal, and do wrong, and misuse the power granted, and fail to pro- tect the Commonwealth. It is a contradic- tion of terms. I am willing to trust the Governor as we have for the last forty-one years. Of course all Governors are human and are liable to err. It is human nature ‘to err, it is divine to forgive. When for- giveness is necessary, and is exercised with prudence, judgment and care, it is not only the highest attribute of human nature, but is necessary for the protection of the people of the Commonwealth. Mr. HOPKINS. I have listened in. vain to the arguments which have been made to hear some good reason why the section of the Constitution under consideration, under which w‘é have lived so long, should be changed. No laws have ever been made which have not had objectionable features. The genius of man has failed to devise laws which are not more or less susceptible of being misapplied, and the world has been content throughout all ages to adopt such rules for its action as come, nearest to se- curing the general welfare and good of the community. While the subject under discussion has been lengthily discussed, it has not been shown that the law, as it now exists, has WHITAKER—HOPKINS. [Novembeii 8. been abused, or that the application of it has wrought evil in more instances than it has wrought good. On the other hand, I deny that it has. The Constitution of the United States, framed over a bun- dred years ago, has a ‘similar provision to that reported by the Committee, only that it goes farther. It does not limit the pardoning power of the President, except in cases of. impeachment. ' It allows him, in cases of treason, to pardon the offender; and during the late war, when our land was drenched in blood, and the clank of arms was heard from ocean to ocean, the magnanimous and illustrious Abraham Lincoln, though surrounded by adverse sen— timent, by men prejudiced against the South, and against those in rebellion against the Constitution of the. United States, dared to exercise that power, and in many instances pardoned men who were charged with crime against the United States before they had been tried. Did it stop there? No. After the war had closed, and after the van- quished had bended their knees in sub- mission to the victor, President Grant, in the magnanimity of his soul, extended it to numerous Southern men, who had met him on the battle-field and fought to crush the Union. And I dare say there may be Delegates on this floor who owed their freedom to the exercise of this power by him. The Constitution of this State, adopted in 1792, contained a similar provision to that reported by the Committee. So did those adopted in 1799 and 1849. It is now proposed to be re-incorporated in the Con- stitution of 1890. It is not necessary to reiterate what has been said by other Delegates. There are cases within my personal knowledge where it has worked infinite good. I can cite one from the county of Lawrence, which county the Delegate from Boyd represents. Go back ten years to the day when that county was aroused by a sentiment that the law was not being enforced; that it was not meet— 12 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. SatdrdayJ HOPKINS. [November 8 . ing the demands of justice; that the vio- lators of law were allowed to stalk abroad unmolested. Some of the best men in the county banded themselves together, and were called Ku-Klux. The law could not recognize such a body, and the power of the law was brought to bear, and hundreds and hundreds of those men were indicted. It threatened a revolution. The power of the county-was unable to vmeet it, Judges were unable to exercise the duties imposed upon them. They feared the power of the men who had been dragged on and on until they had gotten to a point where there was no chance to retrace their steps. They had been dragged into it because the State failed to do its duty, and put down crime. They were threatened to be arraigned before the bar of justice, and sent to the penitentiary for violation of the law. What occurred? The Judge of the dis- trict came to the Governor, and presented the facts. and, after a mature consideration of the matter, the Governor directed him to go home, and say to those people to come in and surrender themselves to the law, lay aside the organizations they had formed, promise in the future to be good citizens, and they should not be punished. The re- sult was that one day over a hundred and fifty men came into the town of Louisa, executed bond, the Governor interposed and pardoned them, and to-day those men are among the best citizens of that county. Would it' have accomplished any good to have gone on, and at a cost of thousands of dollars and many lives to have put that organization down by the strong arm of the law? Was it not policy, and was it not better for the State and the in- terests of the community that it should be‘ settled in a more peaceable and amicable manner? It is with some degree of diflidence that I refer in a matter like this to one of the counties I represent,but I can give an illus— tration from the recently created county of Knott. Within her borders lawless men had congregated because they felt they were safe, being so remote from the law-enforc- ing power of the State. They caused a terrible commotion. Bloodshed and mur— der terrifiedv the good citizens of the county until the power of the county was unable to suppress it. Men were afraid to obey summons to arrest. What was the result‘? I have it that the Sheriff came to this city no longer ago than last spring, presented the case to the Governor that he was un- able to suppress the lawlessness, and that the good people of the county were afraid to assist him to do so, and asked for troops or some other means of quieting the trouble. The result was, in a few days after the Sheriff returned home, two cases of guns belonging to the State, with ample ammunition followed him. Those guns were hauled into the town of Hindman, and there in broad daylight were distributed to twenty or thirty of the best citizens, who were sworn in as police- men, and the word went out that whoever used those guns in discharge and defense of the law should not be punished. The re- sult is that not a single outrage has occurred in that county from that day to this. I do not know that the Governor sent such a message. I do not know that he gave authority for any such statement, but he had a right to do it, and the fact that it was given out that he had done it, and that these ofiicers of the law were not only armed with State arms, but were pledged that if they used them in defense of the law they should never be brought to trial, solved the difliculty in that case, and the law-breaking element was disbanded, peace and harmony restored, and you no longer hear the report circulated that the Judge of the Court is afraid to discharge his duty. The good people of the county, recognizing that they have behind them public sentimentand the good will of the Chief Executive of the State, have succeeded in enforcing the law, and to- day that county stands am on g the most peace- EXECUTI VE DEPARTMENT. 13 the Executive Department. .at the time he committed it. .seem then that when the law has provided discovered afterwards. ‘exist when the trial took place. _power to pardon a person, if he was ./ Saturday,] CAEROLL—MODEEMOTT. [November 8. able and law-abiding counties in the State. These are some of the reasons why I insist upon retaining for the Executive that power which he has so long had the right to exercise, and which, except in one or two isolated cases, referredto on this floor, has always been properly applied. I hope that the wisdom of this Conven- tion will not change the law which our forefathers made, and which has become sanctified by time. Mr. CARROLL. The subject we are now discussing is one of great interest to the people of the State, because it is seldom that any person is charged with or con- victed of crime that his friends or himself do not at once seek to obtain for him a pardon. Hence the pardoning power is a matter of general interest to the people, as it is felt in every precinct, district and county in the State. It seems to me that the power to pardon before conviction ought not to be vested in My reasons We have en- acted certain laws for the protection of right and punishment of wrong. We have upon our statutes certain laws that pro- vide whenever a man commits a crime he shall be punished for it in a certain way; that he shall be indicted by a Grand Jury, be tried by a petit jury before a Court, and, if convicted of crime, shall suffer the penalty imposed by law for its commission It would for thinking so are these. these tribunals and these methods for the punishment of crime, by which every man charged with an offense can obtain a fair- .and impartial trial, that when such a trial is had and the man is either convicted or ac- quitted, he and the Commonwealth ought to be satisfied. But it may occur that facts, which are not developed on the trial, are There may arise extenuating circumstances that did not Hence the wrongfully convicted, ought to be vested in some person in order that exact and equal justice may be done both to the accused and to the Commonwealth; but until a man has been found guilty in the tribunals appointed for that purpose, what right has the Executive of the State to interfere with the exercise of the func- tions of the Judicial Department, and take from it the powers vested in it by the laws and the Constitution? What right. has the Executive of the State to say to a person accused of crime, that although We have provided Courts for your trial; although we have provided means by which you can obtain a fair and impartial hearing; al- though we have provided a jury of your own selection, and that you shall be tried before a fair and impartial Judge, I will step in between you and them and rescue you— Mr. MODERMOTT. Will the gentle- man permit me a question? Mr. CARROLL. Certainly. Mr. MODERMOTT. Would you allow the Commonwealth’s Attorney the right to dismiss before a verdict? Mr. CARROLL. sworn? Mr. MODERMOTT. After the matter has come into the hands of the Common- wealth’s Attorney. Mr. CARROLL. I do not know exactly what you mean, and I will answer you this way. If you mean after a man has once been put in jeopardy that the Common- wealth Attorney ought to have the right to dismiss, I say no; but if a man has not been put in jeopardy, I say yes. Which do’ you mean? Mr. ‘MCDERMOTT. I want to know whether you mean the Commonwealth’s Attorney ought to have the discretion of dismissing an indictment before a verdict of a jury? Mr. CARROLL. Do you mean before or after the man has been put in jeop- ardy? After the jury is 14 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] MCDERMOTT—CARROLL—BURNAM - [November 8 . Mr. MCDERMOTT. I wish to know whether, before or after the defendant is put in jeopardy, the Commonwealth’s ‘At- torney, in your opinion, should have the right to dismiss or quash an indictment‘? Mr. CARROLL. The Commonwealth’s Attorney now has the right to dismiss be- fore a man is put in jeopardy. , Mr. MCDERMOTT. Do you think the Commonwealth’s Attorney should have more power than the Governor? Mr. GARRGLL. The Commonwealth’s Attorney has no power at all. The Com- monwealth’s Attorney can dismiss before the man is put in jeopardy, but after the jury is sworn, the Commonwealth’s At- torney has no right whatever to dismiss. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Of course, I mean with the consent of the defendant; but the defendant, as a matter of course, would be willing to consent. Mr. CARROLL. I may be a little dull, but really I don’t understand the point you arc trying to make. There is still another reason why the Ex- ecutive should not have the right to pardon before conviction, and it is this: I care nothing about particular cases; I care nothing about whether it was wrong in this case or right in that one. It is the princi- ple of the thing. Itis not because I am ap- prehensive that any Governor of this State will ever improperly exercise the right of pardoning before conviction; but I believe whenever a man is relieved by the Execu- tive from the penalty of a crime, the Ex- ecutive'ought to have before him at the time he passes upon the matter all the evidence both for and against the accused, so that ‘he can act intelligently and justly between the parties. If the pardon is not granted until after the conviction, then the. Execu- tive, when he comes to pass on the case, can have before him the evidence for the accused and against him, and act intelligently and justly to both parties. If in his judgment, and I am always willing to lZI‘FSt the judg- ment of the Executive of Kentucky, the man has been improperly convicted; if in his judgment facts and circumstances have developed since the trial which would make it cruel or inhuman to punish him, let the Governor have a right to pardon him ; but if upon an inspection of the record, there is no fact developed, no circumstance proven, ‘ no reason given why the verdict of the jury is not right and proper, or why the man should not suffer the penalty imposed upon him by the laws of the land, then I take it. for granted the Executive of the State will not grant a pardon. But until he has been convicted, if the pardon is granted, it is granted on ex parte testimony on the hear- ing of only one side of the case. I am opposed to giving the Executive the power- to pardon before conviction. Nor do I believe that the Executive ought-to be required to furnish to the Legislative De- partment, or anybody else, any reason at all for his conduct or action. When the par-- doning power is vested in the Governor, that ought to be of itself a sufiicient guar— anty that he will exercise it properly or else it should never be vested in him. If he does exercise it properly, he ought not be called to account; if he exercises it improperly, he cannot be compelled to answer to anybody, and you cannot impose- any penalty for acting wrongfully. Hence, I, can see no reason why he should disclose to- the Legislative Department any reason for- his conduct. Mr. BUHNAM. In view of the promise- made to the gentleman from Lexington that he should have an opportunity to give his views on this, I see no prospects of a. vote on this question, and I move that it be passed, and that we proceed with the- discussion of some other matter. - Mr. DEHAVEN. I hope that motion will not he insisted upon. Let us go on with the discussion of this. Some other‘ gentleman may desire to be heard. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I shall say but a few words on this subject, since the views I entertain have been so well presented by other Delegates on this floor; but I wish to, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ~ 15 ' power; ' experience of all ages, in all countries, has Saturday,] PHELPS. [November 8 . offer some of the reasons which will prompt my vote on my amendment. I think it may be a debatable question as to whether the Governor ought to have the pardoning but while that is the case, the shown to us that it is the will of the people to have the pardoning power lodged some- where; and in view of the intelligence in Kentucky, and the many men qualified to fill the Executive Chair, I think there could be no safer place to lodge that power in Kentucky than in the Governor. I want to say that while this may be a de- batable question in the minds of a few, if I should have any doubt or misgiving about the parddning power at any time, it would be after conviction. It seems to me that the arguments on the other side have been inconsistent in this: You require the accused to be brought before an Examin- ing Court, and they send him on to the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury finds an in- dictment against him, and he is sent to the trial jury, and that trial jury of twelve men says that man is guilty, and the Court, sitting there and hearing all the testimony, renders a judgment. The case ' is taken to the Court of Appeals and they review it, and say that the trial was all right, and sustain the judgment of the Court below. You have four different tribunals passing on the question, and a- jury of twelve saying he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; and still you are will- ing to submit it to the Governor. I say why make the man run through all these Courts for the purpose of enabling him to apply to the Governor for a pardon, when, per- haps, it may be known to the whole com- munity and the Governor that at the end of the trial he will be pardoned. and that he ought to be. I want to say if there is any time when a man should be pardoned, it is before trial. because after conviction, you make the Governor undo everything done in four Courts. When he pardons before trial he ‘is overruling no Court, re- versing no judgment. He is, perhaps, saving from ruin a young man; he is, perhaps, pre- venting disgrace from being brought upon a worthy family. The only harm Ican see in permitting a Governor to exercise this power before conviction, as well as after, is that it would have a starving effect on the lawyers of Kentucky. I do not propose, although I have a license to practice law, to incar- cerate any poor man in jail or to prosecute any innocent man in order that I may get a fee; nor do I propose to vote for a propo- sition just to make fees for the lawyers. I have in my mind a case like this: A poor man is charged with crime. He is innocent, and the whole country knows he is innocent. Perjured witnesses have gotten into the Grand Jury room. These facts may be known to the whole country, and yet the Governor is not to be allowed to pardon him until -he goes through the Courts— until he is broken up, his family bowed down in sorrow and shame from which they can never rise. You would allow a man as innocent as an unborn child to be lodged in jail and held for trial, when it could be proved to the Governor that there wasa conspiracy among the witnesses,-or possibly that the charge was on account of the malice of a Commonwealth’s or County Attorney. It is six months at least, under our system, before a trial can be had, and the poor- fellow becomes sick, it may be with that long lingering disease, consump- tion. The doctors come to his cell and examine his physical condition, and swear that he cannot live until the next term of the Circuit Court. His friends appeal to the Governor. The proof of his condition is brought ‘to the Governor, and that'he was indicted by perjury. The Governor says, with tears in his eyes, “I would gladly pardon this man, but the Constitu- tional Convention has tied my hands. I cannot do it.” You force that man to remain in jail in disgrace when the whole country is crying that he was indicted by conspiracy and perjury, 1 6 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMEN T. Saturday,] PHELPS—PETRIE. [November 8 , and they are able to prove it. Such an in- stance might not happen more than once in a long term of years, but if itcan hap- pen one time, While this Constitution is ‘the supreme law of Kentucky, I am op- posed to it. I would rather that the Gov- »ernor of Kentucky should make one hundred mistakes in pardoning before conviction than to let such one unfortunate man die in jail, because his hands are tied. I know that when the predecessor of the present Governor was in ofi‘ice, I helped prosecute a man in my county for robbery. I never prosecuted a man with more zeal and industry in my life. He was convicted and sent to the Penitentiary. Long before his term was out in the Pententiary he was overtaken with consumption, and Governor Knott, with that generous impulse and noble heart that move him to-day, par- doned him, and let him go home to die at his own home, with his wife to wait on him. That was right. These are things we cannot foresee and cannot provide for; and I say if we provide the State with a good Governor, which we always do—a man of justice, of intelligence, of learning and of experience—there will be no danger, because the public sentiment is against pardoning before trial, and the Governor is not apt to go against public sentiment, unless he has good reasons for so doing. Now, that is only a supposed case, but it can happen in every county in this State in less than ten years, that an innocent man, unable to give bond, may be incarcerated in jail and die there, be- cause the hands of the Governor are tied. His wife and mother may weep over his grave for the remainder of their days, but it is a disgraced family, because he has died in jail. Such a case could not happen unless this substitute is adopted. Mr. PETRIE. The discussion of this question has been protracted to such a length that I shall only occupy time enough to enter my solemn protest against “a prin- ciple which I regard- as subversive of the L ' that imposition. very foundation of society. I think my very nature draws me towards mercy, and I would not, if I had the power, deprive the Executive of the State of the right and the power to pardon. Mercy is a divine at; tribute, and we ought to exercise it; but the question is, when, where and how it should be exercised. I listened to the argument of the gentle- man from Henry county, and, to my mind, his argument was .unanswerable. I am utterly opposed to constituting the Gov- ernor of the State a Criminal Ccurt. Take jurisdiction from the regularly organ- ized Court and try cases upon ex parte tes- timony without even the sanction of an oath. I know it is an embarrassment to him, and I am in favor of relieving him of that embarrassment, as well as doing justice to the people of the State. You cannot better destroy the con- fidence of the people of the State in the laws and institutions of our country than to take from their midst a man who has been accused of an atrocious crime, and without a hearing so far as they are concerned, and without their knowledge, pardon him, and he goes back a free man without any inves- tigation. This often happens, but it does not imply any corruption on the part of the Executive. I say in these cases he is im- posed upon, and I wish to relieve him of What can he do? Par- ties have a right to apply to him for par- dons. A man accused of a crime comes with his friends and attorney, present to the Governor what they say are the facts in the case. They are influential men, they are the friends of the Governor. He cannot, without an insult to them, say: “ I doubt what you say.” He cannot ques- tion the facts they present. He must act upon this ea: part6 statement for the ac- cused man and his friends and relatives, and upon that he grants a pardon without any notice to the people of the commu- nity where the alleged, crime occurred. Now, if you require a party indicted to be EXECUTIVE DEPA RTMENT. 17 ~age. .after that the young man rode up to the ‘Saturday,] PETRIE. [November 8 . .'tried in the Courts of the county where he lives, no Governor would be imposed upon :after such investigation, for in that case he would naturally say, “ WVhat was the evi- dence in Court that tried him? both sides of this question. it all.” rstron g and able may be the counsel and the I want 1 want to hear I care not how influential and friends who surround him, he will go to ‘the ‘record, because, knowing there had been a public trial, you could not induce him to act without the evidence which was introduced at that trial. I think it is best 'to relieve him from that trouble. :some Governors of the State have pro- claimed, knowing the difliculties that would surround them, that they would not grant a pardon in any case before conviction}? I am not quite sure of that, but I think it is so. I do not blame the Executives because "they act upon this ex parte testimony, and generally, perhaps always, it is convincing to the Executive when he acts; but it is ‘wrong. If the Governor must be allowed ‘to pass upon the guilt or innocence of an accused party, I think, in case he finds the ‘man not entitled to a pardon, he should be :authorized to go one step further, pro- nounce him guilty, and affix his punish— 'ment. Many cases have been given, but ‘these cases only illustrate the principles under discussion. I have in my mind a rather extraordinary case which happened in the county I represent. There was a ‘middle-aged man who had some difficulty with a young man about nineteen years of It wasa trivial affair. A few days front gate of the farmer and called him. Instead of responding to the ‘call, he put his shot-gun through a window and shot that young man to death. The young man lived long enough to testify, and his mother -sustained.him in it, that he had gone ‘over there on a little matter of business. The people of the'community were shocked. The man was indicted, and nothing was ‘.known in that community about any effort I believe ‘ to relieve him .until, when the case was called in Court, apardon was filed. He was a notorious man. 011' one occasion before this, with my own eyes, I saw him go into the Court-house with a pistol in one hand and a bowie knife in his boot, and tell the Judge “if you dare release that man on trial, ’ I will kill him in your presence.” Accord- ing to his own statement he had killed two men at least before this young man. The Governor did not know that. He did not know but what that man was one of the best citizens in the county. He had enough money to pay counsel and have his friends come before the Executive. You can imagine the feelings of that community, with the knowledge of the character of that man and the great outrage and crime he had committed, when they found without their knowledge away off at the Capital of the State, at the instance of that man’s counsel and friends, the Governor had relieved him of even a trial for that crime. That may be an extreme case; I believe it is, but I believe that every man ought to be tried according to law. Sometimes there are circumstances that are developed after the trial that make it eminently proper for the Governor to intercede and relieve a man. The case I alluded to happened long before the term of the present Executive. I believe the Governor in that case was imposed upon, as they always will be when they act on ex parte testimony without the sanctity of an oath. And these men come and beg for mercy with their hands red with blood. They cannot come and say “The mercy I to others show, that mercy show to me.” Do they say pardon me because I do not want the expense and trouble of a trial? That is not it. It is: “I do not want the risk of a trial. I do not want to submit myself to the risk of a con- vietion.” They come before the Governor, hundreds of miles from their counties sometimes no one on the other side even knowing they are coming. I say the Gov- ernor should not be subjected to that. He should be placed in a position where he can 18 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] 1\lU1R--“’Asr1mcroiv. [November 8 - say “ I have no power to interfere with the law, go before the Courts, and if they con- vict you, and I can. find good reasons for it, I will pardon you, and not otherwise.” Mr. MUIR. Mr. Chairman, it is now forty years since I commenced the practice of law in the central part of this State, and neither in my own county nor in coun- ties immediately around my home have I ever heard of any grievous abuse of the pardoning power of the Governor. I knew of one case in my county where a lady of excellence and purity of character became innocently guilty of bigamy, under circumstances which commended her to the - Governor for pardon, which she readily obtained upon the proper presentation of the facts before action by a Grand Jury. I know of a case where a postmaster was tried and sentenced to the Penitentiary for un- locking a mail bag with a key provided for him for the purpose when the Government key had been lost. No intent to do a wrong appeared in his case, yet the post- master was convicted by a Federal Court, and then a Presidential pardon was pro- cured, because of the fact that no intentional guilt could be imputed to the party con- victed. How much better would it have been to have exercised the power of pardon in this case before conviction was had. It would have relieved the party accused of all the humiliation consequent upon such a trial and conviction. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that this power of pardon ought, in many instances, to be exercised before conviction, and there is no safer or better place to lodge it than with the Executive. Mr. WASHINGTON. It was not my pleasure to be present during all of this discussion, and it may be possible that some gentlemen have advanced the views I en- tertain in regard to this matter. At all events, it will not be very material, for I shall occupy the time of the Convention buta few moments._ ' I am opposed to lodging this great power in the hands of the Governor for several reasons. One of the first and most important of these reasons is its extreme liability to abuse. We may have just the kind of a Governor to-day' that we ought to have and that we would like to have. What kind of a Governor we may have next year or in the future, no- man is prophet enough to tell. It is not. given to any man to penetrate the veil which conceals from our vision the future. We know that this great State has entered upon what may be termed the second era of ' her existence. We know that she teems with natural wealth; we know that there are many things to invite capital and the industries of the world. We know the- hordes of Europe are pouring into this country, all kinds and classes of people,. Anarchists, Socialists and all other kinds. To what extent we may be called upon to‘ receive this class of population upon our soil, it is not given to any man to tell. I can very easily conceive of a condition of circumstances when, in the agitation of the times, some man might be lifted to the Executive chair who is totally unworthy of it. IVe have recently seen in this country how suddenly great. changes may arise. We see this illustrated among the agricultural element of the‘ country. We see what wonders they have lately worked in the political world. So, I say, it is not given to any man to see what it may be within the power of any class to ac— complish in the future. It may happen that the Governor will not be competent to grapple with this kind of a question at all. The very application for a pardon im- plies guilt. How is it going to be 111-- vestigated‘? By what compulsory process shall he enforce the attendance of witnesses‘? How shall the peculiar circumstances sur» rounding each case be made to apply to it ?' I believe it has already been suggested by some gentleman that the examination would necessarily be en: parie; that one side in many instances would be entirely unheard. . Counsel would be absentin many instances, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. _ 19 Saturday,] "WASHINGTON—CLARDY. [November 8 . and you impose upon the Governor a most delicate and responsible task, in an en: pal/rte fashion to pass upon grave questions, involv- ing the peace and good order of society. To say that such a power as that is liable to abuse is simply to give expression to what is perfectly self-evident. It goes without saying. We have created Courts for the in- vestigation of these things at great expense. We have qualified Judges sitting on the Bench. The accused is generally repre- sented by able counsel. If he is unable to employ counsel the Court appoints him counsel. It is required to do so, and I believe I have never yet _ known of an instance in which counsel have declined to render service when called upon under such circumstances. Thisis the ancient and most approved method of ascertaining the real state of the case. No other means has ever yet been devised by the wit of man which is superior to it. of all civilized countries commend it as the highest expression of man’s wisdom in this regard. Shall we substitute in its stead one man,sitting in the Executive Chair, clothed with numerous other responsible duties; shall we visit upon him the responsibility of go- ing into grave questions of this character? It seems to me it would be impolitie and ill-advised. But there is another serious objection to it in my mind. Nothing is better settled under our system of government than that it shall be divided into three co-ordinate branches, and that neither department of this government shall encroach in any de- - gree upon the province of the other. How can you erect a Governor into a Court, a judicial tribunal, without encroaching upon the most important department of our civil government—one whose mistakes are the hardest to be repaired. If the Gov- ernor commits an error, he can rectify it; but when you come to the Judiciary, the error of to-day becomes the precedent of the mor- row, and we soon find precedents hardened into law, and the Courts saying: “This The wisdom of all ages and . question has been decided so and so, and whatever may have been our decision in this matter, had it been brought before us as an original proposition, we must abide by precedent.” Therefore, I say, because it does encroach on the judicial depart- ment of the government, and being dan- gerous in its tendency and violative of what I conceive to be sound principle, I shall vote against it. Mr. CLARDY. As a layman, I do not propose to make any lengthy speech upon this question. I have listened with pro- found interest to the learned legal gentle- men, and I am in doubt; and when Doc- tors of the Law differ, what must the lay- men do? I want to ask a question or two. It appears that this controversy rests upon the matter of conviction, that they are all in favor of allowing the Governor to exer- cise the right of pardoning after conviction. The question I want to ask is this: Is a confession of a crime a conviction, or does it amount to nothing? For instance, when a criminal comes up to be tried in Court, enters a plea of guilty, is there any necessi- ty for summoning a jury and going through all the paraphernalia of an investigation in his case? Of course I am not able to an- swer these questions, but I am competent to ask them. Is it not equivalent to a con- vietion if you confess a crime? Suppose va person is indicted and comes before the Governor before he has any trial. He asks Executive clemency in his favor. Is not that virtually an acknowledgement of his guilt, and is he not convicted in the ordi- nary sense of the term? Does he not con- fess that he is guilty of the crime, and does he not by that act place himself legally in the same position as if a jury had pro- nouneed a verdict against him ? These are points upon which I would like some of these learned gentlemen to give us informa- tion, because I, like a number of others, who have not made the‘ matter of law our chief study, want to act intelligently 20 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ‘comes Saturday] BOURLAND—HAN KS. [November 8. on this question. I do at least, as I want to do on every question that before the Convention. I ask these questions to bring out informa- ‘tion. Mr. BOURLAND. It is my purpose to detain the Convention but a few mo- ments in discussing this question. It has been amply discussed by men of learning, but, as I ama member of the Committee on Crimes, Punishment and Criminal Proced- ure, and as a substitute, which is now under consideration, emanated from that Committee, I think it due myself and to that Committee to give some reasons why I support that report. In my judgment the designs or primary object of criminal and penal law, is to prevent the commission of crimes, and protect the quiet, peacable and law-abiding citizens from the encroach- ments of the vicious and evil disposed. It seems to me that the attempt has been made by divers persons in this Convention to build up a sympathy for the accused. My sympathies are always with the victim of the crime and not with the vicious or evil disposed person who commits the crime. The reason I give my vote in favor ‘of this proposition before the Committee was to the effect that I believe that the fact that the power to pardon before con- viction would encourage the commission of crime; that it afforded one more loop- hole through which violators of the law might escape. I vote earnestly in favor of that report from the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. I shall vote equally as earnestly for the adop- tion of it by this Convention, because I believe the quiet, law-abiding citizens of the country have a right to demand at the hands of the law-making powers the most ample protection both in their lives, liberty and property. I believe the quiet, peaceful law-abiding citizen has a right to demand at the hands of the States that the whole power of this State and the strong arm of the law shall be stretched out and ample protection furnished them, and the only way in my judgment to protect the quiet, peaceable and law-abiding citizen in the exercise of his rights and privileges as a citizen of this Commonwealth is to let the fact be known in this Commonwealth that if any one violates the law of the State he must assuredly suffer the penalties at— taching to such violation of law. It is not for the punishment of the criminals that the laws are enacted, but for the protection of the innocent against the guilty; for the protection of the weak against the strong; to throw the strong arm of the law around the most humble citizen of the Commonwealth and make him feel secure in his rights and privileges. Now, I can see no good reasons why a pardon should be granted before conviction. I think the Courts are for the investigation of just such cases, and that all such should be fully and thoroughly investigated by the Court. I am one of those who is willing to go even farther than that; I do not believe the pardoning power should be allowed to be exercised after conviction. If a man -has violated the law of the State, and that fact must be proved before he can be con- victed, I do not believe the power ought to be vested in the Governor, unless it can be demonstrated that injustice has been done to the citizen. I do not believe the power to pardon ought to be vested in any depart- ment of the Government; but where cases arise, where injustice has been done, where facts are developed after the trial that, though injustice has been done the citizen, I believe it is well for the Governor to have the power to rectify the evil which has been done to that citizen. I shall support most heartily the substitute now before this Committee. Mr. HANKS. Physically, I fearI shall be unable to do more than briefly present a few thoughts relative to this pardoning power, of which we have heard so much this morning. However, I wish to give my views as to what I think ought to be EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 21 Saturday,] HANKS—BECKNER. [November 8 . the power of the Executive of this Com- monwealth. It is conceded by all that the power of pardoning should rest somewhere. It has been suggested, I think, by the last gentleman on the floor, that after a man was convicted and it was demonstrated that he was guilty, there should be no pardon- ing. I understood him to take that posi- tion. Now, if you please, if the views of the gentlemen who oppose the report of the Committee are carried out what is the re- sult? Each and every pardon that is granted must be granted in direct opposi- tion to a verdict of a jury and a judgment of "a Court. It seems to me that there are advantages in allowing the report to stand as the Committee has it without amend- ment. It does seem to me the Executive of the State is as well qualified to pardon a man before as after a conviction. I should think it would be more embarrassing for an Executive to pardon a man after conviction than it would be to paialon him before a verdict of the jury and a judgment of the‘ Court has been entered. The embarrass- ment seems to me would certainly come in in the former case. Many Delegates have spoken of the embarrassment of the Execu- tive in granting pardons, although the ap- plicant was only technically guilty. I have heard the present distinguished Executive say, when applied to for pardon, “the Court has rendered its judgment, the jury found the man guilty; therefore, I hesitate to grant the pardon, though he may be only technically guilty.” Here is the embarrass- ment. Before conviction no such a thing could be heard, and no such objection urged. For a hundred years the privilege of Executive clemency has existed, and who is here complaining of the abuse of the power except one or two Delegates. I say better that ninety-nine guilty persons go unwhipped of justice than that one inno- cent man should be punished. If the Gov- ernor pardons a ‘man, he is acting on the side of mercy, and I have not become cold-blooded enough yet to say that a man must be tried and convicted when the com- munity and the Executive say he ought to be pardoned. I say give the Governor the power to pardon. It does seem to me that our country has not suffered in conse- quence of this power being lodged with the Executive up to this time, and may we not presume that the Executives of our State in the future will come up to the standard of those who have gone before them‘? I am willing to trust this power in the hands of the Governor, and allow him to retain the right to be merciful in cases where the community and the Governor think mercy should be shown. I am unable, on ac- count of my voice, to say more. I shall vote for the Governor retaining the pardoning power, as now given .him in the present Constitution. Mr. BECKNER. When I remember that each day I am myself a supplicant for mercy, I cannot consent to support the sub- stitute offered by the gentleman from Lex- ington. There is a body of people known as the Perfectionists, who say they have reached that high degree of purity wherein they commit no sin; and I take it for granted, from hearing the speeches which have been made on this floor, that that body of people is represented in this Convention, that there are men here who can do noth- ing wrong and need no pardon. They are, therefore, for abridging the power of pardon. I am not of that class. I am conscious of so much wickedness done by men that comes from their being finite, weak and erring that I am in favor of giving to some representative of the sov- ereignty of the Commonwealth the power to remit fines, forfeitures and penalties im- posed by the rigid rules of the law. The whole argument in favor of this substitute has been against the power of pardon itself. The instances cited have been in- stances where there were abuses claimed of this power. Now, if the power is wrong, let us strike it out; let' us come out boldly and say that nobody shall have this power 22 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. * Saturday,] BECKNER. [November 8 . But I take it for granted no gentleman is bold enough to of pardoning at all. assume to do that in this Convention, and go before the people of the Commonwealth upon it. I hold that no better things have been done for the people than the exercise of the power of pardon under two conditions of affairs that have existed in Kentucky. At the close of the war when Governor Bramlette released the Confederate soldiers and many other peo- ple in the Commonwealth from pains and penalties for violations of law, charged to have been committed by them in that time of excitement when the struggle between the States was on; and again when the peo- ple of the State seemed to be blind to the abuses of a system which was making this Commonwealth odious throughout the civ- lized world, by reason of its conduct of its Penitentiary, a great and good man elected almost unanimously by the people of the State, came to the front and exercised the power of pardoning with a boldness, a cour- age, a discretion and a sense of right that did him infinite credit, and aroused the people of the State to the condition of af- fairs until we had that reformation which is one of the best things that has happened in Kentucky. I have heard no instances given; of abuses of this power. Gentlemen say it has been abused, but when or where‘? I call for specifications. Gentlemen say it may be abused, but that is presuming that the Commonwealth will elect men unfit to exercise the power. I have faith that the people of the future will do better than they have done in the past, because there will be the influences of the Christian re- ligion, and the power of a better system of education to improve the people of the fu- ture, and to make them better than the people of the past or of the present have been or are; and I take it for granted that the people of that greater future will elect better men even than the people of the past have done. I see nothing in the history of the Chief Executives of this Common- wealth to make us fear to leave with them the power that they have exercised during the hundred years that have passed. There are many instances, I could cite instance after instance, where it has been needed, in fact I have had an instance since I came here where a friend applied to me to present his case to an Executive of another Common- wealth. Some fifteen or eighteen years ago two people were married. They soon found that they had made a mistake; that they were not congenial spirits, and they agreed to disagree, the man going ofl“ to another State, the woman remaining in Kentucky. In due time, after a year had elapsed, which under our law gives a party who has been abandoned the right to sue for a divorce, she brought her suit. The proof was taken, and the judge announced from the bench that he would grant the prayer of the petition. The brother of the man, being in Court, wrote to his brother that there had been a divorce granted, and he had a right to marry again. Sometime afterwards he married, believing it was true, but it so happened that the judgment pursuant to the announced opinion was not entered upon the books. The man in the other State married, raised a family of chil- dren about him and came back to Kentucky, and found after he came that really and technically, he had not been divorced. The divorce had not been granted and the wife here, finding he was getting on happily with his second wife, and seeing his family about him, began to annoy him, after dis- covering that the decree had not been en- tered: and he asked me to apply to the Governor of the other Commonwealth to relieve him from the penalty for what he had done. He had violated the laws of that other State—committed the offense of big- amy when there had been no intention to do so. I received a letter from the Gov- ernor to whom I wrote, saying he had no power; that the last Constitutional Con- vention had taken away from him the power to pardon before conviction, and he re- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 23' Saturday,] BECKNER—BLACKBURN. [N ovember’ 8 . ,gretted that, under the state of case 'pre- :sented—which was actually true and sus- tained by ample proof—he was not able to ‘grant the prayer of the petition. That was an instance without flaw, and instance zafter instance of like merit can be given, and I am sure I have heard no instance to the contrary, and I can see no reason why we ‘ should change this provision in the Consti- tution, which has been used so beneficently on many occasions, simply because gentle- men fear something wrong may happen in "the future—gentlemen who have pessimis- ‘tic minds, and who are distrustful lest pos- "terity may notbe as wise and safe as we :are. I am not of that class. I am willing to risk posterity to manage its affairs as the people of the past have done, and as we are ourselves doing. The argument pre— sented that a man should go into Court and should have his whole case heard—go before the examining Court first, and then 'the Grand Jury, and then the Petit Jury, with the Judge to sit and hear it— :should go through all that, and then present the case to the Governor, I say that if there is to be any abridge- ment of this power it should be at the other end of the line. If after all ‘of these safe-guards have been thrown around him, if he has had all these chances to escape; the Examining Court. the Grand Jury, the Petit Jury, the Judge on the motion for a new trial, and then the Cou'rt of Appeals have all said that that man is ‘guilty, there might be some reasons for insisting the Governor shall not exercise this power. The instances in which the Governor exercises it are those in which he thinks that the public good will be sub- .served; that a brand shall not be put upon .a man who may be technically guilty of a violation of the law, but who > in spirit did not intend to violate the law, and that is the reason the power is given. Many a man has violated thelaw when he had nointention to do so; others have been drawn into itthrougl? .some accident or misfortune, or some sudden temptation; others may have known the law, but from circumstances have been led ignorantly to do that which they would not otherwise have done, as in the case. just cited, or because they were misinformed, and the Governor should stand with the power of the State to excuse them from the penalties of the law. This quality of mercy is not strained, you cannot apply legal rules to it. Gentlemen stand here and talk about having rigid, iron-bound rules applying to mercy. It is not a thing to be _measured in that way. If a Governor is to have this pardoning power at all, I say leave it with him as the absolute represent- ative of the sovereignty of the State; He is supposed to be the first citizen of the Commonwealth. We have chosen a class of men for Governor worthy to exercise this power, and whom certainly the people of the State can trust in the future as they have been trusted in the past. Mr. BLACKBURN. It seemed to me that this was so fair a proposition that it woulduhardly call forth the discussion it has. I can very well understand the interest and the zeal of the gentleman from Lexington, because he has injected into this, or at- tempted to do so, a provision from the re- port of the Committee on Crimes, Punish- ments and Criminal Procedure. That Committee reported to this Convention the other day, and now that the Committee on Executive Ofiicers for the State at Large has submitted its report, he comes with asection from his report and offers it as a substitute for section 10 of this report. I have been sur- prised to hear Delegates in this Convention criticising the action of the Governors for in- terposin g this pardoning power either before or after conviction. In answer to all such criticisms, I want to make this statement without fear of being disappointed in it: That any fair-minded Delegate in this Con- vention may go to the oflice of Secretary of State, select'his case, take all the papers and vouchers in connection with it, and he will do exactly as the Governor did under 24 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] BLACKBURN. the circumstances. I know that for years the papers have been very prompt to criti- cise the actions of the Governors in this respect. Men in the community have learned from them, perhaps, to crit- icise unfavorably the actions of the Gov- ernors in granting pardons. I undertake to say it was because they knew nothing of the facts controlling the Governor in his action. They have not taken the trouble to find out the facts controlling him; to look at the petitions, the letters and the representations that were made to the Governor; and I agree fully with the distinguished gentleman from Clark county, who said they had begun at the wrong end of this line to restrict. If the Governor is to be curtailed in the power to pardon, then begin at the other end, and say that he shall not pardon a man who has been fairly tried and convicted of the ofi'ense before a competent jury and a competent Court. How stands the case‘? A party is charged, either by warrant or indictment, with a violation of the law, a misdemeanor or a felony, if you please. He goes, through his friends or by himself, and applies to the Governor. He may be really guilty; he may be technically guilty; he may not be guilty at all; but I care not which position he is in, the Governor ought to have, as he has had, in my opinion, the right to inter- pose the pardoning power there. The gentlemen on the other side, however, it ‘ seems to me, argue the question to the very absurd and ridiculous proposition that the Governor shall not interpose this power before conviction; that it is a great abuse of the power; that it is dangerous to the best interests of society and the community at large; but after the accused has been arraigned before an Examining Court, after that Court has sent him to the Grand Jury, and, by the way, that is one of those most inquisitorial, and some- times the most dangerous board that has met since the days of the bloody and cruel Nero— after being indicted by that Grand Jury, he then goes before the trial. jury, who, after hearing the proof, and being instructed as to the law by the Judge find. him guilty as charged. He may take his ap- peal to‘ the Court of Appeals, and that. Court aflirm the judgment and verdict of the - lower Court, and afterhe has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then the- gentlemen who advocate this substitute say that is the time the Governor ought to in- terpose the pardoning power. guilt has been proven beyond question— when he stands before the world, an ad- mitted violator of the law, and guilty as. charged in the indictment, then the cus- todians of good morals in the community say that is the time the Governor ought to step in and pardon whom? One con- victed of crime, any grade of crime in- dicated by the indictment. Now, the reason that we insist upon the report of‘ Because of the- the Committee is this: numerous instances mentioned by the Dele- gate from Clark, and the Delegate from Nelson, where it was right and proper;. and it seems to me, it is no answer to us to- say if a party is innocent, let him go into- Court and make his defense. I put it to you, Mr. Chairman, and every member- of this Committee, is that fair treat- ment to a citizen of this Commonwealth? When the Executive has heard the state- ments of the neighbors of the accused, when the community in which he lives know that that warrant or indictment was- secured by perj ured testimony, when they know that in heart and purpose that party did not intend any violation. of the law, that he had been misinformed or mistaken as- to the law, I ask if it is the proper re- sponse to make to that citizen to tell him or her you have the privilege of going into- a Court, of being arraigned in the prison- er’s dock, and appearing and answering by your counsel, and bringing your witnessesv into that Court to prove your innocence. That is the whole case. [November 8 When his» If the Governor is- not going to be permitted to exercise EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25 Saturday,] BLACKBURN. [November 8 . this power in the case of one innocent, in the case of one perhaps technically guilty, I say then that he ought not to have the power to pardon at all. It is a question with me whether he ought to have the power to pardon a man who is unquestionably guilty of a violation of the law. It is only while there is a question of guilt in the case; and I am astonished that my associ- ates here, learned in the law, fail to remem- ber that this appeal which the citizen makes to the Executive of his State is the last ap-- peal allowed him under the law. After his appeal has failed before the Circuit Court and the Court of Appeals, then the Constitu- tion and the law allows him to go into this other and higher Court, this Court of Conscience, this Court where the Judge, in the person of the Chief Execu- tive, will see that the law is admin- istered, but tempered with mercy. I ask you if there is a Delegate who will. say to a citizen the door of that Court-room shall be closed to you. I care not how merito- rious your case may be, if the strict and technical letter of the law condemns you, you shall'have no day in that High Court of Conscience where justice, tempered with mercy, may be. dealt out to you. That is the whole question. It is as to whether he shall have and exercise that power or not. Now, one other word: They have said there is no way of finding out why the Governor pardons a man, and he ought to report it to the next Legislature, and give information as to why he has granted this pardon or the remission of a fine. The gentlemen certainly are not ignorant of the fact that they can go to the office of the Secretary of the State and find there every paper and voucher, and every thing. per- taining to the case on file, kept in boxes there. There are the Journals of the Sec- retary of State, true transcripts of the Gov- ernor’s official acts. He will find every paper touching upon every case. find the private letters; the petition, every- thing that any one can want to-day; He will - and further than that, upon demand of either branch of the General Assembly, the Secretary of State must bring those papers, every voucher, every paper or letter relating to the case, and lay it before either branch of the General Assembly. Is not that notice sufficient? Is it not a sufficient publication of the reasons which controlled the, Executive in his his oflicial act? It seems so to me; but if that is the only pur- pose in this request that they shall know why the Executive has taken this course, they learn it there. If it is for the purpose that the Executive of this State shall report it be cause of any right inherent in that other eo-ordinate branch of the Govern- ment I deny it, and say it is a dangerous precedent to establish here.- One of the foremost ideas in our form of Government is that these three co-ordinate branches of Government are independent, the one of the other, and that neither shall be tribu- tary to the other. The Governor should not be required to report his action to the Legislature for the purpose of criticism or correction. ()ne gentleman said he sends his message to the Legislature to advise them as to the ‘wants of the Common-- _wealth. That is in aid of legislation. Being Executive of the State Government, he has perhaps informed himself, or hasv earned as to the wants of the people, as to the amount of taxation that should be levied, as to improvements, as to changes to- ' be made by the Legislature; therefore, I see a perfect propriety in his communica- ting with the Legislature touching those matters, but not touching o'fiicial acts. They are purely personal to himself. He is responsible for the dis- charge of that duty to no man or set of I men, except to the people of the Common- wealth of which he is Governor. The Delegate from Boyd county (Mr. Moore) referred to a case in which he says, “I know this case.” I think that in the case he knew, he proved too much, because he says he knows a case where straw-bail 26 ExEoUTIVE DEPARTMENT. I Saturday,] MooRE—BLAcKBUEN~FoRREsTEE [November 8 . was taken, in order that they might have time to come down here, and get a pardon from the Governor and release the straw- bail on the bond, as I understand him. Mr. MOORE. Will the gentleman al- low me to correct him? You misunder- stood me entirely. I said there was a bond given which was worth $500,000, and th\at bond was remitted by’ the Governor. It was not a straw bond. Mr. BLACKBURN. If that is the case we ought to take from the Judge the right to take a bond, or the Clerk of the Court, or whoever the power may be trusted with; but to take that as a case in point is but to infer and presume venality and corruption on the part of the Chief Executive of the Commonwealth. If he remitted that bond for the purpose of releasing the sureties on the bond he made a mistake, or he was a corrupt man, and he ought not to have done it; and that being the case, we are brought back to the point upon which I insist that if you deny the right to pardon before conviction you must take from the Governor the right to pardon at all. But you know, and we all know, that individual isolated cases cannot determine the right or wrong of a Constitutional provision or a statutory law. I care not if the Governor made a mistake; I care not if he deliber-P ately did a wrong; I care not if the Execu- tives of this State. any one of them, for four consecutive years violated their oaths and committed a wrong in every act of this sort; that does not affect the right or wrong of a great Constitutional principle. We are not trying to frame a Constitution based upon such presumption. I think rather we should be controlled by the idea that our Governor, as other public ofiicers, will observe their public and official oath; and will discharge their duties, as I believe they have done hitherto, with hon- esty and fidelity to themselves and to the- people. I hope that the Committee will adopt the report of the Committee as sub- mitted to them, and vote down the substi- tute offered by the gentleman from Lexing- ton and others. Mr. FORRESTER. I shall record my vote in favor of taking from the Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky the power of pardoning before conviction, and Ihave thought it my privilege and my duty, perhaps, to present for the people I represent, as well as the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky at large, my reasons for casting that vote. I know not that I can add any new ideas to the argu- ments that have been adduced by gentle- men on the same side with me on this question; but it appears to me that the pardoning power is a Court of last resort when all the remedies have been exhausted, when a man has been brought before a jury who have sworn that they have no parti- ality for, or prejudices against the accused; when the witnesses who saw the circum- stances have come in ‘and testified to the truth, and the man, because of some un- foreseen circumstances, that could not have been shown by proper investigation, has been wrongfully convicted, or where the man has been confined at hard labor for such a time that the Governor and the peo- ple acquainted with him are satisfied that the punishment has been adequate for the crime that he committed. But I have never understood the reason for 'giving the Governor the right to turn a man loose who has committed a homicide, denying the friends of the man who has been slain in the heat of passion, that the gentlemen speak of, the right ‘to come in and have a fair inevstigation, and the law inflicted upon him if guilty; if not to let him go. When you deny that right, I say that injustice has been done to the people and the friends of the man slain by the accused. Ah, they speak of mercy interposing; but I will ask them where is mercy if she is not in the law, in its penalties, and in the jury that tried the man‘?F Where is mercy when a man’s passion has been aroused and -he has taken the life of his fellow man? EXECUTIVE" DEPARTMENT. 27 Saturday,] FORRESTER—HOGG. [November 8. The funeral procession is soon over; the man is soon forgotten. He is not there to tell the tale of the guilt of the man who is on trial or is seeking for pardon—not hon— est enough to go before a jury to try to vindicate himself. It seems to me that if a man is guilty, he should not be pardoned. If he is innocent he should be willing to come in before a jury of his country and vindicate himself and go free. If he can not do that. and if he is confined in jail and takes the consumption, let him die with it —it is no more dreadful than the bullet he :shot through the heart of his friend. I say it is a dangerous thing to put it in the power of the Governor to turn a man loose ‘charged with crime; denying the juries, the Courts and the friends of the deceased man the right of trial and to let the facts be submitted to a candid world. Suppose the man is sick and in prison, why, did the ‘gentleman from Russell not know that-the writ of habeas corpus has not been suspended? Let him swear out the writ, bring him before the Court, give notice of a motion for bail, and let the witnesses come and tell how it occurred, and if he was not justified or excusable in the act, although the con- sumption is preying upon him, let him _ suffer the consequences. He is responsible ‘ for his own ruin. I am in favor of the pardoning power existing somewhere; but I am opposed to its being exercised until all other remedies have been exhausted, and the man has been brought in and tried and the facts sub- mitted to the world. They talk about a man being indicted by perjured witnesses, and being incarcerated in prison. Where :are the perjured witnesses generally found ‘I It is to stand by the nabob who has killed his friend, or some good citizen, to come in and swear him out and turn him loose to commit such a crime again. I hope that this power will be taken from the Gov- ernor, not that I believe that he has exer- cised it wrongfully, but that he may do it hereafter. Some circumstances that we cannot foresee may actuate him to do it when it should not be done. If my brother or friend should be slain by some man whose passion had been aroused, and I was denied the the privilege of coming in and prosecuting him, and seeing the law meted out to him, I would feel that justice had been robbed of her dues, driven out of the Court-house, that I had been denied a right, and that there was no such a thing as inalienable rights, and I would not feel like living in such a country as this. With these remarks I shall record my vote in favor of taking that power from the Gov- ernor. Let it be exercised after conviction, if the circumstances justify it. Mr. HOGG. I did not expect to say any thing on this matter, but as my county, which I represent, has quite a feeling upon this subject, I determined to say some- thing. It does seem like all the laws have been enforced, and all expenses necessary incurred by the Commonwealth to put down crime, and to prohibit and prevent crime. A man goes through the Examin- ing Court, and the Examining Court binds him over to the Circuit Court, and the Grand Jury of the Circuit Court investi- gates the case, and those tribunals decide him guilty. Then, after all of this, a few friends who, without a scintilla of proof, come before the Chief Executive, and ask him to pardon the man. Poor men, who may need pardon, cannot get it. It is only the influential men who get to the Gov- ernor, who have distinguished and wealthy friends, and influence in the country. It looks like it is just destroying every princi- ple of our fundamental law. Why, in the Bill of Rights we say that all men indicted shall have a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of his country. It seems that there ought to have been added, if the Governor does not see fit to pardon him, he shall have a trial. I have never seen such a travesty on justice in all my life. While I do not reflect upon any Governor whatever, 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. I get them pardoned. Saturday,] HOGG. [November 8 . I have heard of references to Governor Bramlctte, who was doubtless a good man. I would like to state an instance myself : There is no politics in it. three men. There were They had all been in the same army. They got into a quarrel with a man in my town and shot him down, while he was running off at the time, without even as much as a pocket knife. Those three men were indicted, and they got a dis- tinguished man down there, named Milton N. Rice, to go to Governor Bramlette and He did so. That country was very much worked up about it; and what do you think became of those three men ‘? Two of them have since been shot down from ambush, and one of them has left the State, and l have not heard of him since. (Laughter.) When they ap- peal to the Chief Executive, it is then that Might usurps the place of Justice; and the country has been stirred up ever since that time. Another case in Perry. A man, likewise in a controversy, shot and killed his uncle. I really do not know whether Governor Bramlette pardoned him or not. It was reported that he did, though. The indictment went on. The man that did the shooting was assassinated and shot down from the bushes afterwards, probably by a son of the man, Idon’t know; that was never known; but the man that he killed had a large family, and was a man of great influ-_ ence, and another man stood by and, the proof is, handed him the pistol to do the shooting with, and that man, too, was indicted, and I do not know whether his pardon was granted or not. I know the case was in the last Perry Court, because I was there, and I was asked by the man who did the deed if I would not go to the woman, the wife or widow of the man, and ask her if she would not be willing for it to be filed away. I did so, but they told me the proof was that he stood by and handed the other man the pistol, and he shot his uncle down. But that woman told me she had to fee the law- 'now in the Penitentiary. yers to prosecute that _man for killing her husband, and that she would rather give everything she had and work the balance of her life for a subsistence than to compro- mise; that she wanted it prosecuted. But since I have been here, I have learned that that man has been pardoned. As to the truth of it, I don’t know. I do not know what part he took in it, except he handed the other man the pistol, who shot his uncle- down. This pardon before conviction is- one of the most dangerous things that our country has to contend with. If a man is convicted and comes up and surrenders- himself and is imprisoned, and then the Governor sees fit to pardon him, because he shows himself to be worthy of confidence, I think that is well enough. We had a case tried in our Court the- other day. A man’s wife left him and went. to Tennessee. It was reported that she had died. He married again, but she returned, and the other day the man was convicted and sentenced to the Penitentiary for three years for bigamy. In such a case the Judge said that he was satisfied the man did not know that he was doing a wrong, but that he could not give him any relief because the facts were against him, and that man is In such cases as that the Governor, where the sworn testi- mony could be produced, might well grant a pardon; but for him to fire away on some other man’s unsworn statement, I think, makes the law a farce. My friend from Pike talks about the lawyers; the high standing they occupy in the country. There is a large party coming into power that do- not recognize the lawyers at all. (Laught- er.) It looks to me like they are going to be left out in the cold. (Laughter.) The gentleman from Russell seems to think that public sentiment is so much against the Governor pardoning before conviction that he will not do it. If public sentiment is against it, we, as the Representatives of the people, ought to protect that public senti- ment and prohibit him from doing it, and EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 29 \ [Saturday,] Hooe. [November 8. say to the Governor public sentiment is against pardoning before conviction, and that you must not exercise that power be- cause it ofi'ends the public, and thereby you relieve the Governor. As for the individ- ual cases I have spoken of, it was because ‘those other gentlemen spoke of them, and I considered I also had the right. As to the Governors reporting to the Legislature, I do not see any impropriety in that. They say it is not worth while to require the Governor to report his reasons for pardoning a man, because if the power to pardon is wrongfully exercised, he cannot be held to answer for it. That has very lit- tle to do with it in my opinion. A great many argue that a man ought not to be pardoned if he has been tried and convicted. That is, as it were, the Court of the very last re- .sort; it is a Court of Conscience. The law is such that a man is sometimes taken by .surprise after doing something he does not know is an offense, and had no intention to do wrong in doing it, finds himself con- victed; and to execute law in such a case is a hardship. In such cases as that, if the Governor is thoroughly con- vinced, from the proof, of the want of bad intention, he can pardon those who are thus unfortunate. But those who are unfor- tunate in this regard are generally too poor to get their cases properly presented to him. I do not expect to influence Delegates upon this floor, but I want to express my views. It is my honest judgment that this pardon- ing power before conviction is the greatest ‘drawback our criminal laws have. Take from the Governor that power and we shall .soon have a vigorous prosecution of all ofi'enses, speedy trials, and that is one of the chief things we want. The country is complaining about the great delay. A criminal goes on two, three, four or five _years before he has a trial. That is a great defect of our judiciary system. We should have speedy trials; and every time a man is charged with crime, try him, and that quickly. Then, whilst I am really in favor of a Pardoning Board in preference to the Governor, nevertheless, if the Governor sees fit, I think in the extreme case he should have the right to pardon. The amendment of the Delegate from the county of Henry was read, and is as follows: Amend section 10 of the Committee’s report: by adding after the word “ power,” in the first line, the words “after judg- ment.” The amendment of the Delegate from Pike was read, and is as follows: Amend substitute proposed by Delegate from Lexington as follows: “Strike from line two of the substitute the words “after conviction,” and insert after the word “ proper,” in the fifth line, the words, “But no reprieves, remissions, pardons or comu- tations of sentence shall be granted until days notice of application therefor be given in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the offense has been committed. The amendment of the Delegate from Fayette was read, and is as follows: Amend section 10 by inserting after the word “impeachment,” in the third line, the Words, “ And he shall file with each appli- cation a statement of the reasons for his decision thereon, which shall always be open to public inspection.” The next section was read, and is as follows: Sec. 13. He may, on extraordinary oc- casions, convene the General Assembly at the seat of government, or at a different place if that should have become since their last adjournment dangerous from an enemy or from contagious diseases; and in case of disagreement between the two Houses with respect to the hour of adjournment, he ma adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not exceeding four months. When he shall call them together it shall be by proc- Iamation, stating the object of the call, and none other shall be considered. The amendment of the Delegate from Fleming was read, and is as follows: Strike out the following words: “When he shall call them together it shall be by proclamation, stating the object of the call, and none other shall be considered.” 3O EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] HENDRICK—MCCHORD—DEHAVEN. [November 8. The amendment of the Delegate from Washington was read, and is as follows: Amend section 13 by adding thereto the following: “And such other matters as the Governor shall recommend during the term of the special session.” The amendment of the Delegate from Covington (Mr. Mackoy) was read as fol- lows: Strike out the word “ them, ” in the sev- enth line, and insert in lieu thereof the words “ the General Assembly.” Mr. HENDRICK. I would like to ask leave of the Committee to withdraw my amendment for the purpose of presenting it in a different form. The CHAIRMAN. By unanimous con- sent, such leave will be granted. Mr. McCHORD. It seems that the pur- pose of my amendment is plain. The Committee report that the Legislature shall be limited in special sessions to consider only such matters as may be set out in the proclamation convening the General As- sembly. It ‘does seem to me that when the Commonwealth is put to the cost of paying the mileage and per diem of members from all parts of the State that they should have the right to consider other matters which, in the wisdom of the Governor, he may see proper to recommend for their considera- tion. When the people’s representatives come from various parts of the State of Kentucky under the proclamation of the Governor, they might suggest to the Gov- ernor various matters that could be legis- lated' upon, and the Governor ,might regard thos‘e suggestions as worthy of his consideration, and would like to have the Legislature to consider them while they are in this special session. It seems to me that while the General Assembly is here, and the matter suggested to the Governor is deemed by him of sufficient‘ importance to recommend their consideration, that he ought to have the right to do so. I, there- fore, offer this amendment, believing it would be to the interest of the State that if the Governor saw proper to suggest. additional matters, he ought to have the right to do so. If he has not the right, it matters not how important a matter might be suggested for consideration, the Legisla- ture would have to adjourn under the proclamation, and he would then be com- pelled to convene them in special session again to consider some other matter. 1,. therefore, think it is proper and right that. the Governor should have the right to- suggest any additional matter for the con- sideration of the General Assembly while in session under the original proclamation. The amendment of the Delegate from Fleming was read, and is as follows: Amend by striking out these words: “And none other shall be considered.” Mr. HENDRICK. I do not desire to detain the Convention with any remarks upon this, except to say that the amend- ment as originally presented by me struck out the whole of the last sentence in sec- tion 13. I submitted my views relative to this matter to the Convention on Thurs- day. The part stricken out will leave the section as follows: “When he shall call them together it shall be by proclamation stating the objects of the call.” It strikes- out the words, “and none other shall be considered.” Mr. DEHAVEN. Those of us who have had any Legislative experience know that where extra sessions of the Legislature are called they are subject at times to very great abuse. There is no way that I know of, after a Governor shall have convened the General Assembly in extra session, by which their term can be confined at all, and if in the future, great emergencies should arise demanding of the Executive- of the State to call the Legislature to- gether, I think that as little as we should ask would be to require the Governor to state in his proclamation what the necessities or exigencies are that compel him to’ call the Legislature together, and when the Legislature comes here, in EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 31 Saturday,] HENDRICK—DEHAVEN—MCCHORD. [November 8. my humble judgment, they ought to be confined entirely to those things that were embraced in the Governor’s proclamation. I hope, therefore, that the amendment of- fered by the gentleman from Fleming will not be adopted. I do not desire to take up the time of the Convention in discus- sing that again. He seemed to think the other day in the ‘argument he made in sup- port of his amendment that this would be derogating from the dignity and power of the Legislature. I am wholly unable my- self to perceive the force of that argument. He seemed to think that we were attempt- ng to insert such a provision as would rob the Legislature of all the dignity and power that that department of the Government has and ought to have; but I cannot, for the soul of me, see how it can have that efl‘ect. ' Mr. HENDRICK. Will the Delegate permit a suggestion? Mr. DEHAVEN. Certainly. Mr. HEN DRICK. I only want to cor- rect you as to my position. My argument was this: that it was an inhibition upon the power of the Legislature, going beyond any limitation which had yet been attempted in any Constitution made for the people of Kentucky, and that while it did not rob it of all its dignity and power, it was a step in that direction; the tendency of the pro- vision was to do that. Mr. DEHAVEN. I did not miscon- ccive the force of the gentleman’s argu- ment. This is not only a limitation upon the power of the Legislature, but it is equally a limitation upon the power of the Governor. We propose to limit both of these Departments of the Government. If he sees fit to call the Legislature together in extra session, it is due to the people from the Governor,sthat he shall in his proclamation set out distinctly what those necessities are; and then we say to the Legislature, “Gtntlemen, when you come here, you can perform the duties that devolve upon you by law upon these sub- ject matters, for the disposition of which the Governor has called you here, but for none other; when you get together upon that subject, and dispose of it, you must go home.” Mr. McCHORD. I would like to ask the Delegate from Oldham a question, if he will permit me. Mr DEHAVEN. Certainly. Mr. MCCHORD. Under the section, as reported by the Committee, if the Governor saw proper to suggest to the Legislature additional matters after they have con- vened, would he have the power to do so, and would the Legislature have the power to pass upon any matter that might occur to the Governor and be suggested by him to the Legislature after the Legislature had convened? Mr. DEHAVEN. I think not. I think the Governor, under this pro- vision of the Constitution, if it is in- serted, would have to set forth in his proclamation, with great distinctness, what he wanted with the Legislature, and that after they got there, he could not make any other suggestions, and I do not think he ought to be permitted to make any other. He must take a general sur- vey of all the exigencies that surround him at the time, and he must put in his proclamation all that he desires the Legis- lature to do. Mr. HENDRICK. Will the gentleman permit a question? Mr. DEHAVEN. With great pleas- ure. . ‘ Mr. HENDRICK. I suggest" to you this: You make a provision by which you say the Governor shall designate specifically all matters on which they shall legislate. Suppose the Legislature should assemble here, and there should be a bill or bills passed by the Legislature which, in the judgment of some gentlemen, might be beyond the purview of the call, who is to determine the question‘? Would not that 32 EXECUTI VE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] DEHAVEN—BECKHAM—BURNAM. [November 8. be a question before the Courts whether that bill was within the purview of the call of the Governor; and would there be any way to determine it except by litiga- fion? Mr. DEHAVEN. Whenever that ques- tion arises it will be that sort of question which is always addressed to the Courts as to whether the law is or is not Constitution- a1. Unquestionably, if it should arise, the Courts would be compelled to determine it. The truth of the business is, in my humble judgment, we have had too much legislation, both State and National, and it may be many years before these extraordinary oc- casions occur or happen; but it does not seem to me to be requiring too much of the Governor for him to set out in his procla- mation what those exigencies are, and then the Legislature ought to be confined to the consideration of those questions and none other, because if they are convened together in extra session and they can go on with general legislation, they would stay here for sixty or ninety days. I do not know whether they would come within the constitutional inhibition of sixty days or not when convened in special session. Mr. BECKHAM. Before the Delegate gets through, I would like to ofl’er this amendment. I rather think he will accept it, but I will say a. word upon it. The amendment is to strike out the words “stating the objects of the call, and none other shall be considered,” and to insert the words that I send up. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows: Strike out the words “stating the objects of the call, and none other shall be consid- ered,” and insert the following words: “Stating the subjects to be considered, and no other shall be considered.” . Mr. DEHAVEN. we have now. Mr. BECKHAM. No. I desire to call the attention of the Chairman of the Com- That is exactly what ‘objects shall be considered.” mittee, and of this Committee, to what I think is a proper verbal criticism of the subject under consideration. “Stating the objects of the call, and none other shall be considered,” I do not think that that is ex- actly expressive of what the Committee means to express; and I think that the language that I have sent up expresses it a little better, “Stating the subjects to be considered, and no other shall be consid- ered.” Taking the grammatical construc- tion of the sentence, as the Committee has it, it would read: “And none other objects shall be considered.” It is not the object that is to be considered; it is the subject that is to be considered. Mr. DEHAVEN. It is the objects of the Governor’s call. Mr. BECKHAM. Let us see how it reads to finish the sentence, “Stating the- objects of the call, and no other,” which relates to a preceding noun, which is “ objects," making it read, “ and none other It seems to me that it is very much better to say, “Stating the subjects of the call, and no other shall be considered." Mr. BURNAM. Will the gentleman from Shelby allow me one suggestion? Strike out the word “objects,” and put in the word “purpose,” and leave it as it is? Mr DEHAVEN. to that. Mr. BECKHAM. I do not think that that would make it very good English. It would read, “Stating the purpose of the call, and none other shall be considered.” That would make the word “ other ” relate to the preceding noun “purpose,” and I do I have no objection . not think that would be exactly right. I submit that it is a mere verbal criticism that, to my mind, is proper. Mr. COX. I most heartily approve of the language contained in the report of the Committee. I believe it embraces just what Kentucky now needs. If the Gov- ernor wants 9. called session of the Legisla- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 33 Saturday,] WASHINGTON—HENDRICK—MACKOY. [November 8 . ture of Kentucky, and the Legislature has the power to do other business aside from that which is presented in the call, we know not how long that Legislature will be in session. They may go to the Governor under the amendment offered by the gen- tleman from Washington, and present to him some excuse or some reason for him to suggest to the Legislature further subjects ’ for its consideration. This would extend the session of the Legislature on and on and on, and as the gentleman from Old- ham has said, there would be no limit. The limit fixed by the Constitution of Kentucky would not reach the called session, but they might go on for several months and ‘expend the’money of the people of Kentucky. The Legislature sometimes obtains very great influence over the Governor, and a large Committee, or three or four Committees of the Legisla- ture going to the Governor and asking him that he amend his call; that the State has other objects and purposes for legislation, and attempting to demonstrate to him the grounds upon which those things would be necessary, the Governor might grant their request; and before they got through with that, another Committe, or set of men, would go and ask for a similar extension, and thus extend the session indefinitely. Certainly it is wisdom upon the part of this Conven- tion to so limit the action of every depart- ment of this government as to save the people from unnecessary expense, and this provision of the report of the Committee unquestionably accomplishes that end. Mr. WASHINGTON. I would like to ask the gentleman from Fleming one ques-. tion, in order :that I may get a proper understanding of this matter. The amend- ment, as I understand it, is to strike out the last clause, “ And none other shall be considered.” Mr. HENDRICK. Yes, sir. Mr. WASHINGTON. I would like to inquire if the words, “Stating the objects of the call” are not words of limitation; in other words, if you do not limit the special sessions to the consideration of the objects of the call, by those words? Mr. HENDRICK. Not at all. With these words in, “And none other shall be considered” it would be no doubt a limita- tion upon the part of the Legislature to consider anything else. My amendment contemplates that the Executive shall state the objects of the call. That is a limitation upon the power of the Governor, to be sure; but it is not a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to consider other matters, unless you say so. There is no limitation, whatever, by reason of the lan- guage used in the first two ciauses of that sentence. Mr. WASHINGTON. It leaves the Legislature to consider such matters as they may choose to consider, in their dis- cretion‘? Mr. HENDRICK. It does. A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Fleming, it was lost. A vote being taken on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Washington, it was lost. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Covington (Mr. Mackoy) again. Mr. MACKOY. I merely want to call the attention of the Convention to the fact that was intended simply to correct the phraseology. When the Governor issues a call, it is to, the General Assembly as a body collectively, and not to the Houses separately. Mr. DEHAVEN. The Committee has no objection to that, and accepts the amendment. A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Shelby, the same was declared carried. .- The amendment of the Delegate from Caldwell was read, as follows: Amend by inserting after the words “Houses,” in line 5, the words, “At any session.” It would then read: “And in s 34. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] A LLEN— .Vl ACKOY. [N ovember 8. case of disagreement between the two Houses at any session with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not ex- ceeding four months." Mr. ALLEN. I simply want to say in support of that amendment, that it is mere- ly a suggestion perhaps, a better amend- ment may follow this. This section refers to but one thing, namely, extraordinary sessions of the Legislature; and yet the second part of the section says, that “in case of disagreement between the two Houses, with respect to the time of adjournment, the Governor may adjourn them,” etc., etc. That has been construed heretofore to refer not only to extraordinary sessions of the Legislature, but to ordinary sessions of the Legislature. If you desire to retain that meaning, it seems to me that it would be better to insert the words “At any session” after the word “Houses,” so that it will read: “In case of disagreement between the two Houses at any session with respect to the time 'of adjournment, the Governor may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not exceeding four months.” A vote being taken on said amendment, it was declared lost. A vote being taken on said section as amended, it was adopted. The Reading Clerk read the next section, which is as follows: SEC. 24. A Treasurer, Auditor of Public Accounts, a .Register of the Land Oflice, Secretary of State and an Atrorney-Gen- eral shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at the same time the Governor is elected, for the term of four years, each of whom shall have been a resident citizen of this State for at least two years next before his election. The Secretary of State shall keep a fair register of, and attest all of the official acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto, be- fore either House of the General Assembly; and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law; and may ap- point his clerk; ' Mr. lugcKoY. I want to interrupt the order for a moment before you proceed to the consideration of that section. I would like to move to reconsider a vote by which certain sections were adopted. The motion will have to lie over one day of course unless the House consents to it. I move the reconsideration of the vote by which section 18 was adopted, and to offer in lieu thereof another section; also I move to recons der the vote by which section 20 was adopted, and offer in lieu of that another, and I should like to have them reported. The object of these two sections offered by me is to provide against the possible contingency of their being a vacancy in the office of Governor, and I ask that they be read now for the informa- tion of the House, and that my motion to reconsider the vote by which each of those sections was adopted be entered. The CHAIRMAN. You can only give notice of that fact in the Convention, and not in the Committee of the Whole. 'Mr. MACKOY._ Cannot the Committee of the 'Whole reconsider this matter? The CHAIRMAN. It has been held that you cannot. . Mr. MACKOY. By unanimous consent it can be done. DELEGATES. Leave! Leave] The Reading Clerk read the substitute for section 18, as follows: A Speaker pro tempore of the Senate shall be ‘elected by each Senate as soon after it is organized. as possible, the Lieutenant-Gover- nor vacating his seat as Speaker of the Senate until such election shall, be made, and as often as there is a vacancy in the office of Speaker pro tempore, another Speaker pro tempore of the Senate shall be elected by the Senate if in session, and if during the vacancy of the office of Governor the Lieutenant-Governor shall be impeached, removed from ofiice, refuse to. qualify, re- sign, die or be absent fromthe State, the Speaker pro tempore of the Senate shall, in like manner, administer the government; provided, that whenever‘a' vacancy shall occur in the ofiiceof Governor before-the first two years of the term shall have ex- pired, a new election for Governor shall‘ take place to fill ‘such’ vacancy. . EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 35 Saturday,] MACKOY—YOUNG—H ENDRICK. November 8 . The Reading Clerk read the substitute for section 20, as follows : “If the Lieutenant-Governor should be called upon to administer the government, - 4 and shall, while in such administration, re- sign, die or be absent from the State during the recess of the General Assembly, if there be no Speaker pro z‘ernpore of the Senate, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, for the time being, to convene the Senate for the purpose of choosing a Speaker; and until a Speaker is chosen, the Secretary of State shall administer the government. If there be no Secretary of State to perform the duties devolved upon him by this sec- tion, or in case that ofiicer be absent from the State, then the Attorney-General, for the time being, shall convene the Senate for the purpose of choosing a Speaker, and shall administer the government until a Speaker is chosen.” Mr, MACKOY- I would like, if there is no objection, that this should be consid- ered now. As I stated the other day, the contingency might arise in which both the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor may die at the same time; both might be assas- sinated; and under the law, as it now exists, some time would have to elapse be- fore the Senate could be convened and a Speaker pro tempore of the Senate elected. During that time the law, as it now stands, does not provide that the Secretery of State shall administer the Government. motion, when it was absolutely necessary that there shouldbe some oneto discharge the Executive duties. Then, again, it is not al- ways the case that a Speaker pro tempore is elected and the sections offered by me provide that a Speaker pro tempore shall be elected, and if in office he shall immediately assume the office without the necessity of con- Vening the Senate, and discharge the duties of that office. That is the object of the two sections, to avoid in the one case ex- pense, and in the other cases, the contin- gency of an interim during which there may be rio Executive ofiicer whatever, The Delegate from Hart this morning told me one instance in which such a thing might have occurred in ordinary times. He was It might be during a time of great civil com- _ absent from the State and the Lieutenant- Governor was suddenly taken sick and unable to be at the seat of Government. He had been ordered by his physician to go South, vand the Governor was out of the State; but fortunately was advised of it in time to return to the State, and there was an instance in which there was no peril probably, but still it might occur at a time when it would be necessary for some one to act as Executive. I think ifthe Committee consider the matter, they may be willing probably to accept those amend- ments or something intended to carry out the objects which they are designed to effect. The CHAIRMAN. Section 24 is now under consideration. We will finish that and then go back to your motion. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Christian, as follows: Add after the word “State,” in section ‘24, the words “Commissioner of Agricul- ture and Statistics.” The amendment of the Delegate from Todd was read, as follows: Amend the report of the Joint Commit- tee on Executive Department as follows: Section 25, line 2, strike out the words “Secretarv of State,” and after the word “election, in line 6 of section 24, add the following : “ The Governor shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of ‘the Senate, shall appoint a Secretary of State, who shall be commissioned during the term for which the Governor was elelcted if he shall so long behave himself we 1. Mr. YOUNG. We are now entering upon a subject that will require consider- able discussion. I move that the Commit- tee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit a am. Mr. HENDRICK. I second the motion. The motion was carried, and the Com- mittee of the Whole thereupon rose, and the President (Mr. Clay) resumed the Chair. ' Mr. STRAUS. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the Joint Committee on the Ex- ecutive Department, and report progress and ask leave to sit again. The report was adopted, and the Conven- tion upon motion adjourned. ionvention Ziecorb. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1. FRANKFORT, NOVEMBER 10. 1890. N0. 48 )Ionday,] The Convention was called to order by the President, Mr. Clay, and the proceed- ings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Henderson. The Journal of Saturday’s proceedings was read and approved. Petitions, Etc. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order will be the reception of petitions. Mr. McELROY. I have a communica- tion from the Clerk of my county in re- sponse to a resolution of this body. The PRESIDENT. The communica- tion will be referred to the Special Com- mittee. Mr. J. S. HINES. My county has made no statement, but I have made one myself, which I desire to have referred. The PRESIDENT. That will be re- ferred to the appropriate Committee. Mr. MCELROY. My communication does not go to that Special Committee. It should be sent to the Committee on Cir- cuit Courts, or to the Committee on Corpo- rations. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it will be referred to the Committee on Cir- cuit Courts. Mr. MUIR. I have a petition from the citizens of my county, which I desire to have read and referred to the Committee on General Provisions. The petition was read. The PRESIDENT. The communica- tion will be so referred. Mr. DEHAVEN. I have an answer from the Clerk of my county as to the amount of fees paid the J ailer. My recol- lection is that that was a resolution from the Committee on Circuit Courts, and this McELRoY—HINEs—MUIR—DEHAvEx. [N ovcmber 10 . communication should go to that Commit- tee. Mr. FIELD. I have a report from the County Court of Bracken, giving the in- debtedness of that county, which I desire to have referred to the Special Commit- tee. The PRESIDENT. The reports will be referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. FORRESTER. I havea commu- nication from the Clerk of Harlan county, stating the amount of fees paid to the Jailer. The PRESIDENT. It will be referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. FORGY. I have a petition which I desire to have read and referred to the Com- mittee on Legislative Department. The petition was read. and was so re- ferred. Mr. MILLER. I have a number of re- sponses from various counties, which I desire to have referred to the Special Committee of which the Delegate from Anderson is Chairman. The PRESIDENT. The communica- tions will be so referred. Mr. MAY. I have a statement showing the amount of fees paid to the Jailer in my county. The PRESIDENT. The communication will be referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts. Mr. BUCHANAN. I have a similar statement from my county. The PRESIDENT. The same disposi- tion will be made of that. Mr. J. S. HINES. I also have a similar statement. 2 RESOLUTIONS. Monday,] FUNK—BURNAM—RAMSEY. [November 10* The PRESIDENT. Same reference. Mr. NUNN. I have statements from the two counties I represent, Crittenden and Livingston, on the same subject. The PRESIDENT. The same reference will be made. Mr. FUNK. I rise to a question of per- sonal privilege. The PRESIDENT. will proceed. Mr. FUNK. 1 very much regret to have to call the attention of the Convention to the matterI now do. In No. 43, of the Convention Record, on page 12, I find an allusion to my name which I very much regret. I will not state the word, but all of you who have that number can see it. I feel indignant over the matter, and I believe any one else under the same cir- cumstances would feel just as I do. Then again, in the same Record, on page 46, there are words left out of my remarks upon an amendment and a portion of a section added which does not belong to me at all. I feel that it is doing me an injustice, and I do not believe that this Convention desires to do any one an injustice. I was in hopes when the printing matter was settled, that, with the Editor and the Stenog- rapher’and Printer, we could have things done properly. I will leave it to any mem- ber of the Convention as to whether I am right in this matter. If my name is to go in the Record in this way, I would greatly prefer to have it left out altogether. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I feel as the gentleman from Louisville does, that great injustice has been done him in the matter mentioned. I am not prepared to say that it ‘is intentional, but it is a matter of so much importance that I think the matter ought to be inquired into and the fault as- certained. Let it be known to the Conven- tion by whose omission or misconduct this thing has been done. I move, therefore, that the matter be referred to‘ the Com- mittee on Printing and Accounts to be in- quired into. The gentleman l Mr. BURNAM. I move that the Con- vention resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of the report of the Joint Committee on Ex- ecutive Oflicers. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest that there is the unfinished busi- ness, the report of the Committee on Pre- amble and Bill of Rights, which has precedence of the business to which you refer. Resolutions. Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to' offer a reso~ lution. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate- from Madison insist on his motion ? Mr. BURNAM. I think we could get through with that matter to-day. The PRESIDENT. The Chair wonldi hold, when the time for taking up the Special Order arrives, that that Special. Order has precedence over all other busi- ness. Mr. RAMSEY. The resolution I offer is in connection with the matter now belng discussed. I would like to have it re- ported. The resolution was read, and is as fol-- lows: Resolved, That the Secretary of State be, and he is hereby, requested to report to this Convention the number of pardons granted, fines and forfeitures remitted, of ' each Governor of this State within ten years last past, the length of time each Governor was in office, for what length of time each convict was sentenced, the date of sentence, the time when pardoned, for what crime convicted, the amount of fines and forfeitures remitted, the county and district where the offense was committed‘, and whether the pardons granted were before or after conviction. The PRESIDENT. The resolution is not in order. Does the Delegate from. Madison county insist on his motion‘? Mr. BURNAM. I do. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. Is it in order to move to go into Committee of the Whole after motions and resolutions are called for, BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 3 Monday,] RAMSEY—PHELPS—WHITAKEB. [November 10 . and before a Delegate has to send up a resolution‘? ‘The PRESIDENT. It is; but the mo- tion to go into Committee of the Whole can be voted down. The vote being taken, the motion of the Delegate from Madison county was lost. Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to re-ofl'er my resolution. ' The resolution was again read. A vote being taken, the resolution was declared rejected. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I offer a resolu- tion. Resolution was read, and is as follows: Resolved, That. each of the Delegates to this Convention be requested to furnish to the Secretary his name, profession and age, - the name of the county, counties, or district he is representing, his place of nativity and post-ofiice, and that the same be printed in an appropriate placein the bound records of this Convention—the names of the Dele- gates to be in alphabetical order. _Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I hope the mem- bers of this Convention will adopt that resolution. That kind of a report was printed with the records of the Convention of 1849, and I can see no good reason why any Delegate should vote against it. It will not cost much, and will be a satisfac- tion to the people of the State to know the names, counties, place of nativity, and post- office address. It is true some of the un- married men may object, because they are men of considerable age, but I do not see why others should. Mr. WHITAKER. Would it not be better to wait until we are nearly through‘? If we take it now, it might not represent our ages when we get through. (Laughter.) Mr. J. L. PHELPS. In answer to that, I guess it will take a good deal of persua- sion on the part of the Secretary to get the members to give their ages, and I want to give him ample time. The vote being taken, 'the resolution of the Delegate from Russell was adopted. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the Convention resolve itself into the Com- mittee of the Whole for the further con- sideration of the report of the Committee‘ on the Executive. The PRESIDENT. That motion has just been voted down, and the Special Order_ will be up in about a minute and a half. Mr. NUN N. I would like to‘have post-- poned the matter we are to take up at 11:30* o’clock until we get through with the report of the Committee on Legislative Department and Corporations. I think we‘ could get along better in that manner. I move to postpone indefinitely the Special Order set for half-past eleven. The PRESIDENT. The carrying of a. motion to indefinitely postpone is equiva- lent to the defeat of the whole matter. You might move to let it fall into the Orders of the Day. The motion was so amended. A vote being taken, the motion was lost. Preamble and Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The Special Order is now before the Convention. The proceedings in amended rule found on page 25, and as they were not under the amended rule in the- Committee of the Whole, the Chair thinks it would be better now to consider the matter in the same way in which we considered it in the Committee of the Whole. While he thinks the rule a good one, based on the same general ground that the- framers of the present Constitution had in mind when they said no bill should refer to more than one subject, still, as we considered the matter in the Committee of the Whole the way we did, the Chair thinks it will prevent confusion and complication to suspend the first part of the amended rule during a consideration of this matter in Convention; and the Chair will be obliged to some member to make such a motion. The Chair thinks that the amend- ed rule, which says that each section or" Committee of‘ the Whole were not strictly under the. 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. :to the Bill of Rights. 'Monday,] ALLEN—PETTIT—MCHENRY. [November 10 . paragraph of the report of the Committee which shall contain matter to be inserted in the Constitution shall be acted on sepa- rately, had better be suspended so far as this matter is concerned. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. ition. Mr. PETTIT. I second it. A vote being. taken, the motion was car- 'ried. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will re- 13011] the amendments offered by the Com- .mittee of the Whole. Mr. MCHENRY. Those are printed’ and I see no necessity of reading them. The PRESIDENT. That is the rule. The Convention has a right to know what the Committee of the Whole has done. Mr. MCHENRY. I thought we took up .each section by itself. The PRESIDENT. Unless a division I make that mo- Iis called for, they are considered as a whole. . Hr. MACKOY. I move a division of the amendments, and that they be taken up and voted for one by one. The PRESIDENT. That is a matter of right, and the Secretary will report the first amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole. The CLERK. The first amendment adopted is as follows: “Amend'Preamble by striking out in the fourth line the word " continuation,’ and insert in lieu thereof :the word ‘ continuance.’ ” A vote being taken, the amendment re- ported by the Committee of the Whole was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Report :amendment. Mr. MACKOY. Would it not be proper now to consider the Preamble as amended before passing to another section? The PRESIDENT. The general rule is to consider the Preamble last. Mr. McHENRY. That is the case with Preambles to Bills. This is not a Preamble It is a Preamble to The Preamble and the the next tthe ‘Constitution. Bill of Rights are two distinct things; one will likely come at the beginning of a Con- stitution, and the other may be towards the last part of it. I think the ordinary rule does not apply. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks it is not a matter of importance. Full opportunity will be given to consider. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is, “Amend article 1, Bill of Rights, by adding before the word ‘great,’ in the first line. the word ‘ general.’ ” Mr. BECKHAM. I rise to a ‘Parlia- mentary inquiry, whether it is not proper to finish what we have taken up? Is not the Preamble subject to amendment, or have we finished it? The PRESIDENT. We are simply acting on the amendments reported by the Committee of the Whole. After they are finished, other amendments can be taken up. Mr. BECKHAM. Do we pass the Pre- amble without further action‘? The PRESIDENT. The Parliamentary rule is that the vote will be on the report of the Committee as a whole, unless some gentleman proposes a division. Mr. MACKOY. After these amend— ments are considered section by section, and the whole matter gotten through with, We can then offer other substitutes. The PRESIDENT. Certainly. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is to add to subsection 4 of section 1 the words “being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.” ' Mr. RODES. That language, as the Convention will see, is used in section 7, and is, therefore, unnecessary and improper in this section. A vote being taken, the amendment re- ported by the Committee of the Whole was rejected. ' The PRESIDENT. amendment. Report the next BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Monday,] KNOTT—MACKOY. [November 10. The CLERK. “Amend subsection 7 of section 1 by striking out the words ‘their families,’ and also the words ‘or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally sum- moned,’ and insert the words ‘shall not be questioned.’ ” A vote being taken, the said amendment reported by the Committee of the Whole was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The following was adopted as subsection 8 : That absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a Republic, not even in the largest majority. A vote being taken, the amendment re- ported by the Committee of the Whole was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Report the second section of the report of the Committee 011 ~ Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. KNOTT. I rise to make the in- quiry as to whether it is in order now to renew amendments to this first section, which were offered in Committee of the Whole and voted down? The PRESIDENT. The amendments to the first section are all disposed of. Mr. KNOTT. Does that settle the first section? The PRESIDENT. We are considering the amendments reported by the Commit- tee of the Whole. When we have finished considering those, others can be offered. Of course, when an amendment is reported from the Committee of the Whole, there can be another amendment offered to it— it admits of amendment in the second de- gree. Mr. MACKOY. If it is in order, I move to pass subsection 2 until the report of the Committee on Legislative Depart- ment and the report of the Committee on Corporations are made. The PRESIDENT. That motion is not in order. We are considering the report of he Committee of the Whole. The whole matter will have to be postponed if any part of it is. That is according to Parlia- mentary ruling. Mr. MACKOY. I am not questioning the Parliamentary ruling. The reason I voted for the postponement of the Bill of Rights awhile ago was, I felt that there was matter in the report that was proper for the Committees on Legislative Depart- ment and Corporations to report on. I think the words “that no laws shall be passed by the General Assembly granting any special privileges or franchises,” con-- tained in this report, is a restraint on the power of the General Assembly, on which the Committee on Legislative Department. should report. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is- out of order. That was a question ad- dressed to the Convention when the mat- ter of the postponement was up, and it cannot be brought up now. The Secre- tary will please report the amendment. The CLERK. The first amendment re- ported by the Committee of the Whole is as follows: , Amend section 2 by striking out the fol-- lowing words: “But in consideration ofv public services,” and insert the following: “Except as shall be provided in this Con- stitution.” A vote being taken, the said amendment. reported by the Committee of the Whole- was adopted. The CLERK. There is also an amend-s ment offered to it, as follows: And no law shall be passed by the Gen-v eral Assembly making any irrevocable- grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities. . Mr. MACKOY. I move that that amendment be referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT. That motion is out of order. The amendment will have to be: disposed of along with the report. A vote being taken on the said amend- ment reported by the Committee of the:- Whole, the same was adopted. e BILL or RIGHTS. Monday,] BRONSTON—MODERMOTT—KNOTT. [November 10 . The PRESIDENT. amendment. The Reading Clerk read the next amend- ment, as follows: Report the next Amend section 4, as follows: After the word “worship,” in section 4 of the report, add, “or to send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed.” Mr. BRONSTON. There was a substi- tute adopted for the whole of that section. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the substitute adopted for that section by the Committee of the Whole. The CLERK. The following is the sub- stitute for that section adopted by the Com- mittee of the Whole: That no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or de- nomination; nor to any particular creed. mode of worship, or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, or obliged, against his own consent, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion whatever; but all per- sons shall be protected in their right to worship Almighty God according to the ‘dictates of their own consciences; and the civil rights, privileges, or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching whatsoever. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I want to ask the author of that substitute, whether if the substitute be carried, and there be no pro- vision in any other part of the Constitution providing that churches shall be exempt from taxation, it will not follow that church property cannot be exempted from taxation ? Mr. KNOTT. I think not. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Would not the Courts hold that when you say nobody ‘shall contribute to the support of any denomination, the exemption of prop- erty from taxation is a contribution by those not exempted? Mr. KNOTT. The Courts have never i said that; and the same provision, practi- cally, is in the old Constitution. Mr. MACKOY. I move to strike out the words in the substitute)! “against his own consent.” It seems to me that no per- son can be obliged against his own consent. The word “obligation” implies that it is against consent, and the expression seems to me to be tautology. To correct the phraseologv I offer this motion. The amendment of the Delegate from Covington was read, and is as follows: Strike out of the substitute the words “ or against his own: consent.” Mr. KNOTT. I will just say this, that I thought about the propriety of using those words when I drafted a substitute, but I thought it safer to leave them in, because sometimes men contribute volun- tarily to aid a Minister. It then becomes a contract; but afterwards they may not wish to pay the subscription, and the plea might be made that it was against his consent at that time to pay the subscription. I found the words in the old Constitution and adopted them. Mr. MACKOY. I do not think that construction could be given to it. Mr. KNOTT. I do not think it could legitimately either. I copied the words from the old Constitution. I doubted the propriety of it at the time, but I put it in anyhow. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Do I understand it to be held that if we wish to amend that at any time we could do it, as the gentle- man from Covington is trying to do‘? The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that any amendment reported by the Com- mittee of the Whole is subject to amend- ment in the second degree. Mr. MODERMOTT. I have an amend- ment I want to offer to that 4th section of the report. The PRESIDENT. You can offer it, but it must be an amendment to the sub- stitute. A vote being taken on the amendment of BILL OF RIGHTS. _ I 7 Monday,] PETTIT—BECKNER—KNOTT. [November 10 . the Delegate from Covington, the same was declared to have been rejected. ' Mr. PETTIT. I have an amendment. The PRESIDENT. The amendment »of the Delegate from Louisville has pre- ‘cedence. The Reading Clerk read the amendment ‘of Mr. McDermott, as follows: Amend the substitute by inserting after the word “consent,” in the second line of section 4, the following words: “Or to send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed.” Mr. KNOTT. I will say to the gentle- man that I was about to propose the same :amendment, to come in at a difl'erent place; to insert after the word “that,” on the first line: “No man shall be compelled to send his child or children to any school, and no preference,” etc. ' Mr. McDERMOTT. That is satisfac- tory to me, and I will withdraw my amend- ment. Mr. KNOTT. I offer that as an amend- ment. Mr. BECKNER. I want to ~call the at- tention of the Convention to the significance of the amendment proposed by the Dele- gate from Marion. I do not think it ap- plies to the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Louisville. I offer new the :amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisville, and which has been withdrawn by him. Mr. KNOTT. I am just drawing my town amendment, and I think I have the floor. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Daveiss has been recognized, and while the Delegate from Marion is drawing his amendment, the Secretary will report the amendment of the Delegate from Daveiss. Mr. PETTIT. I call the attention of the Convention to the fact that we have :stricken out in the old Constitution the word “that,” prefixed to each paragraph. "The Preamble,‘ article 1, says: “That the ‘great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and ‘established, we declare: all men are by na- ture free and equal; no man or set of men,” .etc. Instead of using the word “that” in each succeeding paragraph—omission making smoother reading—I move, there- fore, to strike out the word “ that” where designated. ' Mr. ALLEN. I wish to call the atten- tion of the Delegate from Daveiss to the fact that if the amendment ofi'ered by the Delegate from Marion is adopted, then your amendment will be unnecessary. Mr. PETTIT. I think so. The PRESIDENT. Does the gentle- man insist on his amendment‘? Mr. PETTIT. I will withdraw it tem- porarily. ‘ Mr. KENNEDY. In the Committee of the Whole I offered a substitute for sec- tion ‘.2 of the Committee’s report as now amended. The substitute was not called up by the Clerk. I want to ask when is the proper time to insist upon a vote on that substitute ? The PRESIDENT. The amendments in order now are these amendments adopted in Committee of the Whole. The amendments adopted in Commit- tee of the Whole have precedence over other amendments, and the only way you can offer an amendment is by an amend— ment to the amendments already adopted by the Committee of the Whole. Mr. KENNEDY. Then when will sub- stitutes for sections be in order? The PRESIDENT. Just as soon as amendments to the Committee’s report, reported by the Committee of the Whole, are disposed of. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of ‘the Delegate from Marion, as follows: Amend the substitute as follows: By inserting after the word “ that,” on the first line, the following: “ No man shall be com- pelled to send his child or children to any school, and.” Mr. BECKNER. I desire to say a word about that, so that the Convention may understand what it is acting on. I am as ardent a friend of public 'schools as any 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. Monday,] BECKNER. [November 10.. man in the Commonwealth, and believe that the welfare and prosperity of the Statev depend as much upon having an adequate system of schoolsas upon any other thing that can be done for it. I am not for com- pulsory‘ education at present. 1 do not think that the time has come for it in Ken- tucky, nor do I think our system of schools is such that it should be required by any reasonable man; but the time may come in the future when the people of the State shall demand that those who have children, and are raising them in this Common- wealth, shall give them the advantages of an education, which may be so bountifully provided by the State. If the State goes to the expense of furnishing a good sys- tem of schools throughout her borders, if the localities vote aid to what the State has done, and shall give good school-houses and good schools with good teachers in every district in the Com- monwealth, and there are many children who are not sent to those schools, and the State suffers detriment by it, in the judg- ment of those who represent her, I say we ought not to tie the hands of the people of the future in that respect. We ought not to say that the Legislature shall not pass a compulsory educational law, if it shall see fit to do so. In the great States of this Union they have compulsory education; in Massachusetts, and in New York, and in a number of the other States they have al- ready provided that the people shall, during a certain portion of the year, send their children to school. They have in some of the greatest countries outside of the United States adopted it, and many think it is the logic of the free school system that those who do not send to the free school, shall be required to send their children a cer- tain portion of time to some other schools, in order to give them the rudiments of an education. I say if, in the future,_it shall be deemed wise and proper to enact such a law, we ought not now, with the limited view that we have of this matter of popu- lar education, insufficiently advised, as many of the people of this State are, upon this question, we ought not, at this early period in the development of the educa- tional system of the State, to declare that at no time and under no circumstances shall there be compulsory education. My amend- ment does not prevent it. My amendment. simply says that those who have children shall not be required to send them to- schools to which they may be conscientiously opposed. It does not hamper the Legisla- ture in any way ; but allows it to provide- that they shall send them to some schools It may be a school of their own church, or a school of their own neighborhood. They have the right to choose what school they shall send them to. If the Legislature- shall provide that the children shall be sent, to some school for a certain portion of time, my amendment does not forbid it. The‘ amendment of the Delegate from Marion would, and the Legislature would have no- option about it. If this system of com- mon schools is to be what they have made- it in the great States of this Union, we- have no right to pass this amendment. The idea prevails in many of the Southern States—in nearly all of the Southern States —-that public schools are simply a public charity; that they are a provision made for the poor children of the Common- wealth; a theory which I spurn and scorn, and which is totally insufiicient, and does- not rise to a proper thought with reference to the question. I say we have no right to- tie up the future in this matter. If it be- the duty of the State to provide education for all its children, and to see that we have intelligent citizens, and to provide the means for becoming intelligent, then-the- State ought to be left free to see that the children are sent to schools, which they may in the future, so wisely and benefi- cently, provide; and I, therefore, object to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Marion, which cuts off that power' entirely, and says that so long as this Con- BILL OF RIGHTS. 9;: Monday,] KNOTT—BECKNER. [November 10. stitution prevails in this State there can be no compulsory education. That is the effect of his amendment. Now the effect of my amendment is not that, but leaves the Legislature free to adopt a system of compulsory education, if it shall see fit to do so in the future. _ Mr. KNOTT. If Constitutions are intended for any thing at all, they are intended for the protection of the minority. It is a common saying, that V0.1: Popul'i, V0.1; Dei; nevertheless, the populace frequently commit acts that are not only unwise, but essentially despotic, and of all the intolerable despotism that my imag- ination can conceive, the act of the State, reaching into the bosom of the family of one of its citizens, taking his child from its natural asylum, placing itself in loco par— ent-is, notwithstanding he may desire to ed- ucate it there, is the most atrocious. That is my judgment. Whether a majority may desire l:that all the people shall send their children to school or not, is one ques- tion; the right of a minority, whose children are as dear to them, to nur- ture and educate them in the bosoms of their own families, is another and a far more serious question. I do not rise to argue this proposition at all; but to state here and now emphatically, that the very object of this proposed amendment is to take away from the majority this terrific power. ‘We have gotten along very well without compulsory education, and we will no doubt get along as well in the future, without allowing a majority to substitute its will for the affection and care of the parent from whose loins his children have sprung. It is for the express purpose of denying to the Legislature the power to inaugurate compulsory education in this State, instead of limiting it by a mere question of conscience! Who is to deter- mine upon that question of conscience‘? Who is to explore the inner recesses of a man’s heart? Who is to weigh his affec- tions or his prejudices and say whether again st Suppose- he has conscientious this school or that school? he has conscientious scruples against all schools. Nevertheless, under the- gentleman’s amendment he must send his children to school, although he may be» perfectly well prepared and perfectly will- ing to educate them by his own hearth-- stone. Mr. BECKNER. The speech made by the gentleman from Marion would be a good one in a legislative body, before which the question might come. What I insist is that the question shall not be- finally and forever disposed of here by this. body; that it is unwise for us to say now with the educational situation as it is in Kentucky, that there shall at no period of ' our future be a system of compulsory educa- tion ; with the population that we have—the census of 1880 showing—as I stated the other day, that 29 3-10ths of the people of’ this Commonwealth who ought to be able scruples ' to read, were not able to do so; with a por- tion of our population indifferent to the- advantages of education,indifferent to the- duties of citizenship, and unfit to exercise the right of suffrage intelligently, I say that in the future the General Assembly may see fit to adopt some system of com-- pulsory education, and the people may desire to have it done; but this amend- ment will absolutely preclude any such action on the part of the representatives of the people, and I say it is improper for us now, having as little light on it as we have, having given to it as little consideration as- we have, that we should absolutely forbid them ever to have this system of education, which has been working so advantageously in other States of the Union, which is being adopted throughout the civilized world, where they have public schools. Mr. KNOTT. In Prussia, for instance. Mr. BECKN ER. It has been in Prus- sia, and made a great State of it, too. It is being adopted in England and in France, and in all the great Commonwealths of‘ '10 BILL OF RIGHTS. TMondayJ >sidered in this _,years ago. BECKNER—MILLER. [November 10. ~"this Union. I am not in favor of it now. If the question were up as to whether we =should adopt a system of compulsory edu- cation or not, I should vote against it, and would be opposed to it, because we are not ‘prepared for it; but I say it is unwise for us to decide now, when it has not been con- Commonwealth. It has never been agitated or urged in our legis- -1ative bodies. I have not, during the twen- ty years that I have given special attention ‘to questions of this kind, heard even a 'imotion made to that effect in our General ‘Assembly. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Will the Dele- .gate yield for a question‘? ‘ Mr. BECKNER. Certainly. -Mr. W. H. MILLER. What Com- 'monwealths in this country have adopted "it? Mr. BECKNER' Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, and I might name other States. Mr. W. H. MILLER. In what section \of the Constitution does it appear? Mr. BECKNER. It is not in their 'Constitutions, but in the acts of the Gen- \eral Assembly, and I, therefore, say that we ought not to put a clause in our Con-' ~stitution forbidding the Legislature from enacting such a law. We may or may not want to adopt it. We cannot tell what may come. We have had laws passed in ‘~the last ten or fifteen years which would have been considered monstrous thirty Forty years ago, when those men formed the Constitution under which 'we live now, had a proposition been made ‘to enact what has been passed here without a division, the man who suggested it would have been drummed out of the State. I say it is exceedingly unwise and improper to say what shall be done in the future ‘about a thing like this. Of course it would ’-‘be different if some great wrong was likely "to be perpetrated, something that would ‘injure the Commonwealth or ruin the lpeople of the State, or deprive them of their liberties and rights; but this is a ques- tion about which there is a great diversity of opinion among intelligent and good men, and the people of the future ought to be left free to deal with it; and I do not know a more serious stab‘ that could be given to the prosperity and welfare of this Commonwealth in the future than for us to say now that, under no circumstances, shall there ever be a system of compulsory education, which many of the wisest of men who have considered it think the logic of the common school system. Mr. COX. “Sufiicient unto the day is the evil thereof.” If the time should ever come when the ‘people of Kentucky should determine upon a compulsory system of education, the Constitution of the State can then be amended to secure that end; but I am thoroughly convinced that the people of Kentucky to-day do not want any thing looking in the direction of a system of compulsory education. It is one of the relics of tyranny and oppression, and Ken- tucky wants this Convention to give to us a Constitution that will secure to us all the rights, liberties and privileges of freemen, and not to compel us to adopt a system that may ever be turned into reaching into the families and homes of all, compelling them to send their children to school. Such a provision would be directly antagonistic to all the ideas I have of the theory of civil government. Mr. BECKNER. My esteemed friend from Carroll entirely misapprehends the situation. I do not propose to adopt any thing looking towards compulsory educa- tion. My amendment simply proposes to leave the future free to deal with it as it pleases. That is the proposition. Mr. McDERMOTT. I'shall not take any part in the dispute between the gentle- man from Marion and the gentleman from Clark. I shall vote for the amendment of the former; but, if that be defeated, I hope that at least the amendment of the latter will be carried. The Legislature should BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘ 11 M onday,] not be intrusted with the power to compel :any man to send his children to a school which his judgment condemns. Such a constraint on his will in so vital a matter is nothing short of tyranny. In this Bill of Rights you proclaim with emphasis that every man’s conscience shall be unfettered; ' ‘that he shall have the right to worship God as he pleases; and hence it follows that he :should have the unhampered privilege of inculcating his faith in his ofi'spring. If he is allowed the right to adhere to any church he likes, he should be allowed to ‘take his children with him. You keep the word of promise to his ear and break it to his hope—you give him husks instead of bread—if you tell him that his conscience :shall be free and his liberty unimpaired, but that he must be denied the inestimable ‘right to rear his child in such manner as he may deem best. Such a wrong is unbear- able to every honorable man. Fathers and mothers, deeply interested in the suc- cess and happiness and salvation of their oflspring—far more interest- Ied than the State—should not, un- der any circumstances, be compelled :to use schools to which they are conscien- tiously opposed. When Sparta undertook the complete education of the children of ‘its citizens, it intended simply to make sol- diers fit for constant war, and that Grecian i‘Sta-te temporarily gained great prestige and power; vbut its strength failed and its military glory vanished. The chief merit “of our Christian civilization—its main bul- wark—is the sacred influence of our homes. We rightly look to the altar of the family as the place where the child must imbibe the .great principles of virtue and public spirit. If you take away from the mother the ,guardianship of her offspring, what will become of it? Are not her teaching and her example better than all other training ? Is not a father or a mother better fitted ‘than the State to direct the education of a child? If it were certainly true that learn- ing always makes a man good—if philoso- McDERMoTT—FARMER. [November 10. phers and scientists, like Herbert Spencer, did not deny that merely acquiring a knowl- edge of reading, writing and arithmetic makes men good—it might be proper to allow the Legislature an opportunity to compel parents to surrender the entire control of their children to the State; but we know that the best influence over a child is the home- eircle, and that the parent is the best pro- tector and the safest guide of the young. We can trust the unselfish affection of a father, and the sacred and boundless devo- tion of a mother to secure every child fair education where it is substantially free. At any rate, the State cannot, and will not, fill the place of the parent. Do not tell a man that you give him religious freedom if you take from, him the education of the child that is dearer to him than his life. If you cannot say that the State shall never compel a man to send his child to any school, you surely can and will agree that no man shall be compelled to send his children to a school to which he conscien- tiously objects. Without this defense against arbitrary power and intolerance I for one would not give a pin for your boasted freedom. You are then but the slaves of a majority. Your dearest rights are as insecure as the web the spider weaves in the sunlight. Every tyrant has justified his wrongful deeds by pleading that they were necessary for the good of the State. If you are to have compulsory education, why not have compulsory re- ligion? I do not belittle the public schools or the inestimable been of educa- tion. I passed through the public schools and the High School of Louisville. I would not injure them; but I would not compel "any man to send his child to a school to which he conscientiously objects. Mr. FARMER. I cannot let this ques- tion pass without entering- my protest, and without signifying my hearty approval of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Marion; and I am in hopes that the amendment offered by the Delegate from 12 ' BILL OF RIGHTS. Monday,] FARMER—BECKNER. [November 10.. Clark will not prevail. There is one idea that none of the gentlemen have touched upon in this matter. It would be no hard- ship for the rich. The rich can send their children to school; they can have a tutor in their families, but I know in many cases in my county it would work a hardship against the poor. We know in many in- stances that our Catholic friends are op- posed to sending their children to the com- mon and secular schools of the State; and it may happen that the Catholics, or other religionists, would be conscientiously op- pesed to sending their children to any school provided by law. It may happen that there might be no school accessible to which they could send their children, and I think the conscientious scruples of all persons should be respected by the people of this State; and I am utterly opposed to any thing ;like paternalism on the part of the State. I think the State has no right, as the gentleman from Marion has said, to go into the bosoms of our families, that the father and the mother are the best judges as to whether their child should be sent to any school. The state of its health may be such that it cannot be sent to school in safety, and of that fact the parents should be the judge; and for these reasons, and others that have been so ably presented by the gentleman from Carroll, I give my hearty approval to the amendment of the Delegate from Marion, and I hope that this Convention will vote down the amend- ment of the gentleman from Clark. Mr. BECKNER. Just a word. The amendment that I offered was really a compromise made with a Delegate who had an amendment such as that proposed by the gentleman from Marion, and who was going to insist upon its passage; and in discussing it with him he agreed that the amendment ofli'ered by me would be satis- factory to those who believe as I do, and it would protect all who had conscientious convictions against sending their children to the public schools, as he had. I think, really, it covers every question of con- science that can come up. I would force no man to send his children to a school to which he is conscientiously opposed. If, however, the representatives of the people desire to say that the children of the Com-~ monwealth, who are being neglected, who are allowed to run about, or who are kept at home by their parents for purposes of gain, to be employed at hours when they ought to be sent to school, shall go to schools provided by the State, so as to make- them intelligent, good citizens, and keep them from being criminals and paupers, then I say that the future ought to be allowed to settle that question for itself; and we ought not to come in here with an inhibition in this Constitution when so momentous matter has not been discussed, and is not understood by the people of this State, and forever preclude them from con- sidering it. I say it is unwise in us to-do it. You talk about a few thousand colored people voting against this Constitution,. because you h av e a referen cc to slavery in it. I say there will be more people voting again st it if you put that clause in it, because there are people in this State who hold that the Commonwealth has the right to deal with these questions, and they will not be put down. They are an intelligent class of the population of this State. They have talked about this matter and considered and dis- cussed it, and they would prefer to stand under the present Constitution rather than tie up that future, which will be greater than the present generation has dreamed of, and will put this State in line with the‘ other great States of this Union. I am opposed to putting in the Constitution any-- thing about compulsory education, or com-- pelling people to send their children to school. If I were now in the Legislature and the question were pending, I should vote against compulsory education, because- I do not think we are prepared for it; but the time may come when it may be consid~ BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 citizens intelligently. "jection against popular education. seen it in pamphlets sent around that Mas- M onday,] BECKNER—KNOTT. [November 10. ered necessary to get rid of the illiteracy in the State, and to compel children of the State to attend school in order that they may be prepared to exercise their rights as As the gentleman from Louisville said, in Greece they edu- cate their children to make soldiers of them. ,I/Ve educate our children here to make in- telligent voters of them. Intelligent voters protect the rights of our people. We do not need a standing army in this country, . save to protect us from the Indians on the frontier. We are not going to be troubled with foreign enemies, and if we have in- telligent citizens, we are not going to be troubled with internal enemies. The main object of our public schools is that our peo- ple may be made intelligent enough to ex- ercisc the right of suffrage. That is the reason for the expenditure of this great sum of money ;. not to provide schools for poor children in the State, but to make all the children in the State intelligent. Mr. KNOTT. “Till the gentleman allow one question‘? Mr. BECKNER. Certainly. Mr. KNOTT. Do not the facts show that in the great State of Massachusetts, with which the gentlemen would like to bring Kentucky in line, there isimorc pauperism, more crime, and more vice of every description than there is in Kentucky, and that the‘ population is about the same‘? Mr. BECKNER. I will correct the gen- tleman in one thing. I did not say that I would like to bring Kentucky in line with Massachusetts in every respect. They have there three per cent. of illiteracy, and these are largely those who have come into the State; and I will say further about Massa- chusetts, I am not in any way, shape or form, connected with Massachusetts. My ancestors came from Virginia, and I am of simon pure Virginia stock; but I will say for Massachusetts that that matter has been brought up time and again as an ob- I have 1 than any other State. sachusetts has more pauperism and crime I will tell you how it is in Massachusetts. There they send men to the penitentiary for becoming con- firmed drunkards. They confine them in that institution for a year or more for va- rious and sundry crimes concerning which we are indifferent in the State of Kentucky, and in many instances those committing them ale given high ofiice. (Laughter). I saw in the State of Massachusetts some years ago, when I had the honor of being Pen- itentiary Commissioner, more than six hun- dred women, confined for offenses of which no cognizance would be taken in Ken- tucky, and I saw at least four hundred men confined for offenses about which nothing would be said in this grand old Comm mwealth of ours. I love Ken- tucky and respect her as much as anybody in the world; but we all know that Ken- tucky is not up with many of the States in a great many respects, and I as a citizen of the State, born here, and with ancestors living here since the foundation of the State, who camefrom Virginia, and loving her institutions and her past as I do, I say as an honest man that she is not what she should be, and I would have the future left free to make her what other States have been made. I have no prejudice or see- tional feeling in this; I am a Democrat of the old school, born and raised here; but I propose in this Convention to tell the truth when the occasion comes; and I say we are not the greatest Commonwealth in the world. We have as many elements of greatness as any State. {We have not done for the State what should be done. That must be admitted, it seems to me, by all impartial and reasonable men. I want to leave the future free to make the State what it should be; if by one means they shall think it proper, let them do it; or if by another they shall think it proper, let them do it. Our people are becoming more enlightened every day. They are improving steadily, and they can certainly 14 ' BILL or RIGHTS. Monday,] BEcKNER—RAMsEY. be left to control themselves in this matter; ‘and what I object to is to tying their hands on so vitally important a question; for us blindly here to say that they shall not do this thing which has been considered proper, and has been endorsed by the people of so many States; for us now to pronounce final judgment upon it and settle it, with so little discussion, so little knowledge of the situation and wants of the future, would be a great wrong; and I will say to my friend from Henderson that I am not ad- vocating any thing which would force peo- ple to send their children to any school whatsoever. I am simply arguing that this Convention shall allow the future to do as it pleases about this question, as the people in the past have been left free to do as they pleased. Sixty years ago we had no system of public education in Ken- tucky. In 1836 the first movement was made, and it has gradually developed from year to year, with a very small provision at first. Only a few years ago was any thing like a decent provision made by the State. In many counties they have done nothing to supplement what the State has done. In three-fourths of the county seats nothing has been done towards supple- menting what the State pays for popular education; and yet, at this very beginning of the work of providing a system of com- mon schools for our people, we go and settle one of the great questions connected with it finally and forever, and say that that great and intelligent future, which is to come after us, shall have no lot or part in the discussion‘. of this question coming up in the other States and being settled in the way we say it shall not be considered here. That is what I am objecting to, and I say leave it alone—keep your hands off. Mr. RAMSEY. If I understand the question we have before us now, it is not whether we shall adopt compulsory educa- tion by a provision in this Constitution, but whether or not we shall leave it open, so that if the time should come hereafter, and the sentiment of the people in the- State should demand compulsory education ,.. that we might secure it by legislative en- actment. I am very heartily in favor of the suggestions offered by the gentleman from Clark in leaving that matter open. I think it would be very unwise for us to adopt a provision here that would preclude us hereafter from taking such steps in order‘ to secure the education of the children oft his State. I do not understand by compulsory education, as it has been adopted in other States of this Union, that. the parent shall be compelled to send his child to a school which has been provided by the State, but all the provisions which have been adopted by the different States-- provide that the child shall be placed in some school and receive some education; not that it shall be educated by the public schools of the State exclusively, but that it shall be sent to some school, either public- or private, and educated. It seems to me- it would be very unwise for us to adopt a provision that from hereafter securing such in this State. Not only Massachu- setts, but Indiana, Illinois, Kansas and several of the States recently admitted into the Union, even while Territories, had provisions by legislative enactment, re- quiring children to be in school at least. twelve weeks out of every year; not that. they shall be in the public schools, but that some school shall be provided for them. If the parent has conscientious objection to sending them to a public school, they must provide other means of educating‘ them, so that they shall have at least. twelve weeks schooling in each year. I can see no objection to that. It seems to me that it is awise provision for those- children who have no home influence thrown around them; who have parents- who do not realize the importance, but who neglect the education of their children, and will not send them to either the public or- private schools, but keep them at home, as [November 10 . would preclude us- _ results- BILL OF RIGHTS. 15. Monday,] PHELPS—LASSING—BECKNER. [November lO.~ the gentleman from Clark expressed it, for the purpose of gain, or something of that kind. I very much favor the idea of the system which has been adopted in several States of the Union, by which children shall be sent to some school'during a certain number of weeks of the year, and I would very much regret to see a provision in our Constitution which would prevent us from securing such a system in Kentucky, if it should appear hereafter that the people de- sire it. I, therefore, hope that no provis- ion will be adopted which will prevent us from securing legislation 011 this subject. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I offered an amend- ment to the amendment of the Delegate from Clark when we were in Committee of the Whole. I desire the Secretary to report that to the Convention. The PRESIDENT. Unless there is ob- jection, the Secretary will report the amendment of the Delegate from Russell. However, the amendment of the Delegate from Clark is not under consideration. It is the substitute of the Delegate from Marion. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I understand that; but the Delegate from Clark will re-ofi'er his amendment in a few moments. I am in favor of the amendment of the Delegate from Clark as amended by mine. Mr. LASSING. I move the previous question. The PRESIDENT. Will the gentleman be a little more explicit. Mr. LASSING. I move the previous question. I The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion can be moved on any section, or on the whole report. Mr. LASSING. I move it on the sec- tion now under consideration. A vote being taken, the main question was ordered. Mr. McDERMOTT. Does that include the amendment of the Delegate from Clark? The PRESIDENT. It disposes of all the amendments to the amendmet of the- Committee of the Whole. Mr. BECKNER. Do you mean all,‘ amendments offered heretofore or which may be offered hereafter ? The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds. that the effect of the previous question is» to preclude any more amendments to this amendment. The Chair wants the Con- vention to understand the status of the‘ question, and to prevent any mistake, will again put the motion for the previous ques- tion. The vote being taken, the Convention re- fused to order the main question. The PRESIDENT. The vote will now be taken on the amendment of the Delegate- from Marion. Mr. BECKNER. On the yeas and nays. The amendment of the Committee of the- Whole, as amended by the Delegate from Marion, was reported. The CLERK. In Committee of the Whole section 4 of the original report of that I demand the Committee on Preamble and Bill of ' Rights was stricken out, and in lieu the section offered by the Delegate from Ma- rion was substituted. The roll-call on the adoption of the sub-- stitute offered by the Delegate from Ma-~ rion resulted, yeas 34, nays 49, as follows:. YEAS—34. Amos, D. C. Hanks, Thomas H. Askew, J. F. Hines, J. S. Beckham, J. C. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W. Kennedy, Hanson,_ Knott, J. Proctor Boles, S. H. Lassing, L. W. Brown, J. S. Martin, W. H. Buckner, S. B. McChord, Wm. C._ Bullitt, W. G. McDermott, E. J ._ Burnam, Curtis F. Clardy, John D, McElroy, WV. J. McHenry, H. D. Cox, H. Miller, Will. Doris, W. F. Miller, W. H. Durbin, Charles Pettit, Thos. S. Farmer, H, H. Quicksall, J. E._ Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert HAYS—~49. James, A. R. Allen, C. T. ‘16 BILL OF RIGHTS. M ond-ay,] Allen, M. K. .Auxier, A. J. Ayres, W. W. Beckner, W. M. Bennett, B. F. Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Buchanan, Nathan ‘Carroll, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie DeHaven, S. E. Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. 'Glenn, Dudley A. ‘Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Hogg, S. P. Hopkins, F. A. Jacobs, R. P. DURBIN—PHELPS—RODES. November 10. Johnston, P. P. Kirwan, E. E. Mackoy, W. H. May, John S. Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. lVIuir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. Petrie, H. G. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam'l J. Ramsey, W. R. Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. \Vood, J. M. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. ansnx'r—l 7. Applegate, Leslie T. Brummal, J. M. Chambe's, G. D. English, Sam. E. Goebel, William Hendrick, W. J. Jonson, Jep. C. Lewis, W. W. Montgomery, J. F. ()‘Hara, R. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Phelps, Zack Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. \Vest. J. F. VVmlfolk. J. F. So the substitute was rejected. During the roll call Mr. Durbin asked leave to explain his vote. granted, and he spoke as follows: Mr. DU RBIN. I have thirteen children The same was and I do not think any man or set of men is entitled to say what I shall do with them; consequently I will vote aye. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the amendment offered by the Dele- gate from Clark. The Clerk read the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark, as follows: Amend the seventh line of section 4 by adding after the word. “whatever” these words “ nor shall any man be compelled to send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed.” Mr. J. L. PHELPS. ment to offer to that. The PRESIDENT. Your amendment I have an amend- is not in order. This is an amendment to an amendment. A vote being taken, the amendment _ofi‘ered by the Delegate from Clark was adopted. Mr. RODES. If I am in order, I move to strike out all after the word “whatever,” in the seventh line, down to the word “con- science," on the ninth line. The PRESIDENT. That amendment is in order, but the gentleman had better reduce it to writing. Mr. RODES. My reason for making that motion is that it is embraced in the second sub-division of section 1. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that the report of the Committee is now open to amendment, and all amend- ments must be acted upon before the sub- stitutes are taken up. Mr. PHELPS. I would like to know when my amendment will be in order. The PRESIDENT. Whenever drawn in such a form as to be an amendment to the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights it will be in order. Mr. PHELPS. It was acted upon in Committee of the Whole as an amendment, offered by the Delegate from Clark. The PRESIDENT. The amendment before the Convention is the amendment of the Committee of the Whole, and to that only one amendment is allowed. You cannot have an amendment in the third degree. If your amendment is legitimate to the report of the Committee as now amended, it will be in order, but the Chair would have to hear the amendment read before he could decide it. 1 Mr. MACKOY. Does that apply to any section of the report‘? The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir; but the section will have to be acted upon in order. The Clerk will report the amendment of the Delegate from Warren. The amendment was read as follows: Amend by striking out all after the word “whatever,” in the seventh line, down to the word “conscience,” in the ninth line. BILL OF RIGHTS. . 17 . 3 Monday,] The CLERK. I would suggest to the Delegate from Warren that the amend- ment just adopted, which was offered by the Delegate from Clark, comes in just af- ter the word “ whatever.” Mr. RODES. That does not interfere with it. The CLLERK. The Convention has just adopted a clause which comes immediately after the word “ whatever.” Your amend- ment says strike out all after the word “whatever,” and that would include the amendment just adopted by the Conven- tion. Mr. MACKOY. to the Preamble. The PRESIDENT. Send 'it up and it will be considered in order. Mr. MACKOY. I want to offer as a substitute for the Preamble as reported by the Committee the Preamble of our pres- ent Constitution. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I wish to make a motion that instead of adjourning at 1 o’clock, the Convention take a recess until I have an amendment The PRESIDENT. That involves the suspension of the rules, and will require a two-thirds vote to pass it. Mr. MCHENRY. We will retard the business of the Convention if we have evening sessions to-day or to-morrow or probably the next day. One of the most important Committee meetings will be held this evening and to-morrow-—a meeting of the Committee on Court of Appeals. To- morrow evening there may be a meeting —a very important meeting—of the Joint Committee on Courts. and other important Committee meetings will beheld. I do not think we should have evening sessions. I call for the yeas and nays on the motion to take a recess. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I second the call. The result of the roll-call was as fol- lows. YEAS—41. Allen, M. K. Hines, J. S. Auxier, A. J. Hopkins, F. A. - Ronns— M ACKOY—MOORE—M cH EN RY. [November 10. Ayres, W. W. James, A. D. Birkhead, B. T. Kennedy, Hanson Boles, S. H. Kirwan, E. E. Bourland, H. R. Mackoy, W. H. Bronston, C. J. McChord, Wm. C. Brown, J. S. McElroy, W. J. Burnam, Curtis F. Miller, W. H. Clardy, John D. Moore, Laban, T. Doris, W. F. Nunn, T. J. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Pettit, Thomas S. Quicksall, J. E. Elmore, T. J. Smith, H. H. Farmer, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Field, W. W. Swango, G. B. Forrester, J. G. Trusdell, George Forgy, J. M. Twyman, I. W. Glenn, Dudley A. Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. NAYS—38. Allen, C. T. Johnston, P. P. Amos. D. C. - Knott, J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. Lassing, L. W. Beckner, W. M. Martin, W. H. Bennett, B. F. May, John S. Berkele, Wm. McDermott, E. J. Blackburn, James MeHenry, H. D. Blackwell, Joseph Miller, Will. Brents, J. A. Moore, J. H. Buchanan, Nathan Muir, J. W. Buckner, S. B. Petrie, H. G. . Bullitt, W. G. Phelps, John L. Coke, J. Guthrie Pugh, Sam’l J. Cox, H. Ramsey,W. R. DeHaven, S. E. Rodes, Robert Hanks, Thomas H. Hines, Thomas H. Hogg, S. P. Williams, L. P. V. Holloway, J. W. Wood, J. M. ABSENT-—21. Applegate, Leslie T. Lewis, W. W. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Askew, J. F. Montgomery, J. F. Brummal, J. M. O’Hara, R. H. Carroll, John D. Parsons, Robert Chambers, G. D. Phelps, Zack English, Sam. E. Sachs, Morris A. Funk, J. T. Spalding, I. A. Goebel, William Straus, F. P. Hendrick, W. J. West, J. F. Jacobs, R. P. Woolfolk, J. F. Jonson, Jep. C. THE PRESIDENT. As it requires a two-thirds vote to carry the motion, it is lost. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I move that the Convention adjourn. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried, and the Convention thereupon ad- journed. “ iormention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. “Vol. 1.] FRANKFORT, NOVEMBER 11, 1890- [No. 49 "Tuesday,] HANKS—RAMSEY—GRAHAM. [November 11. The Convention was called to order by the President, Mr. Clay, and the proceed- ‘;ings opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. .Darsie. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings "was read and approved. " ' Petitions, Etc. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order will be the reception of petitions. Mr. HAN KS. I have a petition from my county, which I ask to be read. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion ? The Chair hears none, and the peti- tion may be read. The petition was from the colored citi- zens of Anderson county, asking that no reference to slavery be made in the Consti- tution. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the petition will be referred to the Com- mittee on the Legislative Department. lVIr. RAMSEY. I have a petition from the colored citizens of Laurel county, which I would like to have read and re- ferred to the appropriate Committee. The petition was from the colored citi- Zens Of Laurel county, and asked the in- sertion of a clause in the Constitution sim- ilar to the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Mr. GRAHAM. I have a petition from the citizens of my county, asking that we have a clause to prevent the working of convicts outside the walls of the penitentiary. I ask that it be referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Pro- cedure. ' - The PRESIDENT. Without’ objection, it will be so referred. Mr. PETTIT. I have a petition from Hon. Cam. Riley, Sr., urging a decrease in representations in the General Assembly, and that in proportioning said representa- tion no county shall be allowed more than two Senators and four Representatives, that a limitation may be had on concentration of influence, which follows growth in large cities. I ask that it be referred to the Com— mittee on Legislative Department. The PRESIDENT. The petition will be so referred. The Chair presents the pe- tition of Cassius M. Clay, and asks that it be read. The petition was read. The PRESIDENT. Without objection the petition will be referred to the Commit- tee on the Legislative Department. Reports from Standing Committees are in order. If there are no reports of Standing Commit- tees, then reports from Special Committees. Motions and resolutions are in order. Mr. ASKEW. I wish to offer a substi- tute for the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. It is the same substitute that I offered originally. It is not necessary to read it; it is the old Bill of Rights with the third clause elimi- nated. Mr. YOUNG. On last Friday a resolution ' was offered by the Delegate from the First Louisville District in regard to evening sessions. I desire to have the resolution read. ‘ Mr. KENNEDY. While they are find- ing that, I will offer a substitute for section 2 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights as now amended. 2 AFTERNOON SESSIONS. Tuesday,] | The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent it can be offered. The resolution of Mr. Zack Phelps, re- ferred to by Mr. Young, was read, as fol- lows: Resolved, That all daily sessions of this Convention, held after November 8th, 1890, shall consist of a morning session, begin- ning at 9:30 o’clock A. M. and adjourning at 1 o’clock P. M., and an afternoon session, beginning at 3 o’clock P. M. and adjourning at 5 o‘clock P. M. But on Monday, the morning sessions shall begin at 11 o’clock A. M., and on Saturday no afternoon session shall be held. Mr. MCHENRY. I move to strike out all after the words “but on Monday.” Mr. PHELPS. I accept that. Mr. MCHENRY. I think if we are going into the matter we had better go clear through. I am in favor of three or four evening sessions a week, or possibly five. \Ve can bring up that matter every day, if there is something that demands evening sessions. Ihave always been in favor of having it in the power of a majority of the House to have evening sessions, and I offered a resolution to that effect from the Committee on Rules, but it was amended when it got here, so that it required two- thirds to take a recess, and then that part of the resolution was finally stricken out. Now, to have an imperative rule that we must have evening sessions, regardless of the work of the Committees, seems to me to be wrong. There is a disposition on the part of the Convention to have evening sessions whenever proper. I do not think we ought to have an evening session to- day, because there is a meeting of a Com- mittee of twenty-eight members, the three Committees on Courts. It is a very im- portant session, and it ought to be held. Yesterday evening I opposed an evening session, for the reason that the Committee on Court of Appeals were to hold a meet- ing. They had a full meeting, and sat until night, and are now ready to report to the General Committee. By pursuing the McHENnY-PHELPs-YoUNe. [November 11 . course I suggest, in a few days we will be» in a condition where we can have evening sessions almost every evening. I want to get through work and go home. The‘ amendment I offer is a resolution which comes outside of the Com-- mittee on Rules. It would have- been ofi'ered yesterday, but the honorable- gentleman was not here to offer his resolu- tion. That resolution, offered by the gen-— tlemen from Louisville, says we shall not. meet on Mondays until 11 o’clock, and shall have no afternoon session on Saturday, for the convenience of the gentlemen who live from here to Louisville. The fact is, we lose more time on Monday and Satur— day than we do on any other day. There are no Committee meetings held on Satur- day, and we lose two days in a week for the accommodation of these gentlemen, and here they are, of all others, whooping us up to work just as hard as we possibly can, so that they can get home on Satur- day and stay until Monday at dinner. (Ap- plause.) I am tired of that thing. Let us have a general understanding. There is no man in the Convention more ready to work than I am, and yet I am placed in the- attitude of opposing evening sessions. I notice that the newspapers have been put- ting me down as opposing the session sim- ply because I want to give the Committees of the Convention a chance to attend to their work. I think it, would be much better to allow the Convention, from day to day, to say whether or not it is nec- essary or proper to have evening sessions. In that way I think we can probably get in four or five evening sessions in aweek; but I am getting tired of voting against evening sessions, and I now propose, if we have evening sessions, to have them straight through—Monday morning at nine o’clock, and have an afternoon session on Satur- days just the same as any other day. Mr. YOUNG. I know of no man more skillful in setting his sails for the coming breeze than the distinguished gentleman. AFTERNOON SESSIONS. a Tuesday,] YOUNG. [November 11 . from Ohio. Last week he was opposing evening sessions, but as soon as the temper of the Convention was manifested, and he sees that evening sessions are to come, he rushes forward to be the leader in this on- slaught upon Louisville men in order to se- cure public opinion in his behalf. He re- minds me a good deal of a hand-organ which plays one tune. Whenever he desires to say something that he hopes will catch the popular mind, he starts off with the old song about Louisville, and what the mem- bers from Louisville want. The Louisville delegation only want reasonable activity in this work. The time has come when heroic action is needed. Whether a man is from the pennyroyal district, the Blue Grass, or from Louisville, he must confess that our progress is not satisfactory; the time has come when the Convention should do something prompt. We have now been in session sixty-four days, and not a single clause of the Constitution has been finally prepared. There is not a single clause absolutely adopted. You have referred the little pro- vision reported by the Committee on Munic- ipalities to the Committee on Style to hammer and change. I-do not believe there is a political Methusalah, or a “Constitu- tional tortoise ” like the Delegate from Ohio, who does not feel that we have given . the matter under consideration all the time that ought fairly and justly be given. We need not conceal from ourselves the facts, that if we were outside of this Convention, there is not one of us who would not ve- hemently denounce the delay exhibited by this body in the preparation of this organic law. If I were not a member of this Con- vention, I should most earnestly protest against the negligence and failure to work on the part of the Convention. Now, of course, this is not to go into the Record. DELEGATES. Let it all go in. Mr. YOUNG. Then, if you insist, let it go in. We have been here sixty-four days, and have discussed this Bill of Rights at length—enough to make the people of the State feel that we are indifferent or in- competent. We should do something. We can present this Constitution to them as a Christmas gift, if we will go earnestly to work. It is said that if we adjourn to meet at 9 o’clock on Monday, the Delegates from Louisville will not be here. Make your adjournment to that time, and the Delegates from Louisvilleawill be here. The Delegates from Louisville did not ask that the Monday sessions begin at 11 o’clock. It was asked by people outside of the city of Louisville; and we will be here at 9 o’clock Monday, and stay here on Sat- urday afternoon, too, if the remainder of the members think that best. We will do any thing to get through with this work. At the rate we are now proceeding, we'will not get away from here before next June or July. There is a worse feature than all that connected with the matter. I do not consider the money involved, but I do care about this other fact :‘ that we are creating the impression upon the public mind that we are incompetent to deal with the ques- tions before this body; that we are either Bill of Rights hair-splitters, or men who desire to talk, whether we speak to the sub- ject under discussion or not. That is the impression we are creating, justly or un- justly, on the people of this State, and they have a right to complain- I am as guilty as any of you. I have talked, prob- ably, as much as any one; but I now say that this eternal discussion should cease, and we should go to work in earnest and get this instrument completed. We will create the impression on the people, by these long- drawn-out discussions, which will lead them to a lack of confidence in our work. If some gentleman will make the motion, I will second it, that we have afternoon ses- sions on Saturday, and that we meet at 9 o’clock on Monday. And I do hope that the Delegates from every part of the State will unite in this resolve, that whatever sacrifices are required will be cheerfully made to accomplish this end. 4 AFTERNOON SESSION S. Tuesday,] ‘A; MCHENRY—PHELPS—YOUNG. [November 11 . Mr. McHENRY. We will do it. Mr. YOUNG. Very well. I move as an amendment to the resolution that our session begin at 9 o’clock on Monday morn- ing, and that we have an afternoon session -on Saturday, the same as any other day. Mr. MOHENRY. I have already offered that. Mr. ZACKAVPHELPS. I accept that amendment. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move the pre- vious question, so that we can get to some work. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I have an amend- ment, which I wish sent up, and I ask the reading of it. The amendment was read, as follows : Amend by adding “and that all Com- mittees who have not yet reported be re- lieved of their duties and discharged.” Mr. MACKOY. I ask for the yeas and nays on the latter part of that. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will sug- gest that if the House does not like that, they can vote it down. The question before the House is the adoption of the resolution of the Delegate from the First Louisville Dis- trict. The vote will first be taken on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Ohio, which the Secretary will please re- port. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of Mr. McHenry to convene at 9 o’clock on Monday, the same as any other day, and have an afternoon session on Saturday. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. Mr. PETTIT. I want to call attention to the fact that the date fixed there is the 8th. That time is past, and we should change the date. Mr. AUXIER. On the passage of that resolution I demand the yeas and nays, Mr. BIRKHEAD. I second it. Mr. BRONSTON. By unanimous con- sent, cannot that date he changed. I un- derstood the Delegate from Ohio to make that motion. Mr. McHENRY. I made no such motion, but 1 do not care any thing about it The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent it can be changed. The date was then fixed at the 13th. The result of the roll-call was as follows: YEAS—68. Allen, C. T. Hines, Thomas H. Amos, D. O. Hogg, S. P. Askew, J. F. Holloway, J. W. Auxier, A. J. Hopkins, F. A. Ayres, W. W. Jacobs, R. P. Birkhead, B. T. James, A. D. Boles, S. H. Kennedy, Hanson Bourland, H. R. Kirwan, E. E. Brents, J. A. Lassing, L. W. Bronston, C. J. May, John S. Brown, J. S. M cChord, W. C. Brummal, J. M. McElroy, W. J. Buchanan, Nathan MeHenry, H. D. Buckner, S. B. Miller, Will. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, W. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Moore, J. H. Carroll, John D. Moore, Laban T. Clardy, John D. Muir, J. W. Cox, H. Nunn, T. J. Doris, W. F. Parsons, Rob’t T. Durbin, Charles Petrie, H. G. Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Forrester. J. G. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. West, J. F. Williams, L. P. V. Hines, J. S. Young, Bennett H. NAYS—IQ. Allen, M. K. Knott, J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. Mackoy, W. H. Bennett, B. F. Martin, W. H. Berkele, Wm. MeDermott, E. J. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Coke, J. Guthrie DeHaven, S. E. Hanks, Thos. H. Johnston, P. P. Montgomery, J. F. Phelps, John L. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—I 3. Applegate, Leslie T. Quicksall, J. E. BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Tuesday,] RODES- PETTIT-~MACK0Y. Beckner, W. M. Chambers, G. D. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Straus, F. P. Jonson, Jcp. C. Wood, J. M. Lewis, W. W. Woolfolk, J. F. O’Hara, R. H. Mr. MOORE. I move that we take up the Special Order. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. . The Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the next amendment of the Committee of the Whole. - The SECRETARY. The amendment proposed by the Delegate from Warren to the substitute for section 4, as proposed by the ‘Committee, reads as follows: Strike out of said substitute the follow- ing words: “But all persons shall be pro- tected in their right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences.” Mr. RODES. I made that motion on yesterday, and gave as a reason for doing it that it embraced the second subdivision of the second section, which reads: “The right of worshiping, Almighty God ac- cording to the dictates of their own con- sciences as being one of the inalienable rights.” That being embracedheretofore, it is not necessary to repeat it in the fourth section. A vote being taken, the amendment of the Delegate from Warren was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Read the substi- tute as amended. The Clerk read the substitute as amend- ed, which is as follows: That no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or de- nomination, nor to any particular creed, modes of worship or system of ecclesias- tical polity; nor, shall any person be com- pelled to attend any place of worship or obliged, against his own consent, to con- tribute to the erection and maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion whatever; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child or children to any school to which he [November 11 . may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights, privileges and capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching whatsoever. Mr. RODES. I offer this as a substitute for the section. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks that is not in order. The amendment is in the nature of a substitute for this section. After this substitute is voted down, your amendment will be in order. Mr. PETTIT. Cannot it be read for in- formation ‘? The PRESIDENT. It can be read for information, and the Secretary will please report it. I The substitute of the Delegate. from Warren was read, as follows: No man shall be compelled to attend, ’ ‘ erect or support any place of worship or maintain any ministry against his consent. No human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience, and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religion, society, denomination or modes of worship, nor shall any man be compelled to send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed. But the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or aflirmations, or excuse acts of licentious- ness. The civil rights, privileges and capacities of any person shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion. Mr. MACKOY. I want to offer an amendment to the substitute which we have been amending. The amendment of the Delegate from Covington was read, and is as follows: Strike out of the substitute for section 4 the words “obliged against his own con- sent,” in the fourth and fifth lines; also the word “own,” in the ninth line. the word “whatever” in the seventh line, and the word “whatsoever” in the twelfth line. Mr. MACKOY. My object is simply to correct ’the phraseology of the section. 6 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] M acxox-Pnrrrr-Bnonsron. [November 11 _ If the question was upon the old Bill of Rights, I should oppose any change what- ever in the phraseology; but inasmuch as it has pleased the Convention to change divers things, I think we might go on- and make the phraseology of the new section correct. I think we should endeavor to get it in proper shape. It seems to me that the words stricken out are superfluous. The first part is not open to the objection that it was voted down yesterday, because, in addition to the words sought to be stricken out yesterday, it includes the word “obliged,” so that the section, as amended, would read: “Nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship or contribute to the erection or mainte- nance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any Minister of religion, but all persons shall be protected in their right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences, and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise dimin- ished or enlarged on account of any belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching.” If the Convention has fol- lowed me, they will see that the words I have moved to strike out are unnecessary; that they will mar the style, and add noth- in g to the strength or meaning of it in any way whatever. A vote being taken upon the amendment, the same was adopted. Mr. PETTIT. I move that the Word “that,” as the prefix to the fourth section, be stricken out, to make it conform to the manner in which we have written this Bill _ of Rights. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. A’ vote being taken on the amendment as amended, the same was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Read the next amend- ment of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. BRONSTON. Do I understand that no substitute can be ofi‘ered to that? The PRESIDENT. After the amend- ment adopted by the Committee of the Whole is disposed of, other amendments will be in order. The CLERK. The next amendment re- ported by the Committee of the Whole is an amendment to section 6, which reads as follows: ‘ Amend section 6 by striking out the words “ancient mode,” after the word “the,” in the first line, and inserting in lieu thereof the word “ right,” and also the first three words in the second line, namely, -“ the right thereof,” so that the said sixth section will read as follows: “ The right of trial by jury shall be held sacred and re- main inviolate, subject to such modification as may be authorized in this Constitution.” ‘ Mr. NUNN. I desire to offer an amend- ment to that section to strike out “certain words. , The PRESIDENT. vThe gentleman must understand it must be an amendment to the amendment. Mr. NUNN. It is an amendment to my amendment. The PRESIDENT. In disposing of the amendments reported by the Committee of the Whole only amendments in the second degree are permitted. Any other amend- ment is out of order. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. It occurs to me that the amendment just read would not apply to section 6, because it proposes to strike out what does not exist. The CLERK. The amendment just read is to the Committee’s report. The PRESIDENT. We want the amendments reported from the Committee of the Whole. Mr. NUNN. My purpose is to perfect the amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole. My amendment is to amend the amendment proposed by the Committee of the Whole by adding to that amendment the following, and striking therefrom, after the Word “inviolate,” the words “subject to such modification as may be authorized in this Constitution.” The purpose of that is. there is no necessity for those words at the end of the :section with the amendmenl BILL- OF RIGHTS. 7 Tuesday,] CARROLL—N UNIX—WASHINGTON. [November 1 1 . :adopted in the Committee of the Whole. The purpose is to leave the right of trial by jury inviolate; and in another department ‘of the Constitution, the Legislative or J u- diciary, let it be stated that a jury composed -of twelve men shall try a person. where life or liberty are involved; but leave it to the Legislature to arrange for the trial of other ‘cases. There is no necessity for those words .to remain at the end of that section. The section was again read. Mr. CARROLL. I offered a substitute for that section. Will that be voted on .after the amendment of the Delegate from ‘*Crittenden? The PRESIDENT. The substitutes will he disposed of after all the amend- ‘ments of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. McDERMOTT. Section 10 retains ‘the right of trial by jury in criminal cases, and might be amended by adding the words “according to the ancient mode,” and then, if section 6 were stricken out, the Legisla- ture could fully regulate jury trials in civil cases. A vote being taken, the amendment was :rejected. - Mr. CARROLL. ' If I understand prop- --erly the effect of the section as it now ex— ists, it is to give the Legislative Depart- ment the right to say how many persons shall constitute a jury in any case, criminal or civil. I would like to inquire of the Dele- gate who offered the amendment as to that. Mr. NUNN. I do not understand that that is so. By this amendment the right of ‘ ‘trial by jury is held sacred, except ‘as oth- erwise provided in this Constitution. Now, in another section—7N0. 12, I believe— there is a provision that retains the ancient mode in criminal cases, and only leaves to the Legislature to regulate the trial by jury in civil cases. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move the previ- ous question on that. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Henry has the floor. Mr. CARROLL. I want to call atten- tion to the fact that I see nothing'in sec- tion 12 that guarantees the ancient mode of trial in criminal cases; so that if this sec- tion is adopted as it now stands, unless some other change is made, the Legislature can say that five men_ may constitute a jury in any case; and if gentlemen are prepared to give the Legislature that right, they can vote for this amendment. Mr. WASHINGTON. I think that my good friend from Henry is in error as to that proposition. It seems to me that under the well-settled rule upon questions of this kind, and "especially upon. this proposition, there is no margin for doubt. This section, as it now reads, preserves the right of trial by jury. The word “jury” is of distinct, well-defined significance. It means in law twelve ‘men, just as certainly and as un- mistakably as the word “ trio” means three. Now I base that observation entirely upon authority. Judge Cooley in discuss- ing this question, says: “Accusations of criminal conduct are tried at the common law by jury, and wherever the right of this trial is guaranteed ' by the Constitution, without qualification or restriction, it must be understood as retained in all those cases which were triable by jury at the common law, and with all the common law inci- dents to a jury trial, at least, as they can be regarded as tending to the protection of the ' accused.” “A petit, petty or traverse jury is a body of twelve men, who are sworn to try the facts of a case, as they are presented in the evidence placed before them.” And it is perfectly well known to all the lawyers in this Convention that Constitutional pro- visions are construed with reference to the common law. Mr. CARROLL. If the intention was not to make a change, why were the words “ ancient mode,” that did secure a common law jury, stricken out '? Mr. WASHINGTON. I cannot tell why they were stricken out, but I can tell you the effect after being stricken out. 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] VVAsHIne'roN—BEcKHAM—CARRoLL. [November 1-1 .. Judge Cooley proceeds to say: “Any less than this number of twelve would not be a common law jury, and not such a jury as. the Constitution guarantees to accused parties, when a less number is not allowed in express terms.” Upon another page he again refers to it, and in a note he quotes from a decision of the Supreme Court of Ohio the following language: “A jury, without further explanation of the law, must be understood as one of twelve per- sons.” I notice that Judge Cooley, in a note to the first paragraph I haye read, re- fers to two Kentiicky cases, one in 1st and another in 2d Metcalfe. So the Convention will see thatjwhenever the word “jury” is used in a Constitution it means, beyond question, twelve men-— not one of less than twelve—and that re- quirement remains in the Constitution just as it was before, unless by some unmistaka- ble phraseology, you change it. It will be construed with reference to the common law system of trial by jury, and means Mr. BECKHAM. I would like to ask if there is not some reasonable apprehen- sion that the Courts may determine that we, by striking out the words “ancient mode,” meant to change the rule of the common law‘? Mr. WASHINGTON. I think not. The ancient mode means ancient manner of trial by jury. Mr. BECKHAM. Just so. Mr. WASHINGTON. Ancient manner of trial by twelve men. That is to say, it is clothed with the unanimity principle. When you say “ancient mode” of trial by jury, ‘it simply means, being translated into plain English, the ancient mode of trial by twelve men. I think the gentle- man from Crittenden is right in substitut- ing the word “right,” in lieu of the words “ancient, mode,” in that section. There were various ancient modes of trial by jury. Some have been pointed out, and I need not repeat them. It did not always mean unanimity, for they sometimes took the verdict of eleven men, and sent the- other man, who was called the “refractory juror,” to jail for not agreeing with the others. They were sometimes sent into a room, denied light, denied fuel, denied wa- ter, denied fire, and other comforts. They were at first the witnesses in the case, and. it often happened that when twelve men didn’t agree—as, for instance, when nine were for plaintiff and three for defendant— they kept on adding to the twelve until they found twelve men who did agree, although they might find it necessary to have twenty-five on a jury. So, it seems to me to be meaningless; to be a sort of stultification of our intelligence, with reference to this matter, when we talk about the “ancient mode” of trial by jury, when there were so many ancient- modes of trial by jury. It is the ancient. “right” of trial by jury that we want. So‘ far as I am individually concerned, I am in favor of the modern “mode” of trial by" jury, stripped of its unanimity principle, in. civil cases. But these are considerations I did not expect to present when I rose. It. was merely for the purpose of responding; to my friend from Henry, whose judgment in such matters is, perhaps, as unerring as, that of anybody. In conclusion, I‘ wish to emphasize my position, and I challenge any lawyer on this floor to produce a dif- ferent holding in relation to it. I claim that it is the unbroken current of decision. throughout the country that, wherever a Constitution guarantees the right of trial by jury, it means neither more nor less than. a trial by twelvemen. Mr. CARROLL. I do not desire to~ trespass upon the time of the House, but I believe I am right in the position I have- taken about this question, however much I regret differing with so distinguished a lawyer as my friend from Campbell. If" Kentucky was now framing her first Con-- stitution, and this clause was in it as it now stands, then, I grant you, the Courts in- construing it would say that the intention; BILL OF RIGHTS. 9 Tuesday,] CARROLL—RAMSEY—MILLER. [November 11 . of the Constitution was to guarantee to every person a right of trial by jury as that right existed in other States, and as provided in the Constitution of the United States, and as at commonlaw; but we are not making the first Constitution for Kentucky. We have already had three Constitutions in this State, and in each and all of them are the words “the ancient mode of trial by jury shall remain sacred.” What does that mean? It means every man who is put upon trial, every man who has a case to be tried, shall have a trial before a jury of twelve persons, and that they shall return a unanimous verdict. There can be no question about that. Now, the Courts, when they come to construe this section as it stands, would apply to it a few familiar rules of construction. They would say a change has been made in the law, and we will find, in the first place, what the old law was; in the second place, the mischief, and, in the third place, the remedy. The old law was, that in every case a man should have a trial by a jury of twelve persons, and that there should be a unan- imous verdict. The mischief is the fact that a unanimous verdict is required in all cases. The remedy is the new law, which says the right of trial by jury shall remain, but not the ancient mode of trial by jury; not the common law right of trial; not the common law jury shall try the case, but a legislative jury. What is a legislative jury? Not twelve men, but as many as the Legislature may see proper to make it. If there is not any difference in these two sections, why not add after the words “ right of trial ” the words “ as heretofore ‘? ” Then there could not be any question about it, as the ancient of trial, or trial as hereto: fore by jury, is. well understood. And another rule of construction the Courts would apply when they came to determine this question would be, the intention of this Convention. The mover of this amendment said that his inten— tion was, if I recollect correctly his remarks when the amendment was adopted, to give the Legislature the right to say that less than a unanimous verdict could be returned. Then when you apply the familiar rules of construction referred to the old rule, the mischief and the remedy and consider the intention of the body making the law, I take it that the Courts would not have much trouble in coming to- the conclusion that the Legislature might. say that a jury of nine, or seven, or six men was a jury in the meaning of this sec- tion. Mr. RAMSEY. Is a substitute to this ‘amendment in order now? v The PRESIDENT. The substitute is, if‘ it is an amendment to the amendment. Mr. RAMSEY. I offer this as an amend- ment. I think it covers the entire ques- tion. It provides that the right of trial by jury, as heretofore enjoyed, shall besacred, and the Legislature may provide for the- juries in civil cases. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will re- port the amendment. The CLERK. “The right of trial by jury, as heretofore enjoyed, shall be held sacred and inviolate; but the General As- sembly may authorize a trial in civil cases by a jury of a less number than twelve‘ men.” The PRESIDENT. That i... substitute for the original section. The only thing in order is an amendment to the report of“ Committee of the Whole, and it must be- drawn in that way or it will not be in order. You can offer it after the amend- ment of the Committee of the Whole is disposed of, but it is not in order now. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I call for the yeas and nays on the amendment of the Committee of the Whole, as amended. Mr. BRONSTON. I second it. Mr. CARROLL. If that amendment is- voted down, I would like to inquire how the section would stand. The PRESIDENT. As originally re— 10 BILL OF RIGHTS. IJonson, Jep. C. Tuesday,] BRONSTON—MILLER. [November 11 . ported by the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. The result of the roll-call was as follows: YEAS—29. ‘Allen, C. T. McChord, W. C. Amos, D. C. McDermott, E. J. Ayres, W. W. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Brummal, J. M. McHenry, H. D. Miller, Will. Moore, Laban T. N unn, T. . Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Buckner, S. B. Pugh, Sam’l J. *Clardy, John D. Smith, H. H. Cox, H. Swango, G. B. Doris, W. F. Twyman, I. W. Edrington, W. J. Washington, George Hogg, S. P. Wood, J. M. ' Martin, W. H. NAYS—57. Allen, M. K. Hines, J. S. Askew, J. F. Holloway, J. W. Hopkins, F. A. Jacobs, R. P. James, A. D. Auxier, A. J. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Bennett, B. F. Johnston, P. P. Blackburn, James Kennedy, Hanson Boles, S. H. Kirwan, E. E. Brents, J. A. Lassing, L. W. Bronston, C. J. Mackoy, W. H. Brown, J. S. May, John S. Buchanan, Nathan McElroy, W. J. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, W. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Montgomery, J. F. Carroll, John D. Moore, J. H. 'Coke, J. Guthrie Muir, J. W. . DeHaven, S. E. Parsons, Robert T. Durbin, Charles Petrie, H. G. Elmore, T.‘J. Phelps, Zack English, Sam. E. Ramsey, W. R. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J .M. West, J. F. Funk, J. T. Whitaker, Ezrczy Glenn, Dudley A. Williams, L. P Y. Goebel, William Young, Bennett H. Hanks, Thos. H. Mr. President Clay. Harris, Geo. C. ABSENT—14. Applegate, Leslie T. Lewis, W. W. Chambers, G. D. O’Hara R. H. Graham, Samuel Quicksall, J. E. Hendrick, W. J. Sachs, Morris A. Hines; Thomas H. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Knott, J. Proctor Woolfolk, J. F. So the amendment was rejected. Rodes, Robert Smith, W. Scott Trusdell, George The PRESIDENT. amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment proposed by the Committee of the Whole is a substitute for section 8, which reads: Report the next In prosecutions for the publication of papers investigating the official conduct of oflicers or men in a public capacity,or where the matter published is proper for public information, the truth thereof may be given in evidence; and in all indictments for libels the jury shall have the right to de- termine the law and facts under the direc- tion of the Court, as in other cases.” Mr. W. H. MILLER. I offer as. an amendment to the substitute the following : “Strike out after the word ‘determine,’ in the fifth line, the words ‘the law,’ and insert in line six, after the word ‘Court,’ the Words ‘as to the law.’ ” law in prosecutions for libel will be the same as in other cases. When any citizen is charged with the offense of libel, it is ex- ceedingly unsafe to leave the determination of the law to the jury. The section as re- ported from the Committee of the Whole is susceptible of that construction. The ef- fect of the amendment offered to the sub- stitute offered by the Committee is to make the Judge in libel. cases the Judge of the law, and the jury the judges of the facts only, under the law, as given by the Court. This is the safest, in my opinion, whenever a- person is accused of libel. Mr. BRONSTON. It would be unjust to myself, as well as to the Convention, to abuse its patience by any further discussion of this matter. The very question sug- gested by the Delegate from Lincoln was fully discussed and considered by the Com- mittee of the Whole. I agree with him, that under the section as adopted by the Committee, the jury in libel prosecutions does determine the law and the facts. That has been the law in Kentucky for a bun- dred years, and I find no objections have been made to it. I think it ought to re- main. I will simply repeat, if the Conven- tion will pardon me, the illustration I gave when we had the matter under discussion By this amendment the _ BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 Tuesday,] MILLER—BRONSTON—BURNAM. [N ovcmber 11 . before, and that was, if a citizen is charged with libelinga Court, the Court ought not to have the power to construe the law. The Court ought simply to be permitted to de- fine the law, and leave to the jury the ap- plication of it under that definition. That has been the law, and I think it ought to remain. 'A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. . The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs on the adoption of the amendment reported by the Committee of the Whole. Mr. MILLER. On that I call the yeas and nays. ' Mr. FUNK. I second it. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would like to have a moment to make a suggestion in re- sponse to the gentleman from Lexington. The greatest objection urged is that, in trials for libels of Courts, the accused might be tried by the Judge who has been libeled. Ample provision has been made by the law, and can be made by the law, to prevent any thing of that kind. The trial may be had before another Judge al- together, one who is not prejudiced against the accused, but one entirely disinterested. It is unsafe in any case, where a man is charged with any violation of law, to leave the determination of the law to any tribu- nal but the Court. Let the Court and not the jury be the judge of the law. ‘ Mr. BRONSTON. Will the gentleman yield for'a question ? Mr. MILLER. Certainly. Mr. BRONSTON. In your practice, or in the history of Kentucky, ‘has there ever any evil arisen out of that clause of the Bill of Rights?‘ Mr. MILLER. I do not know that there has. There have been very few cases of libel in Kentucky. But a state of af- fairs might arise where many prosecutions might be had when the populace is excited, and to leave the determination of the law of libel to a jury which comes from such a populace is very unsafe for the man ac- cused. Mr. BURNAM. I cannot see any kind of propriety in drawing a distinction be- tween a ‘prosecution for libel and one for any other crime. The law is, that in an indictment for murder, the Judge, after the facts have been deposed to by the witnesses before the jury, they having power to pass on the facts and the credibility of the witnesses, instructs the jury as to what the law is; and it does seem to me that the same rule ought to prevail in pros- ecutions for libel. This is the very matter which was the ground-work of that den un- ciation of Lord M ansfield made by J unius, that he undertook, in Woolfall’s case, to take from the jury the power to decide what the law was in a case before that Court. I had greatly preferred the origi- nal report as made by the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights in the lan- guage that they there use: “In prosecutions for the publication ofpapers investigating the official conduct of ofiicials, or published in a public capacity, or where the matter pub- lished is proper for public information, the , truth thereof may be given in evidence; and in all indictments or trials for libel, the jury shall have the right, both in civil and criminal cases, to determine the facts under the direction of the Courts as to the law.” Why should not that prevail here? It is not unfrequently the case that juries have disregarded the law as given to them by the Court. My information is, that at the last term of the Madison Circuit Court, under an indictment for murder, where the Judge told the jury that there was no defense, that they were bound 0 convict the man of murder or manslaughter, they took the bit in their teeth and acquitted him. not believe in any such thing as that. I do not see any reason, and cannot for my life see why the law should not be the same when aman is indicted for publishing a libel against an ofiicer of the Common- wealth as in any other case, and that the power should still remain in the Judge ot say in his instructions what the law is, Ido_ 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] BURNAM—FU NK—BRONSTON. [November 11 ,. and limit the jury to a discussion and passage upon what the facts are, under the law, as given to them. I think it is throwing the whole matter wide at sea and bringing about evils in the country. The gentleman from Lexington has had great experience as an attorney for the Common- wealth, and I think if he will recall what has occurred in his own experience, he will be bound to say that this is a wide depart- ure from the law in other cases. Mr. FUNK. I call for the enforcement of the previous question. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to take a moment to answer the Delegate from Lin- coln, and ask the gentleman to withdraw his motion. Mr. FUNK. I withdraw it for the present. Mr. MILLER. I would like to ask you a question in the outset. In the event a man is tried for libel, and the deter- mination of the law and the facts is left to the jury, if the jury rule the law radically wrong, what remedy by appeal has a man to correct that error? Mr. BRONSTON. In the first place, I cannot assume that a jury would construe the law radically wrong, in a prosecution for libel, where the matter was submitted to them. I do not understand, under this section of the Bill of Rights, that a jury can arbitrarily determine what the law is. As I explained before, my construction of the provision is—and such has been my practical experience—that the Court must define the law to the jury. It must define libel, and must tell t jury what the punish- ment is under the law,leavin g for the jury the ‘application of this definition to the facts of the case. Now, experience has taught me that it is very essential that there should be a difference in the law of libel and the law of homicide, larceny, or robbery. I have asked gentlemen, time and time again, to cite me to some reason adduced from experi- ence why this rule should be changed, and none of them have done _it. It is one of l the highest rights of a citizen to criticise a- Court or an oflicial, in any department of the government, whether such criticism is made by an editor of a newspaper, a ‘corre- spondent, or an individual. Now, suppose the Court had the power to construe the law and take it from the jury, the Court could say to the jury, the words used are libelous. I Mr. BURNAM. If the Court rules the law wrong, does not the right of appeal still exist? Mr. BRONSTON. Of course, but there would be a vast difference between an ap- peal from the finding of the jury on the facts, and an appeal from the con- struction of the Court as to the words used. I undertake to say the Court could, if it saw proper, hold that the words that had been used by a person who desired to criti- cise the Court were libelous, and could, by peremptory instruction, direct the jury to find the defendant guilty. I say that the very spirit of the law of libel is that this shall not be done. You may define libel, but you must let the jury, composed of twelve peers of the individual, who come from the community, determine whether the words used are libelous and what the punishment should be. I ask the question of the distinguished Delegate from Madi- son, who, early in the session of the Con- vention, seemed to herald to the world that he wanted to adhere to the old words in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, what has come over the spirit of his dream‘? What experience can he point to ? What reason can he give why this old language, made sacred by a hundred years, and by adjudications, not only by the Courts of Kentucky, but of every State in the Union, should be changed‘? It is the law we ought to have for the protection of the individual. The Delegate from Lincoln suggests that if a Court is libeled that Court will not try the case. I grant you that. But another Court will try the case, and do not all Courts sympathize with each other in a de- BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 Tuesday,] BURNAM—RODES. [November 11 . sire to protect themselves from criticism by individuals‘? I do not believe that the right of an individual to criticise an officer, Whether he be an Executive, judicial or legislative, should in any manner be tram- meled. I say it is the highest right Ken- tuckians have to-day, and I beg of you take .it not from them, but leave it as our fore- fathers gave it to us; and when an indi- vidual, however humble, criticises a Court 'or other oflicial, let the Court define the law, but leave to the jury, free from official influence and power, to say whether the particular words used are libelous, whether the evidence establishes the truth; whether .spoken with malicious intent ; and what the punishment shall be. Mr. BURNAM. I do not propose to {reply to that part of the gentleman’s speech .in which he charges me with inconsistency. I merely wish to say that I adhere to what I have already said. The whole theory .and structure of the government of Ken- tucky, as I understand it, is that men are ‘to be selected to preside over the Courts who have a‘ thorough knowledge of the law. ‘The length of time in which they have been practicing attorneys is fixed as a pre- requisite to their eligibility. None but ‘those supposed to be learned in the law oc- cupy seats on the bench. Those who con- :stitute the juries of the country are not sup- posed to be conversant with laws, with Constitutions, or with Codes. They should ‘come into the jury box as citizens prepared ‘to receive, from the ofiicer who has been 'elected under the forms prescribed by law to that high position, instructions as to what is the law of the case on which they are to pass. I believe, as to the investiga- tion of facts, that the juries should have ab- .solute control over them. They are prob- ably better judges of the forces that operate upon men in their conduct with each other, :and in their mode of testifying, than the Judge on the bench. I am in favor of pre- serving in all its strength and symmetry the jury system of the country; but when the gentleman asks me to give some reason why this clause shall not remain as it is now, because the Judge may say to the jury arbitrarily, this libel is malicious, I repeat to him that if any ruling of that kind shall be made in any Court, the case will be brought to the Supreme Court, and if any error has been committed, it will be sent back to the Court below. And does any man suppose (as a gentleman asked awhile ago) that a Judge who has been libeled is going to preside over such a case as the trial of his libeler? As well suppose that a Judge would preside on the trial of a person indicted for an attempt to assassinate him. Mr. RODES. This matter has been up before the Convention before, and the prin- cipal point of conflict was in regard to the two last sentences originally reported by the Committee. I think the opposition to it grew out of the last two lines, “and it shall be a sufficient defense inany case that the matter published was true, and was published with good intent.” Finding that there is considerable opposition to that in the Convention, and that .gentlemen are afraid of the effect of those words, at the proper time, I will move to strike out those two lines of the report. We have asked before and ask now, and will again ask, why it is that the law and the facts shall be submitted to the jury under the direction of the Court, when the same law does not apply to any other question‘? I acknowl- edge the plausibility of the gentleman from Lexington when he asks if we have ever heard of any abuses? We reply no; but that is probably because of the paucity of cases. Why is that language put in? It is not the language of any other case. Giving all due deference to the cases, cer- tainly a libel case does not rise superior to a murder case, or to any other case of that description. This kind of language re- minds me of the British army when the Commissary Department sent out a parcel of shoes to a regiment, and every shoe fit the left foot. It does not fit the right foot at 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] MooRE—BRoNsToN— MILLER. [November 11 . all. I asked some gentlemen, learned in ' the law, and I interrogated one while I was gone last week, and he said the lan- guage of this report was exactly right. Why is it not‘? Why put in language that does not apply to any other case‘? It grew out of the fact, as I apprehend, historically, that they were struggling through misty, foggy kind of land before they reached terra firma and clear sun- light. They did not apprehend the effect of it. It has stood that way, but it is not what it ought to be. We have transposed the phraseology, and attempted to make new terms; and while we are at it, why not make it right‘? Is there any thing wrong in it‘? If so, tell me where‘? Necessarily, by this language, you give some covert power to the jury somewhere to imagine or to feel that they have possession of the law when they have not got it; or, if that be the case, or if there be a possibility of such a thing, it ought to be extracted from the Constitution. It ought not to be allowed to remain there. Mr. MOORE. question. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. Mr. BRONSTON. If that is voted down, the original report of the Committee stands ‘? The PRESIDENT. Yes. Mr. MILLER. If it is voted down, and the Committee’s report remains, the latter can then be amended‘? The PRESIDENT. It can when the amendments of the Committee of the Whole are disposed of. Mr. RODES. I move to strike out those last two lines. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will ex- plain that the vote is between the amend- ment as reported by the Committee of the Whole and the report of the Committee. After all of the amendments of the Com- mittee of the Whole are disposed of, the I move the previous * English, Sam. E. original matter is still subject to amend- ment by the Convention. The result of the roll-call on the adop- tion of the amendment reported by the Committee of the Whole was as follows: YEAS—52. Amos, D. C. Hines, Thomas H. Askew, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Beckham, J. C. Holloway, J. W. Beckner, W. M. Jacobs, R. P. Blackburn, James . Hopkins, F. A. Boles, S. H. Johnston, P. P. Brents, J. A. Kennedy, Hanson Bronston, C. J. Kirwan, E. E. Brown, J. S. Knott, J. Proctor Buchanan, Nathan Lassing, L. W. Buckner, S. B. Mackoy, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Carroll, John D. Moore. J. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Phelps, John L. Cox, H. Phelps, Zack DeHaven, S. E. Ramsey, W. R. Durbin, Charles Straus, F. P. Elmore, T. J. Swango, G. B. Farmer, H. H. Trusdell, George Funk, J. T. Twyman, I. W. Glenn, Dudley A. West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Young, Bennett H. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, J. S. Mr. President Clay- NAYS—SG. Allen, C. T. Martin, W. H. Auxier, A. J. May, John S. Ayres, W. W. McUhord, Wm. C. Bennett, B. F. McDermott, E. J. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Blackwell, Joseph McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Miller, Will. Bourland, H. R. Miller, W. H. Brummal, J. M. Moore, Laban T. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Clardy, John D. Nunn, T. J. Doris, W. F. Parsons, Rob’t Edrington, W. J. Petrie, H. G. Field, W. W. Pettit, Thos. S. Forrester, J. G. Pu h, Sam’l J. Forgy, J ~. M. 'Ro es, Robert Harris, Geo. C. Smith, H. H. James, A. D. Smith, W. Scott. ABSENT—12. Allen, M. K. O’Hara, R. H. Applegate, Leslie T. Quicksall, J. E. Chambers, G. D. Sachs, Morris A- Spalding,_.I. A. BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Tuesday,] MILLER—MxcxoY—AUXIER. [November 1 1 , Jonson, J ep. C. Washington, George Lewis, W. W. Woolfolk, J. F. So the amendment was adopted. The Secretary reported the next amend- ment of the Committee of the Whole, as follows: Amend section 9 by striking the letter “d” from the word “secured,” in the first line of said section, so as to make it read: “The people shall be secure in their per— sons,” &c_. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is a substitute proposed by the Committee of the Whole to section 10, which reads as follows: ' SEC. 10. That in all criminal prosecutions the accused has a right to be heard by himself and counsel; to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him; to meet the witnesses face to face; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses; that he cannot be compelled to give evi- dence against himself; nor can he be de- prived of his life, liberty or property, un- less by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land; and in prosecutions by indictment or information, a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the vici- nage; but the General Assembly may pro- vide, by general laws, fora change of venue in such prosecutions for both the defendant and the Commenwealth. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to offer an amendment by striking out the word “both,” and after the word “defendant” the words “and the Commonwealth.” The PRESIDENT. The gentleman must put the amendment in writing. Mr. MACKOY. I have an amendment which I wish 'to offer. The PRESIDENT. This amendment will come immediately after the amend- ment of the Delegate from Lincoln. The amendment of the Delegate from .Lincoln was reported, as follows: Amend substitute proposed by the Com- mittee of the Whole as follows : “Strike out from the tenth line the word ‘both.’ and from the eleventh line the words ‘and the Commonwealth.’ ” Mr. W. H. MILLER. I believe that- this change is proposed by one of the most conservative members on this floor, so far as innovations are concerned. So far as the changes in the present Constitution are concerned, there has been none proposed more radical than this. If this is made the- law of the land the Legislature will have the power, if it is not qualified by a subse- quent amendment, to send a man from Pike county to Fulton to be tried, or from the city of Covington to the Tennessee line. Why is it that such an innovation as this is demanded in the history of Kentucky to-day? Has it come to this point that Kentucky confesses that law cannot be- maintained in her borders without resorting‘ to such a remedy? In my opinion this is the greatest and most outrageous instru- ment of oppression that a free people ever put into the hands of power; and I do hope before this Convention adopts this- proposed amendment to the old Constitu- tion that every member on this floor will pause and consider. The times do not de- mand it. The inability of the Common- wealth to take care of itself and maintain order throughout its length and breadth does not demand it. It is perfectly revolt- ing to every man who has any regard for the liberties, privileges and rights of citi- zenship. I am in earnest about this, and I do hope that every member before incorpo— rating this innovation in the Constitution will consider this matter seriously. It ought to be rejected by almost a unanimous vote. Mr. AUXIER. I introduced that amend- ment myself. I suppose the gentleman had reference to me when he spoke of “one of the most conservative members of the body.” If he did, I shall not deny the charge. I am rather conservative, and I do not see the danger the Delegate from Lincoln speaks of. This simply proposes to put both parties on an equal footing; to 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] AUXIER—BLACKBURN—BECKNER. [November 11 . give to the prosecution the same right as to the defendant; and if there be in any county circumstances or local influences - that prevent the Commonwealth from ob- taining a fair and impartial trial, and the conviction of the guilty, then this amend- ment should be adopted. The report of the Committee of the Whole ought to be adopted. This was discussed pro and can in the Committee of the Whole, and the question was deliberately acted upon there. I do not know whether the Delegate from Lincoln was here or not. He may have been absent on that occasion. Nobody pro- poses, and nobody in this Convention pre- sumes that there is a Judge in the State to- day, or that there ever will be, who would order a change of venue from Pike to Ful- ton. I have too high an opinion of our Judiciary to concede for a moment that there could be elected a Judge who would transfer a case so _ far from home. I think my amendment should be adopted, and that everybody should stand on an equal footing, and I do not see why any one should ob- ject to a case being sent to an adjoining county. ’ Mr. MOORE. question. . Mr. BRONSTON. I hope the gentle- man will withdraw his metion. Mr. BLACKBURN. I would like to state to the Delegate from Boyd that in the opin- ion of many of us this is a most important question, and some of us are not able to ar- rive at conclusions as rapidly as others. For one, regardless of any criticism as to our conduct, anxious only that our work shall be right when finished, I do hope that the previous question will not be con- stantly thrown in our face. I would like to hear gentlemen competent to discuss this question. Mr. MOORE. It seems to me that four weeks— Mr. MACKOY. I object to the gentle- man discussing the question if he will not I move the previous withdraw his motion for the previous ques- tion. The PRESIDENT. The question is not debatable. A vote being taken on the motion for the previous question, the motion was lost. Mr. BECKNER. I desire to say with reference to this question that since this Convention met we have had an object lesson from the county of Perry. There has been transferred to the county which I have the honor to represent, at the instance of the Commonwealth—or, I might say, at the instance of the Judge of that Court-—a number of criminal causes, and that action, simple as it seems to be, has brought peace and quiet to that county. It has done what soldiers could not do, and what the ef- forts of all the good people in the county had failed to accomplish. It has brought all the people of that community to a realization of the fact that law and order must be en- forced. If there is any one thing that we need in Kentucky more than any other at the present time, it is that the law shall be supreme. Some communities have found that law could not be enforced; that the power of the Executive, even backed by the militia, had failed. Men say public senti- ment ought to be sufficient. Public sen- timent is not adequate to accomplish this in some communities; and the people who desire peace and order have been terrorized to such an extent that they could not come to the front and assert the rights of the law. But this simple action of transfer- ring the cases has brought peace and quiet to that great county, one of the richest in natural resources in the State, having in it as worthy good people as the State con- tains. They are trying those cases to-day in my county. The Judge has decided that the act of last winter was constitutional. This was done after considerable argument, and last week I saw several of the defend- ants rise in court and consent to a trial in Clark. They said they wanted a fair trial, and that they felt that an acquittal there BILL OF RIGHTS. 17 Tuesday,] BECKNER—DEHAVEN—BUCKNER. [November 11. ‘would be worth far more than an acquittal in their own county. They seemed to pre- *fer that the trial should go on in that “county to which the venue had been changed. I take it that no Judge would hastily or carelessly make a transfer of a case, that a man fit to occupy that exalted position would consider the necessities of the situation, and would make a transfer only when it was absolutely necessary—- when there was a public necessity for the change. The class of men we have as Judges do not do hasty, cruel and careless ‘things. I feel sure that this power to trans- fer on. behalf of the Commonwealth, as the power exists now, undoubtedly, to transfer on behalf of the defendant, will be ‘exercised judiciously and reasonably in the future, and the right ought to be given to the Judges to send cases to counties where 'they can he tried impartially and without vpressure. They can, without doubt, send outside of the county to get juries, and whyshould they not send the cases where the juries are rather than transport the juries miles and miles to another county. Ithink it wise that we should make it clear and undoubted that the change can be made. . Mr. MACKOY. I desire to offer an amendment. The PRESIDENT. There are two amendments pending, but the amendment can be reported for information. Mr. DEHAVEN. I have ‘an amend- ment I desire to offer. The amendment of the Delegate from ‘Covington was read, as follows: Amend by striking therefrom the follow- ing words: “ The General Assembly may provide by general law for change of venue in such prosecution for both defendant and the Commonwealth.” The amendment of the Delegate from Washington was read as follows: Amend substitute by adding the follow- ing: “But the change of venue shall be made in favor of the Commonwealth only in counties in a state of insurrection.” Amendment of the Delegate from Old- ham was read as follows: Add after the word “Commonwealth” the following: " The change to be made to the most convenient county in which a fair trial can be obtained.” Mr. BUCKNER. I do not rise for the purpose of expressing any theories on this subject under consideration; but it is pos- sible that some knowledge of the facts connected with the disturbed condition of some of the counties may be interesting to some members of this body. I think the Delegate from Boyd truly expresses a senti- Iment of a large portion of the Common- wealth. where many disturbances exist, when he advocates this change of venue in behalf of the Commonwealth. As Execu- tive of the State, I have had numerous delegations from a number of counties who have visited me for the purpose of asking the appointment of some Judge from some other district—a power which is not given to the Executive. I have re- ceived communications from other counties in which, recognizing the difficulties of ob- taining justice to the Commonwealth, some of the most crude suggestions in regard to the administration of justice were made. On one occasion I was asked to send a Judge, with a Commonwealth’s Attorney, a traveling Grand Jury and a petit jury from another district, for the purpose of settling the disturbed condition, and declar- ing that justice could not be obtained otherwise. My predecessor, as well as my- self, has, on the appeals of oflicials from those counties, sent the military to aid them; but they are of little use. Gener- ally, as soon as they get there, they come under control, perhaps, of ofiicials who are on one side\ or the other of the difliculty to be settled. There- fore, it is with the greatest difé ficulty that justice can be obtained, dither for an individual or the Common- wealth. Juries are oftentimes summoned by the parties who are interested in the 18 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,]. MACKOY. [N owember 11 , trial. It is diflicult in many cases even to and in the present temper of the people of find an indictment. In other cases the Kentucky, when they are conservative; Judge is sworn off the bench, and by a pre- concerted arrangement, attorneys who are not in the habit of attending that particu- lar court are there, and a person is chosen as Judge, with a view to acquittal. These are difficulties we should consider, because we are here to see that justice should be done—not only to the individual, but to the Commonwealth, and that the peace of the Commonwealth should be secured in every possible way. It is not a novel thing for the Commonwealth to have a change of venue. It is often done by enlarging the district. The same general provisions con- trol and prevail under the United States Government as with us; and yet aperson can be sent from one part of the Comm on- wealth of Kentucky to the city of Louis- ville or Covington for trial. Thedistrict is co-extensive with the State, and the Com- monwealth, if it be necessary for the main- tenance of the public peace, should have the same power. I simply throw out these facts which have come under my observa- tion. We are here to meet these issues, and we ought to determine them in such manner as that we may secure the peace of the Commonwealth as well as justice to the individual. Mr. MACKOY. I agree very heartily with the remarks made by the Delegate from Lincoln in opening this discussion. The amendment offered by me goes only a. little farther, and leaves the section as it is in the present Bill of Rights. That will not, however, prevent me from voting for the amendment of the Delegate from Lin- coln. It seems to me that in this Conven- tion there is too much of an efihrt to make general rules that wi}l fit special cases. We have met at a time just following out- breaks in certain mountain counties of this State—at a period when there is lawlessness in a few counties—and for that reason we‘ are attempting now to lay down a rule that might be advantageous at the present time when throughout the State they are aroused by no question of great public interest, and because we know that the persons who may have committed these offenses in the mountain counties could be tried in the county of Franklin, the county of Mo- Cracken, or any other county in the State. That is the reason why there is this care- lessness and indifference as to the adoption of this section as reported by the Commit-- tee of the Whole. We are willing to trust our Judges, gentlemen of the Convention say. Why? Because at the present time the men who are upon the bench of this State are men of learning and of justice- men who have commended themselves to us. But if there should be a time of pop- ular excitement, such as this State has passed through; a time when party lines are not only drawn closely, but when party feeling is aroused to its highest. pitch, will you then trust your Judges elected at such a time and not under cir-- cumstances such as we have now? If party lines be drawn by territorial boundaries so’ that one portion of the State is arrayed against another, would a person living in the smallest and weakest part be willing to trust himself to be tried in the hostile por- tion, which was the larger and more power- ful‘? I have no doubt that the defendants who were tried in the county of the Dele- gate from Clark were willing to entrust themselves to a jury of that county at the present time, because there was no question causing excitement. But if the circum- stances which I have mentioned should oc- cur, the men of Breathitt and Perry and other counties where lawlessness has ex- isted would certainly not be willing to venture into another and hostile portion of the State. Let us not, therefore, in laying down a rule which may exist for fifty or one hundred years, make one that will not work injustice hereafter, no matter how well it may operate at the present time... BILL OF RIGHTS. 19 Tuesday,] MACKOY—BRONSTON— M cCHonD. [N ovcmber 11 . The instances are numerous in English his— tory where this right has been used to the prejudice of the individual. He has been taken from his home to a distant county and there put on trial before a cruel and savage Judge, treated not only cruelly and inhumanly, but deprived of the ordinary rights which persons are entitled to when they are put on trial for their lives. May not this time come again, and shall we now in a time of calmness make a rule that would not be applicable and could not be applied justly, and would not afford pro- tection to the individual in time of high ex- citement. These evils in the mountain counties will cure themselves. Let them alone. How long has it been since Carter county was in the same condition as Perry? Two factions were destroying each other, and the result has been they have either killed each other or have gone off, and to-day I think there is no county in the State -of- Kentucky that is more quiet than the county of Carter; and it became quiet, not by the application of any stringent or harsh rule, but simply by the gradual operation of causes which will do the same thing for- Perry. Breathitt is more quiet than it was two or three years ago. As improvements take place in a county; as capital goes there; as school, houses and Churches are built, the evils that now are a‘ source of disturbance will i be corrected, and we shall not have to make a rule that hereafter we may wish to be rid of. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to ask as to whether the 38th section of article 2 does not contain this very provision, and has it not been so decided ‘.7 Mr. MACKOY. Yes, sir; and I thought it unnecessary to allude to that. The Del- gate from Clark said it had been decided. Mr. BRONSTON. Then it is not an innovation ‘? Mr. MACKOY. Not in any sense of the word. And under this construction of the Court I think it is perfectly satisfac- tory to leave the section of the Bill of Rights as it has been fora hundred years. Gentlemen of the Convention know that in the last Constitutional Convention there was an effort made to do the same thing that is being attempted now. It was urged then that the right of change of venue should be granted the Commonwealth as well as the defendant, but some of the strongest and most able men in that Con- vention, men who were imbued with a sense of the importance of protecting the rights of the individual as against the power of the State opposed it, and, fortu- nately for the State of Kentucky, such pro- vision was not adopted. Mr. MCCHORD. I would not under- take to say anything upon this subject were it not for the fact that at the last session of the Legislature I had the honor, as a member of that body, to be on the Committee which had the mountain troubles under consideration. The Lower House of the Legislature undertook to pre- fer charges against a Judge of the State because he refused to hold his Court in one of those mountain counties. An in- vestigation was had, and I may say a thor- ough and full investigation. Proof was offered before that Committee by citizens living in that section of the State, where the civil authorities‘were powerless, to the effect that it was worth the J udge’s life to go into that portion of the State, and un- dertake to hold his Court. The Judge of the Court was here, and he said if the laws of the country demanded that the Judge should go there and undertake to hold Court, when he knew when he left home he would be assassinated before he reached the Court, he would go; but if not he would decline to go. I remember the dis- tinguished Delegate from the county of’ Clark was before the Committee, also the Delegate from the County of Fleming. They and the other witnesses who testified _ before the Committee stated that it was a matter of utter impossibility for those 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] McCHoRD. [November 11, Courts to be held in those counties because of the - lawless The all the country came here and appealed to people from parts of the Legislature to grant them some relief. The Courts were powerless to render re- lief. The question was, what relief could be granted‘? Was the State of Kentucky to remain idle and allow the people in that section to be shot down from ambush, and not make any effort to help them? That was under consideration by the Legis- lature for two months. It was considered in all its bearings. Various propositions were made as to the manner in which re- lief should be granted. I had the honor, after the matter had undergone this mature consideration, to draft a bill which was passed by the Legislature for the purpose of restoring order, which provides for a change of venue from counties in a state of insurrection. The question which ad- dressed itself to my ~mind and the mind of the Legislature wasv as to the Constitutionality of that bill, and it was enacted as I wrote it, became the law, and is the law of Kentucky to-day. Under that law the Judge of that ‘Court has acted, and has ordered the trial ‘of a number or prisoners charged with murder in Harlan county to be tried in Clark county. What is the nature of the law passed by the last Legislature granting that relief ‘? It is in substance that, in any county in a state of insurrection, when the ' ofl‘icers are powerless and 'law cannot be executed, it shall be the duty of the Judge, on his own motion, to order the venue of the case changed to some county where the law can be executed. Can it be said by any gentleman, when we have a county in “the State of Kentucky in a state of insur- rection, when the lawless sentiment pre- dominates, and the law-abiding people are under their subjection, that we shall not change the venue from a county in that condition? I should think the Legislature should have the right to provide a remedy state existing. _ I feel that it will be a wise course on the part of for such a state of afi'airs. this Convention to so form the Constitution that such a law may be passed and be held Constitutional. Therefore, I offer the amendment to the effect that it shall be lawful for the Commonwealth to have a change of venue from any county in a state of insurrection. That is in the line of the act passed last winter granting relief to counties in such condition. It has been gratifying to me since I have come, here in a conversation with a gentleman who was in charge of the troops recently sent by the Chief Executive to aid the Court in these lawless counties, that the law as passed by the last Legislature has done much to settle the trouble in Eastern Kentucky. If that law can be incorporated in the Consti- tution, we will have no more trouble in the mountain counties, because, he said to me, these lawless men, as was suggested by the Delegate from Hart, when tried in the county indicated by them, have the power to have a friendly oflicer to select the juries to try them, and if their enemies are selected they are afraid to discharge their duties, be- cause they recognize the fact that their en- emies may take vengeance after they have made the verdict. Shall we, in forming the Constitution, say that the Legislature‘ or -the Court shall be powerless to order a change of venue from a county in a state of insurrection when the law cannot be en- forced there. The purpose of my amend- ment is that when a county is in a state of in- surrection, a change of venue can be had by the Commonwealth. I say until a law of that kind is passed in Kentucky, we may as well make up our minds to or- ganize a standing army. Those are my views, gathered, as I stated a moment ago, from the evidence before the Investigating Committee last winter. I am sincere when I say that this is the only relief. The only way to bring order out of chaos is to allow - people in counties in a state of insurrection L to be brought to the law-abiding sections of BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 21- Tuesday,] DEHAvEN-Bnons'ron. [November 11 . the State, and a trial he had away from the influence of the lawless section, where wit- nesses will be protected when they are of- fering their testimony. Therefore, I hope that the amendment I have offered will be adopted. Mr. DEHAVEN. It is my purpose to detain the Convention but a very few min- utes upon the subject we are now consider- I ing. The object of all criminal prosecu- tions, as I understand it—and I have had some little experience in that sort of busi- ness—is that pure and exact justice may be done, both to the State and to the ac- cused. That is the primary object of all criminal prosecutions. Where a man is accused of a crime, every safeguard that legislation can devise is thrown around him, in order that his rights may be pro- tected. There are also other great rights that must be protected at the same time that we are protecting individual rights, and those are the peace, quiet and good order of society. The object of all law is to insure those things. I am wholly unable to see why, if the circumstances are such that a fair trial cannot be obtained in any county, upon the part of the Common- wealth, there should not be a change of venue to some other convenient county, adjacent or nearly adjacent thereto. We all know that there?‘ "in some sections of this State, a state 0 eeling that renders the execution of. the criminal law well-nigh impossible. I am proud to say, however, in the portion of the State in which I live -in the district in which I live—we have no such‘ trouble. I have had‘ the honor, however, of being sent by the Governor of this Commonwealth to some portions of this State for thev purpose of bold- ing Court, and although the troubles the gentlemen have detailed with such vivid force upon the floor of this ' House, never have come under my own ob— servation, yet I am perfectly satisfied that there are various portions of our State now in such a condition that it is utterly impossible to execute the criminal laws in them. I am happy to say, that so far as my personal experience is concerned with the mountain people, I have never been treated with more kindness and more def- erence or more consideration by any people upon the face of the earth; but the ends of justice in certain counties of the State absolutely demand that the Com- monwealth ought to have the right to a change of venue; and the amendment that I offered goes only to this extent, and that is all I desire to call the attention of the Convention to. I do not myself think that it ought to be lodged in the power of any Judge to send a man from Breathitt down to Paducah. I do not think that ought ever to be done; nor do I believe that in the exercise of a sound discretion any Cir- cuit Court Judge would ever do it. Mr. BRONSTON. Will the gentleman permit me to make a suggestion ‘? I would like to hear him on the question. It is not contemplated by this provision that the Judge should do it. But_to place it in the power of the General Assembly to pass such a law, and is it not better to allow that body to impose proper restrictions‘? Mr. DEHAVEN. I know my friend from Lexington, in whose legal judgment I have very great confidence, thinks that un- der the provision of the Constitution, as it , now stands, that the Commonwealth is en- titled to a change of venue. Mr. BRONSTON. I stated before, and I state still, it is not free from doubt in my mind. It is for the purpose of removing that doubt that I transposed the section, and put it in connection with this. Mr. DEHAVEN. I am clearly'of opin- ion that under the provisions of the old Constitution that right does not exist, and for this simple reason: It is claimed, as I understand, under section 38. That sec— tion provides that “the General Assembly shall not change any venue in a criminal or penal prosecution, but shall provide for for'same by general laws.” ‘22 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] WASHINGTON—DEHAVEN—BRONSTON. [November 11. Mr. WASHINGTON. Will the gen- tleman allow me to ask him a question‘? Mr. DEHAVEN. Certainly. IYLI‘. WASHINGTON. Is it not the uniform rule of interpretation of the Con- stitution that wherevera power is not de- nied to the Legislature, that it exists in that body ‘? . Mr. DEHAVEN. Unquestionably. Mr. WASHINGTON. Is it denied in any portion of the old Bill of Rights? Mr. DEHAVEN. I think it is denied by implication. Mr. WASHINGTON. I am speaking of section 38 of article 2; is it denied? Mr. BECKHAM. I would like to sug- gest, with the permission of the Delegate from Oldham, that it is by implication de- nied in the clause which guarantees to every person charged with crime, a trial by a jury of the vicinage. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest that it would be better for the Dele- gate from Oldham to proceed. Mr. WASHINGTON. I am not quite through. Mr. DEHAVEN. It does not seriously interrupt me for the gentlemen to ask ques- tions. Mr. WASHINGTON. If it interrupts you in the least degree, I will not proceed. Mr. DEHAVEN. Oh, go on. Mr. WASHINGTON. My question“ was, is there in the present Bill of Rights, or the present Constitution, any inhibition upon the power of the General Assembly to grant the Commonwealth a change of .venue? Mr. DEHAVEN. I certainly think there is by almost necessary implication. The 38th section, that I just now read, is as follows: ‘* The General Assembly shall not change the venue in any criminal or penal prosecution, but shall provide for the same by general law.” If there was no limita- tion given by implication, perhaps the position assumed by the gentleman from Newport would be correct; but here we have in the Bill of Rights this provision: “That in all criminal prosecutions, the accused has a right to be heard by himself and counsel; to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him; to meet the witnesses face to face; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and in prosecution by indict- ment or information, a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the vicinage.” If he has a Constitutional right to be tried by an impartial jury of the vicinage, I think it would be a very latitudinous construction of that provision of the Constitution that would permit a Judge to send a man from Covington to the Tennessee line. I think it would be a palpable violation of that provision of the Constitution, and believing that the Constitution, as it now stands, does not provide for that, it does occur to me that this Convention ought to provide for it, because the instances that were cited by the gentleman from Hart, and instances cited by the Delegate from Boyd and several others, make it perfectly apparent to us that the criminal law can not be executed at all in a good portion of this State, and we ought now to provide for it. As I said before, however, I do not think that a Circuit Judge ought to have the right to send thsiqrcase any further than some county in whi, fi‘a fair trial can be ob- tained, and I hope that the amendment will be adopted, and the report of the Com- mittee as it now is will be adopted. Mr. BRONSTON. I have been so much entertained by the remarks of the. gentle- men, that, although this is a substitute of- fered by myself, 1 shall not abuse the patience of the Convention but for a mo- ment. I desire to say that, in my opinion, section 38 of article 2, read by the Delegate from Oldham, would unquestionably have given to the Legislature the right to pro- . vide for a change of venue in Common- wealth cases, were it not for the word “vicinage” as used in the Bill of Rights BILL oF RIGHTS. ' 23 ‘Tuesday,] BRONSTON—MACKOY. [November I l , Some of the best lawyers in Kentucky have held, and do now hold, that the word “vicinage” does not limit the power of the Legislature, and the presiding Judge of the Clark Circuit Court, after very elaborate argument during last week by some of the best lawyers in the State, has decided that the act of the last Legislature, authorizing .a change ‘of venue, under the provisions of the present Constitution, was constitution- :al; but to remove the matter from any ‘possible cavil or doubt, it occurred to us that if you will take section 88, of the present Constitution, and add it to the Bill of Rights, putting it in connection with the word “ vicinage,” there would be no ques- tion as to the power. I desire to call the attention of gentlemen of the Convention 'to this fact : That this provision in the sub- stitute does not undertake to change the ‘venue, but simply authorizes the General Assembly, by a general law—not by special .law, but by general law—to provide for changes of venue for the Commonwealth and for the defendant. I assumed then, and I think it not unfair to assume now, that the Legislature, in making that gen- eralprovision, will carefully guard it, and will not permit a Court to arbitrarily change the venue, or to change it in an inconven- ient way, as was suggested by the Delegate ‘from Oldham, from the Tennessee line to the Ohio river. The Legislature, when it undertakes to make its provision, will make it in detail, carefully guarded, so that such abuses cannot be made by any Court. I do not object to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Oldham. If the Con vention thinks it is wiser to put that limi- tation in the Constitution, I do not object "to it, saying that it shall be to that county nearest where a fair and impartial trial can 'be had. That is certainly my idea, of what the Legislature ought to do. I think that when it undertakes to make a provision for :a change of venue, that it ought to guard it very carefully; but lest the law might be misconstrued, I will accept the amend ment offered by the Delegate from Oldham to the substitute. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman can not do that. Mr. BRONSTON. I can express a will- ingness to do it. I do not care to argue the merits of this question. It has been argued more ably than I can possibly do. I simply think that no man can justly complain, however he might love the lib- erty of the citizen, that a citizen, when put upon trial, should have a perfectly fair and impartial hearing of the case with a view to ascertaining the truth. It has been my experience on one occasion, represent- ing the Commonwealth, full of all that bloodthirstincss that my distinguished friend from Lincoln seems to think attaches to a Commonwealth’s Attorney suggested to a defendant, “You ought not to stand a trial in this atmosphere,” and if it had been within the power of the Common,- wealth to ask for a change of venue, I should have done it on account of the de- fendant, because I was perfectly satisfied that truth could not be ascertained because of the prejudice that there. existed. Mr. MACKOY. I would like to ‘ask the gentleman a question. Has there not been a period in the history of the English people when Prosecuting Attorneys were not as impartial and as free from prejudice as the distinguished gentleman from Lex- ington ‘? Mr. BRONSTON. I will answer that I have understood so; but we do not propose to put it in the power of Prosecuting At- torneys to have a change of venue. I assume the Legislature would not permit a change of venue merely upon the applica- tion of the Attorney for the Common- wealth, nor upon the motion of the Judge; but I assume the Legislature, when it comes to provide a general law for a change of venue, will require that reasons shall be submitted to the Court that will satisfy the Court that public sentiment is in such a 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] HOGG—BOLES—HENDRICK. vr November 11 . state that a fair and impartial trial could not be had. Mr. HOGG. I desire to offer an amend- ment. Mr. BOLES. As my friend on the left (Mr. Moore) now refuses to again mapve the previous question, I desire to do so. ' Mr. HENDRICK. I would like to have the amendment offered by the Delegate from Owsley reported before the motion for the previous question is acted upon. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Owsley (Mr. Hogg), which is as follows: Amend by adding to section 10, after the word “Commonwealth,” the words “And the defendant and Commonwealth shall show by affidavit alike all the grounds for such change of venue.” Mr. HOGG. I want to explain the reason why I introduced that amendment. I do not want the Legislature merely to provide that the Commonwealth may have a change of venue upon application, with- out showing any grounds at all, and have the Commonwealth to pick out any other county to which it wants a case transferred with- out showing any right to it. If the Com- monwealth wants a change of venue in any case, it ought to be required to make the same proof that the defendant is required to make. A vote being taken on whether the main question should be put, was carried. The amendment of the Delegate from Lincoln (Mr. W. H. Miller) was read again. Mr. W. H. MILLER, calling for the yeas and nays, on the adoption of said amendment, the Reading Clerk proceeded to‘call the roll, which resulted as follows: YEAS—16. , Askew, J. F. Mackoy, W. H. Brents, J. A. ' Martin, W. H. Brummal, J. M. May, John S. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, W. H. Forrester, J. G. Petrie, H. G. Funk, J. T. Rodes, Robert Harris, Geo. C. Smith, H. H. Hogg, S. P. Smith, W. Scott NAYS—7 1. Allen, C. T. Hines, J. S. Allen, M. K. Hines, Thomas H-. Amos, D. C. Holloway, J. W. Auxier, A. J, Hopkins, F. A. Ayres, W. W. James, A. D. Beckham, J. C. Johnston, P. P. Beckner, W. M. Kennedy, Hanson. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm. C-. Birkhead, B. T. McDermott, E. J. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. Boles, S. H. Miller, Will. Bourland, H. R. Montgomery, J Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. Brown, J .‘S. Moore, Laban T.. Buchanan, Nathan Muir, J. W. Buckner, S. B. Nunn, T. J. Parsons, Rob’t T.. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L.. Phelps, Zack Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Ramsey, W. R. Doris, W. F. Straus, F. P. Durbin, Charles Swango, G. B. Edrington,'W. J. Trusdell, George Elmore, T. J. Twyman. I. W. Farmer, H. H. Washington, George Field, West, J. F. Forgy, J. H. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, Wm. Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. ABSENT—13. Applegate, Leslie T. Lassing, L. W. Chambers, G. D. O’Hara, R. H. English, Sam. E. Quicksall, J. E. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Young, Bennett H. Mr President Clay- Jacobs, R. P. Sachs, Morris A.. Jonson, Jep. C. Spalding, I. A. Kirwan, E. E. Woolfolk, J. F. Knott, J. Proctor So the amendment was rejected. The amendment of the Delegate from' Covington (Mr. Mackoy) was read again, and a vote being taken on the same, it was- rejected. The amendment of the Delegate from» Washington (Mr. McChord) was read again. and a vote being taken on same, it. was rejected. The amendment of the‘ Delegate fronn BILL OF RIGHTS. 25 Tuesday,] MOORE—WASHINGTON. [November 11 . Oldham (Mr. DeHaven) was read again, and a vote being taken on same, it was adopted. The amendment of the Delegate from Owsley (Mr. Hogg) was read again, and a vote being taken on same, it was rejected. The amendment of the Committee of the Whole, as amended, was then adopted. The next amendment of the Committee of the Whole was read, and is as follows: Substitute for section 12 the following: “No person shall, for the same offense, be twice put in jeopardy of his life or limb; nor shall any man’s property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of his representatives, and without just 1iontpensation being previously made to 1m.” Mr. L. T. MOORE. I have an amend- ment to that. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Strike out of the first line the words, “Be twice put in jeopardy of his life or limb,” and insert, “Twice tried when life or liber- ty is involved, except when a new trial is awarded upon application of such person;” the word “trial,” as herein used, to be con- strued to mean a trial in which there has been an acquittal or conviction. Mr. L. T. MOORE demanded the yeas and nays on the adoption of said amend- ment, and the call was seconded by the‘ Delegate from Washington (Mr. McChord). The result of the vote was follows: YEAS—27. Amos, D. C. Hopkins, F. A. Auxier, A. J, Kirwan, E. E. Bennett, B. F. May, John S. Birkhead, B. T. Miller, Will. Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Cox, H. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Moore, Laban T. Pettit, Thomas S. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Rodes, Robert Smith, W’. Scott Farmer, H. H. Swango, G. B. Forgy, J. M. Twyman, I. W. Funk, J. T. West, J. F. Hogg, S. P. NAYS—GO. Allen, C. T. Jacobs, R. P. Askew, J. F. Ayres, W. W. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Berkele, Wm. Blackburn, James Boles, S. H. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M.- Buchanan, Nathan Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie DeHaven, S. E. Elmore, T. J. Field, W. W. Forrester, J.G. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, J. S. Hines, Thomas H. James, A. D. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Knott, J. Proctor Lassing, L. W. Mackoy, W. H. Martin, W. H. McChord, Wm. C. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. 'J. Parsons, Rob’t T. Petrie, H. G. Phelps, Zack Ramsey, W. R. Smith, H. H. Straus, F. P. Trusdell, George Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—1 3. Allen, M. K. Lewis, W. W. Applegate, Leslie T. O’Hara, R. H. Chambers, G D. Doris, W. F. English, Samuel E. Holloway, J. W. Jonson, Jep. C. Quicksall, J. E. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Woolfolk, J .F. The amendment of the Delegate from Campbell (Mr. Washington) was read, and is as follows: Amend by striking out the word “limb,” and inserting in lieu thereof the word “ liberty.” Mr. upon that amendment. WASHINGTON. Just a word It has always been a mystery to me precisely what that word “limb ” meant in that section. There is no law in Kentucky to-day, and, so far as I am informed, never has been, that would jeopard a man’s limb; nor in any State in this country. And there cannot be, under the Federal system, because of the prohibition in the Federal Constitution. There cannot be in Kentucky, because of section 16 of 26 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] FUNK—PETTIT—MILLER. [November 11 , this very Bill of Rightsreported by the Committee, which provides that no cruel punishments shall be inflicted. It is pre- vented by that section. I can easily see how, in the old colonial times, when they sometimes broke people on' wheels and burned witches at the stake, there might have been some sense in that word; but I cannot see what reason there is for its con- tinuance at this time. All I desire to call the attention of the Convention to is this: ‘that a man’s limb cannot possibly be reached by‘ any law in Kentucky, because it is protected by section 16. It seems to me that a man’s liberty ought to be consid- ered as of some value, and I do not see why it should be omitted. There are a great many trials which involve a man’s life, and a great many trials which simply involve his liberty; and the clause relating to jeopardy should apply, in terms, as well to one as to the other. But it cannot apply to a case in which a man’s limb is involved, as no such case can arise. Why not substi- tute the practical thing for that which is purely imaginary, and say “liberty” in- stead of “limb?” That is all I desire to say. A vote being taken on the amendment, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted 39 in the affirmative and 40 in the negative, and the amendment was re- jected. Mr. FUNK. I would call for the the yeas and nays on that. It seems to me that there are some who voted both ways. The PRESIDENT. In order to satisfy some of the gentlemen, the Chair will take the vote over again. A division of the vote being again taken, it resulted, 41 in the aflirmative, and 42 in the negative, and the amendment was re- jected. Mr. FUNK. I must insist on the call for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman did not call for the yeas and nays in time. Mr. FUNK. I called for it before the last vote was taken. The PRESIDENT. It was only in con- sideration of gentlemen that the Chair took the vote over again. The yeas and nays must be called for before the final result is announced, or else it is too late. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I wish to offer an amendment to section 12, if it is in order, being the same amendment offered in Committee of the Whole. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows; Amend by striking out all after the word ‘- limb,” in the second line in the twelfth section, and insert the following: Private property shall not be taken for public use without due process of law, and without just compensation being previous- ly made to the owner thereof; and no pri- vate property shall be condemned and taken for the use of any private corporation - without due process of law, and without just compensation having been first paid to the owner thereof, or to his representatives, in money, or paid into Court, subject to his order. ‘ A vote being taken on the amendment, it was rejected. Mr. PETTIT. I propose to amend by inserting after the word “him,” in line 4, the words: “In money or paid into Court. sub- 'ject to his offer.” A vote being taken on the amendment it was rejected. ' Mr. W. H. MILLER. I offer an amend- ment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend the substitute by inserting in line 3, after the word “of,” the words “him- self or.” Mr. W. H. MILLER. I do not see why a man’s property should not be taken with the consent of himself; and this section provides that it should be taken only upon the consent of his representatives. As I understand the intention of the gentleman, it means “his representatives” ‘in the Legis- lature, or something of that sort. I have BILL OF RIGHTS. 27 Tuesday,] McDEaMoTT—FUNK—MILLER. [November 11 . not thoroughly understood that section, and I would like the gentleman from Lexing- ten, or any other gentleman on this floor, to explain that section intelligently as it reads now. Mr. McDERMOTT. Will the gentle- man permit a que.r .on? Mr. W. H. MILLER. Certainly. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Suppose the man consented to the taking of his" property, who would make any objection to it‘? Mr. W. H. MILLER. It says “of his representatives.” Why not say “consent of himself.” Mr. MCDERMOTT. Suppose he should consent, who would make any objection afterwards ? A vote being taken on the amendment, it was rejected. The amendment of the Committee of the Whole was then adopted. The next amendment of the Committee of the Whole was read, and is as follows: Amendment proposed to section 26: Amend section 26 by adding after the word “allowed,” in line 3 of said section, the fol- lowing: -“Nor any other species of gam- bling or gaming.” A vote being taken on the amendment, it was rejected. Mr. FUNK. Will not the mover of an amendment be given an opportunity of saying a word on it‘? that resolution. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman did not rise in time. Mr. FUNK. The President did not have his eyes this way. DELEGATES. Leave! Leave! Mr. BRONSTON. I object. The vote has been announced. The PRESIDENT. The vote has been announced; and if the gentleman insists upon his objection, the Chair will sustain it. Mr. MACKOY. If necessary, I will move a reconsideration. . I am the mover of . A vote being taken on the motion to reconsider, it was declared carried. Mr. FUNK. I have already spoken on this amendment. It will be only nec- essary for me to say a few words in order that my position may be fully understood. I would request the Clerk to read the sec- tion of my amendment, in order that the members may fully understand what is sought to be done. The, Reading Clerk read the amendment, which is as follows: Lotteries and gift enterprises are forbid- den, and no privileges shall be granted for such purposes and none shall be exercised, and no schemes for similar purposes shall be allowed. With the amendment the section would read as follows: Lotteries and gift enterprises are forbid- den, and no privileges shall be granted for such purposes and none shall be exercised, and no schemes for similar purposes shall be allowed, nor any other species of gam- bling or gaming. Mr. FUNK. If one class of gambling is wrong, every other class of gambling is equally wrong. If it is the object of this Convention to stop one form of gambling, it is nothing but right and proper that the Convention should in the Constitution pro- hibit all. I have heard a great deal said upon this floor about equal rights and ex- clusive privileges, but I say here, without fear of successful contradiction, that if you adopt this lottery clause, and prohibit lot- teries, you are simply prohibiting gambling in one form and countenancing it in another. I believe that ‘gambling in any form is wrong. It is harmful to the morals of the people. I do not believe that lottery play- ing is more harmful than the pool-rooms, where a multitude of young men gather daily for the purpose of betting on horse races, speculating in grain or pork, or dealing in “futures.” I claim that the running of a lottery oifice is just as legitimate a business as the running of a bucket-shop. If you are going to put down one class of gam- bling, let us put it all down. Do not say to a 28 BILL OF RIGHTS. ' gamble,” Tuesday,] FUNK—HENDRICK—BRONSTON. [November 11 . one class of people “You shall not and then to another class “Go on with your gam- bling.” One form is just as harmful as another. If it is the determination of this Convention not to accept that amendment, then, in justice to all the people, they should repudiate the portion which is sub- mitted here by the Committee. What I have said, I believe to be right, just and honest. It' is for this Convention now to say whether they think as I do. I will be satisfied with the result, but I believe it is of so much importance that I will call for the yeas and nays on this ques- tion. Mr. COX. Will the gentleman from Louisville permit me to ask him a ques- tion? Mr. FUNK. Certainly. Mr. COX. That question is this: Does his amendment embrace betting upon the speed of horses? Mr. FUNK. All species of gambling, and all games of chance, such as oontz. craps, bucket-shops, grain gambling, bet- ting on base ball, draw-poker, and the Lord only knows how many other species, but in a very few words, I have tried to cover them all. Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a parlia- mentary inquiry. I am a little confused as to the precise position of the matter. As I understand, the Committee of the Whole have adopted this particular section 26, to which the gentleman from Louisville pro- poses the following amendment: “Nor any other species of gambling or gaming.” As I understand, we are acting upon the question of the adoption of that amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. The amendment ad- vocated by the gentleman was adopted by the Committee of the Whole; and the question is on the adoption of that amendment, and upon that the Delegate from the Seventh Dis- trict of Louisville, seconded by the Delegate of people, from Marshall, call for the yeas and nays. The Secretary will report the order under which we are acting, however, for the infor- mation of the Convention. The READING CLERK. Under the order of the Convention, the Secretary was instructed to have printed the original re- port of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights, the several amendments adopted thereto by the Committee of the Whole; and then the original report, as it would read as amended by the several amendments of the Committee of the Whole. That is how this came to be in- corporated in this 26th section. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to vote intelligently upon this question, and I would be very glad if the gentleman from Louisville, who offers this amendment, will explain to me the force and effect of it. Iwill read the section of the Committee’s report to which this is an amendment. Section 26 reads as follows: “Lotteries and gift en- terprises are forbidden.” I can understand that. “And no privileges shall be granted for such purposes.” That is very clear. “And none shall be exercised and no schemes for similar purposes shall be al- lowed.” The gentleman proposes to add after the word “allowed” “Nor any other species of gambling or gamlng.” .I sup- pose he means that no other species of gambling or gaming shall be allowed. "I think that the law is perfectly plain in Kentucky to-day that it is not allowed. If the gentleman means or proposes to re- strain or limit the Legislature in granting certain privileges that have been granted.‘ in Kentucky, I think his amendment ought to come in another portion of the section. If the gentleman means to put it squarely that the Legislature shall not authorize fairs or premiums to be distributed [for the exhibition of horses or cattle; if he does not mean to license pooling privileges upon race courses, I think it ought to go in another section. If he :means simply to prohibit pool selling, as now prac- BILL OF RIGHTS. 29 Tuesday,] AUXIER—RODES. [November 11 . “ticed throughout the country, and cities, and towns, and villages, the law prohibits it now, and parties are subject to the very heaviest of penalties ; andI have no doubt the penalties are imposed. I have known instances in this Commonwealth where as high as $4,000 fines were imposed ‘upon parties for violation of such laws. In other words, if the gentleman simply means to prohibit that species of gaming already prohibited by the law, it is mere -child’s play for us to put that in the Con- :stitution, because it is already in the law of the land. It is different as to lotteries, be- cause they are licensed by an act of the Legislature. If I understand it, the Com- mittee want to prohibit such license being given by the Legislature. There is a very great difference in principle applying to .the'two. Mr. AUXIER. I want to know if- the amendment of the Delegate from the Sev- tenth District of the City of Louisville is a .part of the reportof the Committee of the Whole, and has been adopted as a part ‘of it? The PRESIDENT. It has been adopted in that way. It has been adopted in Com- mittee of the Whole. . Mr. RODES.- I do not know. I may be mistaken, but I think there is some mis- apprehension about it. I think the ques- tion now to be put is this: Whether we will agree that the amendment ofl'ered by the gentleman from’ Louisville shall remain and be a part of the twenty-sixth section .as reported by the Committe on Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. But still there is an amendment of the Committee of the Whole to that section. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll on .said amendment, which resulted as follows YEAS—38. Allen, M. K. Knott, J. Proctor Ayres, W. W. Lewis, W. W. Bennett, B. F. Martin, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. McElroy, W. J. Bourland, H. R. Miller, W. H. Brown, J. S. Moore, Laban T. Clardy, John ‘D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Doris, W. 14‘. Petrie, H. G. Durbin, Charles. Edrington, W. J. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Elmore, T. J. Pugh, Samuel Farmer, H. H. Ramsey, W. R. Field, W. W. Smith, H. H. Funk, J. T. Smith, W. Scott Goebel, Wm. Twyman, I. W. Graham, Samuel West, J. F. Harris, Geo. C. Williams, L. P. V. Hines, J. S. Wood, J. M. Hogg, S. P. Young, Bennett H. NAYS—52. Allen, C. T. Holloway, J. W. Amos. D. C. Hopkins. F, A. Askew, J. F. Jacobs. R. J. Auxier, A. J. James, A. D. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Berkele, Wm. Kirwen, E. E. Blackburn, James Lassing, L. W. Blackwall, Joseph Mackoy,-W. H. Boles, S. H. May, John S. Brents, J. A. McChord, Wm. C. Bronston, C. J. McDermott, E. J. Brummal, J. M. McHenry, H. D. Buchanam, Nathan Miller, Will, Buckner. S. B. , Montgomery, J. F. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, J. H. Burnan, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Coke, J. Guthrle Nunn, J. T. Cox, H. Pettit, Thos. S. DeHaven, S. E. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. G. Straus, F. P. Forgy, J. M. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thos. H. Trusdell, George Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Mr. President Clay ABSENT—10. Applegate, Leslie T. O’Hara, R. H. Carroll, John D. Quicksall, J. E. Chambers, G, D. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam E. Spaldin , I. A. Jonson, J ep C. Woolfol , J. F. The next amendment of the Committee of the Whole is that by which section 27 was stricken out. Mr. MACKOY. I will ask for the yeas and nays'on that. , Mr. MCHENRY. Had not the gentle- man better take a division‘? The hour for 30 BILL OF RIGHTS. Tuesday,] adjournment may arrive before the roll-call is finished. Mr. MACKOY. I will withdraw my call for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDENT. In order that there may be no mistake about the vote, the Chair will explain it. Section 27 was stricken out in Committee of the Whole, and the present vote, if carried. will operate to strike out said section from the original report. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted, and the section was declared stricken out. The PRESIDENT. The amendments of the Committee of the Whole are now disposed of ; and the Secretary will read the amendments offered in the Convention. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to call the at- tention of the Convention to the fact, that in the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lexington (Mr. Bronston) to sub- section 8 of section 1, the letter “s” should be inserted after the word “exist,” making it read. “absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic,” etc. It is the word “exist” now. Mr. BECKNER. I would suggest to the gentleman that we have a Committee on Style for that. Mr. PETTIT. They might fail to notice it; and here is another matter where the Committee on Style might fail to get in a correction in subsection 8 of article 1. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman has the right to offer amendments to those sec- tions, and his amendments will come up in MACKOY—PETTIT—BECKNEB. [November 11 . their regular order; he had better put them in writing. Mr. PETTIT. In subsection 8, of arti- cle 1, the word “ that ” ought to be stricken out, and also in subsection 10 the word “ that.” Mr. BRONSTON. adjourn. Mr. MACKOY. Before we adjourn, I think it would be well to have the amend- ments adopted to-day printed. I move that they be printed and laid upon the tables of members of the Convention to-morrow morning. Mr. BRONSTON. tion. Mr. JOHNSTON. I desire to get in an amendment before we adjourn. The PRESIDENT. It will be considered as before the Convention at the proper time. Mr. FUNK. It seems to me that this matter has been printed some six or eight times, and has been talked over and amended until it has become almost thread- bare, and I move that the motion to print be laid on the table. A vote being taken on the motion to lie on the table, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted 36 in the afiirmative and 38 in the negative, and the motion was lost. The PRESIDENT. The question is now on the motion to print. A division of the vote being called for, and while the President was engaged in the count, the hour of adjournment ar- rived, and the Convention thereupon ad- journed. I move that we I second the mo- ionvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CQNVENTION. 'Vol. 1 .1 FRANKFORT, NOVEMBER '12, 1890. [N 0. 50 Wednesday,] PARsoNs—MILLER-_-WooLFoLK. [November 12 _ The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened with. prayer by the Rev. Mr. .Darsie. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings 'Was read and approved. Petitions, eye. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. Mr. PARSONS. I have a- petition from Elliott county, which I desire to have re- ferred to the Committee on General Pro- ‘visions. Mr. MILLER. I have statements of indebtedness of the counties of Menefee, Larue, Casey, Carroll and Johnson, which I desire to have referred to the Special Com- mittee of which the Delegate from Ander- ' .son is Chairman. The PRESIDENT. The reference will be made. Mr. WOOLFOLK. I have a statement of the indebtedness of my county, which I desire to have referred to the Special Committee. The PRESIDENT. The reference is made. The Chair will lay before the Con- vention a letter from the Stenographer. The letter asked for an increase in amount of allowance, owing to the holding of afternoon sessions. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I move that that ‘communication be referred to the Com- I do not know whether it is the Committee on mittee having that matter in charge. Rules or the Committee on Printing and Accounts. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that no Committee has that matter in charge. Mr. MILLER. I move as a substitute to the motion that the communication be referred to the Committee on Rules. That is the Committee which had the matter under consideration and made the arrange- ment. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I move to amend the substitute by instructing the Com- mittee on Rules to report to-morrow. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Several mem- bers of the Committee on Rules belong to the Joint Committee on the Judicial De- partment, which will have a meeting this evening, and it would be impossible for the Committee on Rules to report to-morrow; but I think I can say, on behalf of the Committee on Rules, that they will report at the earliest moment possible. Mr. SMITH. I withdraw my amend- ment. A vote being taken, the motion to refer the matter to the Committee on Rules was carried. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will present the petition of sundry citizens of Warren county, praying that no reference to slavery be made in the Constitution, and ask that it be referred to the Legislative ' Committee. Reports from Standing Com- mittees are in order. If none, then reports from Special Committees. Report of Committee on Printing and Ac- counts. Mr. ELMORE. The Committee on Printing and Accounts has had under con- sideration the resolution offered by the Delegate from Green and Taylor, which they report back to the Convention, with 2 ' PRINTING. VVednesda-yJ ELMORE—WOOD. [November 12 . ,____ the expression of opinion it ought not to pass. I will read the resolution: That no re ularly elected or appointed ofi‘icer of this Convention shall receive any pay while his duties are being performed by a pro tem. ofiicer, but that the said pro tem. oflicer shall receive the same compen- sation per diem as allowed to the regularly elected or appointed officer. The Committee takes this view of the matter, that there is about one-fifth or one- fourth of the Convention off half the time, and I understand there is no per diem left in the Treasury, and it looks like it would be very uncharita-ble. to deduct the pay of an employe simply because he left a short time on business or sickness. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the resolution, the opinion of the Committee to the contrary notwith- standing. Mr. WOOD. I had the honor of offer- ing that resolution. The object I then had i in view was to see whether or not this Con- vention desired to pay two sets of ofiicers for the performance of the same work. It was not intended as a thrust at any individual officer; but it does seem to me, as a matter of business, that the ofiicer elected or appointed to do certain work, when his private business calls him away, should receive his pay from some other source, and not from the State, and the oflicer pro tem. should get the pay the regularly appointed officer is enti- tled to. In other words, that this Conven- tion does not intend to set a precedent for future Legislatures, that they shall appoint men and fix their per diem and then those men go off and engage in other private busi- ness for which they get pay, and this Conven; tion appoint pro tem. officers and pay them, and allow the regularly elected ofiicers to come back and draw their per diem during their absence from the State. I do not think that the same rule applies to a Delegate when he is absent. His per diem is not left in the Treasury, it is true. He furnishes no sub- stitute, and business goes right on, better, it may be, without him. It seems to me in this case, if one of the officers is away on private business, we certainly have a right- to let the pro tem. officer draw the pay of' I think the Convention. the absent oflicer. ought to settle this question. There is not. much money involved, but this is a busi- ness proposition, and on the passage of the _ resolution I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. FUNK. I second it. Mr. J. H. MOORE. I call for a report of the resolution. The resolution was again reported. Mr. BRONSTON. Is it in order to move to lay that resolution on the table? The PRESIDENT. Yes. Mr. WOOD. On that I demand the‘ yeas and nays. Mr. BOLES. I second it. Mr. ELNIORE. It seems to me that is- showing disrespect for the Committee. The PRESIDENT. No, sir; it really carries out the intention of the Committee» Mr. EL MORE. I understodo it was to lay the report of the Committee on the- table—not the resolution. Mr. BRONSTON. It is done for the purpose of showing the highest respect to the Committee. The result of the roll-call was as follows ; ' YEAS—47. Allen, C. T. Jacobs, R. P. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Askew, J. F. Kirwan, Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Berkele, Wm. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Bronston, C. J. Brummal, J. M. Bullitt, W. G. Carroll, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie DeHaven, S. E. Elmore, T. J. English, Sam E. Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel. William Hanks, Thos. H. Hines, J. S. Hines, Thomas H. Hollaway, J. W. Knott, J. Proctor Mackoy, W. H. McChord, Wm. C- McDermott, E. J. McHenry, H. D. Miller, W. H. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. O’Hara, R. H. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Straus, F. P. Swango, G. B. Washington, George West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H- SURVIVING MEMBERS OF LAST CONVENTION. 3 Wednesday,] ELMORE—COKE—MILLER. [November 12. NAYl—41. Amos, D. C. Lassing, L. W. Auxier, A. J. Lewis, 'W. W. Ayres, W. W. Martin, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. May, John S. Boles, S. H. McElroy, W. J. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Brents, J. A. Montgomery, J. F. Brown, J. S. Moore, J. H. Buchanan, Nathan Nunn, T. J. Buckner, S. B. Parsons, Rob’t T. Cox, H. Petrie, H. G. Dorris, W. F. Phelps, John L. Durbin, Charles Quicksall, J. E. Edrington, W. J. Ramsey, W. R. Farmer, H. H. Rodes, Robert Forgy, J . M. Smith, H. H. Funk, J. T. Smith, W.Scott Graham, Samuel Trusdell, George Harris, Geo. C. Twyman, I. W. James, A. D. Wood, J. M. Kennedy, Hanson ABSENT—+11,‘ Applegate, Leslie T. Hogg, S. P. Bennett, B. F. Hopkins, F. A. Burnam, Curtis F. Jonson. Jep. C. Chambers, G. D. Sachs, Morris A. Clardy, John D. Spalding, I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Mr. President Clay does not vote. So the resolution was laid on the table. Mr. ELMORE. The Committee on Printing and Accounts have had under consideration the motion made by the Del- egate from the Seventh District of Louis- villa, and make the following report : The Committee on Printing and Ac- counts recommend that Convention Record No. 48, containing typographical errors and other inaccuracies in the remarks of the gentleman from the Seventh District of Louisville, be suppressed, and a correct copy be printed for the bound book. A vote being taken, the report was adopted. Surviving lllembe'rs of the Convention of 1849. Mr. COKE. Some time since the Con- vention passed‘a resolution inviting the surviving Delegates of the Constitutional Convention of 1849 to meet with us here to-morrow, the 18th inst. N 0 Committee was appointed to meet and extend courte- sies to those gentlemen. I therefore move that the President of the Convention ap- point a Committee of three to meet and extend all courtesies necessary to the Dele- gates who appear in response to that reso- lution. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move, as an amendment, that the Committee shall be a Committee of five, of which the President of this Convention shall be Chairman. Mr. COKE. I accept that. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. Mr. WOOD. I would like to ask the Clerk whether or not he has received com- munication from the Delegates of the Con- vention of 1849, and whether or not any of them will be present to-morrow. The SECRETARY. I have received communications from three of the Dele— gates: Mr. Morris, of Christian county, who is now at Memphis; Col. Machen, of Eddyville, and Governor Woodson, of St. Joseph, Mo. Those gentlemen have an- swered—two, on account of their physical condition, and one, on account of his press- ing business relations—that they cannot be here. I have those communications, and will turn them over to the Committee. The others I have not heard from, and suppose they expect to be here. I want to say to the Convention that, just as soon as the resolution was adopted, I inclosed a copy of the resolution to each one of those old members, with a pressing invitation, on behalf of the Convention, to be with you all here to-morrow. The PRESIDENT. Motions and reso- lutions are still in order. Leave of Absence. Leave of absence was granted to the Delegate from Wayne. Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move that we proceed with the consideration of the Special Order, the report of the Committee of the Whole on the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] A A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the first amendment. Mr. MACKOY. I would like to send up two substitutes, to be considered at the proper time. ‘ Mr. H. H. SMITH. If it is in order, I offer a substitute for the second section, which I offered in Committee of the 'Whole. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that all amendments offered in the Committee of the Whole will have to be re-offered, in order to go before the Con- vention. Does the Delegate from Coving- ton desire his amendment read? Mr. HARRIS. I thought that was or- dered printed yesterday. The PRESIDENT. That was not adopt- ed. The Convention adjourned during the pendency of the question. The CLERK. The Delegate from Cov- ington offers as a substitute for section 2 of the report of the Committee of the Whole on Preamble and Bill of Rights, the follow- ing: No man or set of men are entitled to ex- clusive, separate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in con- sideration of public services. ‘ He also offers to substitute the Preamble of the present Constitution for the Pre- amble reported by the Committee. The PRESIDEN T. The Secretary will now report the first amendment. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. Do I understand that the amendments heretofore offered will have to be re-offered now? The PRESIDENT. All amendments offered in the Convention, as a matter of course, are pending in the Convention; but those amendments offered in Commit- tee of the Whole have to be re-offered. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to offer an amendment. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate desire his amendment to be reported? MacxornSm'rn—Hannrs. [November 12 . Mr. ZACK PHELPS. It need not be until section 11 is reached. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I re-offer my amendment offered in Committee of the Whole, to strike out the fourth subsection of the first section of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights_ The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state to the Convention that all amend- ments must be put in writing, or the Sec- retary will be unable to keep the proper record. ,Mr. MONTGOMERY. have been printed? The PRESIDENT. Yes; the Delegate will have to hunt it up. Mr. PUGH. I wish to offer a substitute for section 17, which I desire to have called up at the proper time. The PRESIDENT. The amendment is not novwbefore the Convention, but will be at the proper time. Mr. McHENRY. day we had gone over The PRESIDENT. And disposed of all the amendments of the Committee of the ‘Whole Mr. McHENRY. Section by 'section. Gentlemen had the right to offer amend- ments then and have them voted on. Is not that the case? The PRESIDENT. The state of case is this: By Parliamentary usage we first acted on the amendments proposed by the. Committee of the Whole. That still leaves the original matter open to amend- ment. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to make a Parlia- mentary inquiry, and it is this: Is it in order for any amendment that has been acted upon by the Committee of the Whole, to be again presented to the Convention? If so, what use is there in any action by the Committee of the Whole? My under- standing has always been that we take the report of the Committee of the Whole and present it to the Convention, and the first question thereon is the previous question. Where they I thought on yester- BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 l Wednesday,] PE'r'ri'r—KNoT'r—HARRIs. [November 12 . Upon that the question must be had and taken by the Convention. It may be voted down. In which event, the control of the . report passes to the opposition, and they take charge of the matter. The PRESIDENT. What is the in- quiry ? Mr. PETTIT. Whether it is in order for an amendment that has been voted down in Committee of the Whole to be again re- newed in the Convention‘? The PRESIDENT. The Chair decides it is, until the previous question is ordered, when the amendment is otherwise Parlia- mentary. As long as the previous question is not ordered, and as long as the amend- ment is Parliamentary, it is certainly in order. Mr. PETTIT. To test the sense of the Convention- Mr. KNOTT. I will offer in the Con- vention the substitute that I offered in the ~ Committee of the Whole. Mr. HARRIS. I offer a substitute to section 2 that was offered in Committee of the Whole. Mr. BRONSTON. ‘I desire to offer for the gentleman from Scott the old Bill of Rights, as a substitute. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate has already offered it. Mr. RAMSEY- I desire to send up some amendments. Mr. PETTIT. In order to test the sense of the Convention, I move that the previ- ous question be now put. _ Mr. BECKNER. (Interrupting) The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate yield to the Delegate from Clark? Mr. PETTIT. Certainly. Mr. BECKNER. I ‘offer, an amend- ment. Mr. PETTIT. I move that the previous question be now had upon the report and the amendments now pending. The PRESIDENT. What does the gen- tleman mean by “ amendments?” Mr. PETTIT. On the report of the Committee, and the substitutes of the Del- egate from Scott and the Delegate from Marion, and amendments pending thereto. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. I desire to ask if amendments are cut off by that? The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire to re-oifer some. Mr. PETTIT. I understand the Chair- man of the Committee had an amendment pending; I want that also included. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate then withdraws his motion? Mr. PETTIT. Yes. Mr. J. L. PHELPS I now offer my amendment to section 7. Mr. RODES. I offer an‘ amendment from the Committee of the Whole. Mr. PETTIT. I now renew my mo tion. Mr. GOEBEL. I offer an amendment. Mr. ASKEW. I rise to a Parliamentary inquiry. I understand the President made an elaborate statement of the condition of afi‘airs yesterday morning or the morning before, in which it was stated that the re- port of the Committee 011 Preamble and Bill of Rights would be presented and per- fected section by section; then the substi- tute of the Delegate from Marion would be taken up and perfected, and then the sub- stitute offered by the Delegate from Scott would be taken up. * The PRESIDENT. The Delegate is in- correct in one thing, and that is,that it was to be considered section by section. There is no such rule. Mr. ASKEW. If- this motion prevails, there are a number of Delegates who wish - to offer amendments to the old Bill of Rights, and some to Governor Knott’s sub- stitute, and if we vote for the Delegate’s motion, that cuts off any further amend- ments or debate. The PRESIDENT. Yes Mr.- MACKOY. It would cut off all amendments offered to the amendment this morning. i BILL OF RIGHTS. l Wednesday,] MACKO Y—PETTIT—CARROLL. The PRESIDENT. No, sir; the Chair would hold that all the amendments ofi'ered up to this time will be voted on. Mr. MACKOY. Suppose that an amendment offered this morning might meet the view of some Delegate in this room if some word was stricken out, would it be proper, after the previous question, to make a motion of that kind? The PRESIDENT. Only by unanimous consent. Mr. MACKOY. I make the suggestion that the Convention may see how such a rule would operate. It will operate to defeat probably the getting at the true sense of the Convention, because some amendment offered this morning might meet the views of a majority of the Convention if one word were stricken out. Mr. PETTIT. Is debate in order? The PRESIDENT. Not at all. Mr. MACKOY. I do not think we can get a satisfactory Bill of Rights if we adopt the previous question now. A vote being taken, the main question was ordered. The CLERK. The first amendment in order is that proposed by the Delegate from Henry as a substitute for section 6 of the Committee’s report: The ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof re- main inviolate— Mr. CARROLL. I withdraw that sub- stitute. The CLERK. The next in order is the amendment of the Delegate from Fayette, which is as follows: Amend report of the Committee on Pre- ' amble and Bill of Rights by striking out section 24., which reads: “Slavery and in- voluntary servitude in this State are for- bidden, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment just read. Mr. RAMSEY. On that I call the yeas and nays. I Mr. DEHAVEN. I second it. The result of the roll-call was as follows : YEAS—28. Allen, M. K. Graham, Samuel Amos, D. C. Hanks, Thos. H. Askew. J. F. Jacobs, R. P. Blackburn, James Johnston, P. P. Boles, S. H. Kirwan, E. E. Bronston, C. J. Lewis, W. W. Brown, J. S. Martin, W. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Moore, J. H. DeHaven S. E. Muir, J. W. Durbin, Charles Petrie, H. G. Edrington, W. J. Smith, W. Scott Elmore, T. J. Straus, F. P. Funk, J. T. Twyman, I. W. Glenn, Dudley A. Mr. President Clay mars—57. Allen, C. T. Mackoy, W. H. Auxier, A. J. May, John S. Ayres, W. W. McChord, Wm. C. Beckham, J. C. McDermott, E. J. Beckner, W. M. McElroy, W. J. Bennett, B. F. McHenry, H. D. Berkele, Wm. Miller, Will. Birkhead, B. T. Miller, W. H. Bourland, H. R. Montgomery, J. F. Brents, J. A. Moore, Laban T. Brummal,J. M. Nunn, T. J. Buchanan, Nathan O’Hara, R. H. Buckner, S. B. - Parsons Rob’t T. Bullitt, W. G. Pettit, Thos. S. Carroll, John D. Phelps, John L. Cox. H. Phelps, Zack Doris, W. F. Pugh, Sam’l J. English, Sam. E. Quicksall, J. E. Farmer, H. H. Ramsey, W. R. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J, G. Smith, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Goebel, WVilliam West, 'J . F. Harris, Geo. C. Holloway, J, W. James, A. D. Kennedy, Ha‘nson Knott, J. Proctor Lassing, L. W. ABSENT—15. Applegate, Leslie T. Hogg, S. P. Blackwell, Joseph Hopkins, F. A. Burnam, Curtis F. Jonson, J ep. C. Chambers, G. D. Sachs, Morris A. Clardy, John D. Spalding, I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Swango, G. B. Hines, J. S. Washington, George Hines, Thomas H. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. [November 1 2 . BILL OF RIGHTS 7 Wednesday,] PETTIT—STRAUS—KENNEDY. [November 12 . So the amendment was rejected. Mr. PETTIT. I want to say that the Delegate from Christian is absent from the ‘city on important business, and I, there- fore, ask leave of absence for him. The PRESIDENT. The leaveis granted. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I offer an amend- ment. - Mr. STRAUS. I desire to offer an amendment. Mr. TRUSDELL. I desire to offer an amendment. Mr. L. P. V. WILLIAMS. I offer an amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Nicho- las. He proposes the following as a substi- tute for section 2 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights: That all men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and no grant of ex- clusive, separate public emoluments or privileges shall be made to any man or set of men, except in consideration of public services; but no property shall be exempt from taxation except as provided in this Constitution, and every grant of a fran- chise, privilege or exemption shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amend- ment. lWIr. KENNEDY. This substitute of— fered by me to section 2 of the Com- mittee’s report as now amended, difi'ers somewhat from the substitute offered by me several days ago, and I desire to submit a few additional remarks with reference to it. We have had so much discussion over this section that it is with some cliflidence I venture to make any further suggestions -on the subject; but in view of the impor- tance of the question, I ask the indulgence of the Convention for a short time. There are some Delegates in this Convention who favor the entire abolition of the first sec- tion of the present Bill of Rights—what will you substitute for it‘? Will you say that no separate privilege, or exclusive public privilege or exemption, shall ever be granted under any circumstance whatever‘? Whenever you go so far as to say that, you i’ may not only embarrass the State Govern- ment at some time, but may seriously retard the march of progress and check the de- velopment that is taking place in our midst. There must be some. flexibility in governmental affairs, otherwise the emer- gencies and contingencies that may arise, cannot be met or provided for. This section of the Committee’s report, as now amended by striking out the words “but in consideration of public services,” and inserting in lieu thereof the words “ex- cept as shall be provided in this Constitu- tion,” absolutely settles nothing, and only transfers the fight to other times and places. If that section as amended is adopted new by this Convention, then the fight will be renewed under each article or division of the Constitution, and the skirmishing will be kept up all along the line. Let us march up and settle this perplexing question now. If we cannot do it, let us frankly say s0, and retain the present section in the old Bill of Rights. Permit me to call the attention of the Convention to this section as now amended. It reads: No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, except as shall be provided in this Constitution; and no law shall be passed by the General Assem- bly making any irrevocable grant of special privileges, franchises or immunities. By this section, if adopted, you under- take to say, that somewhere in this Consti- tution you will determine what exclusive or separate public privileges you will grant, to whom they shall be granted, and to fur- ther say none shall be granted except those specifically enumerated. That is what the section, as now amended, means. In other words, you propose to take away from the Legislature all discretion in this matter, and to say it shall have no power whatever in the premises. N ow, my idea of a Constitution is, that it should be, as far as possible, a simple declaration of principles; and that it should 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. 'Wednesdayj KENNEDY. [November 12. go no further than is absolutely necessary, in placing restrictions upon the legislative power. I am aware of the fact, however, that the legislative power has been abused sometimes to such an extent, that we all agree that the further exercise of‘ it, in cer- tain directions, should be limited, and, in some instances, entirely prohibited. But the limitation upon or prohibition of such power should only be in those cases where experience has clearly proven, beyond any doubt, that the exercise of the same is not conducive to the public welfare. Now, applying this principle to the case in hand, in what respect has the legislative power been abused under section one of the present Bill of Rights? I propose to an- swer the question squarely, and say that the abuse has been in the exemption of property from taxation, and not in grant- ing separate or exclusive privileges. The fact that a gas or water, company has the exclusive privilege of furnishing gas or water to the city of Lexington for a term of years, is all right, if the city is willing and agrees to it. The fact that a street railway company has the exclusive right of operating its cars for a term of years in the city of WVinches- ter, is all right, if the city is willing and agrees to it. These are matters that do not affect the general public and the State at large, but are local matters, pertaining to local self-government, and if these cities de- sire to give these companies some exclusive or separate privilege as an inducement to them to invest their capital, expecting in return to derive a benefit commensurate with the privilege granted, that is all right and nobody can complain. These are mat- ters that affect the people of those cities only, and not the general public. But whenever you exempt that property from taxation, then every one has a right to complain, because, to the extent of the exemption, the burden of taxation is in- creased upon everybody in the State, with~ out carrying with it a corresponding benefit. No one can deny this proposition. The substitute offered by me remedies all the abuses under this section. I use sub-~ stantially the language in the present- section one, down to “public services,” transposing the language so as to avoid the- grammatical contest over “ is” and “ are.” Then I add after the term “public services” these words: “But no property shall be- exempt from taxation, except as provided in this Constitution, and every grant of a franchise, privilege or exemption shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amendment.” Under this substitute, all property is subject to taxation, except such as may hereafter be exempted in this Con- stitution. That is simple and plain. Under the proper articles of the Constitu- tion, you can exempt Church and school property, and such other property as may seem to you wise and proper, and then all other property, of every kind and descrip-- tion, is covered by this section, and there can be no further trouble on this ques- tion. Now, one other suggestion: The section; of the Committee’s report as amended reads :- “And no law shall be passed by the Gen- eral Assembly making any irrevocable- grant of special privileges,” etc. I submit a friendly criticism on that language. Rev-- ocable when? At the end of ten, twenty or thirty years? If a privilege can only be revoked at the end of twenty years. can you say it is an “irrevocable: grant?” That language is open to a. doubtful construction. The language used in my substitute is, that “every grant of a franchise, privilege- or immunity shall remain subject to rev-- ocation, alteration or amendment.” That language cannot be misconstrued. Now, in conclusion, I appeal to the Con- vention not to adopt the section as amended by the Committee of the Whole, because there is danger lurking in it, and the ulti- mate effect of it may be to chain the foe BILL or RIGHTS. 9 Wednesday,] NUNN—KENNEDY—STRAUS. [November 12 . of progress and arrest the momentum of development so recently attained in this State. I believe Kentucky has more un- developed wealth. than any State in the Union, and, it is the part of wisdom to en- courage all such enterprises and industries as will develop it, when it can be done without any prejudice to the people or det- riment to the public welfare, and the sub- stitutevofl'ered by me still permits the Leg- islature to exercise a sound discretion in this direction, and at the same time restricts that power so as to prevent any abuse of the same. Mr. NUNN. In the Whipps case, was not that lottery grant sustained by the Court on the ideav that it was a private privilege, and therefore not inhibited by section 1 ? Mr. KENNEDY. That is That was so held by the Court. Mr. NUNN. In view of that, will you agree to amend your substitute by striking out the word “public?” I Mr. KENNEDY.~ No, sir. There was an abuse of power, however, in that in- stance; but whenever you say the Legisla- ture shall have no discretion whatever, I think we are going to the other extreme. To show the necessity for the Legislature granting special relief sometimes, one illus- tration will sufiice. Suppose the present revenue law, which requires a Sheriff to qualify on the first Monday in January succeeding his election, had been passed at the last session of the Legislature. At the past August election the Sheriffs through- out the State were elected; now, when the first Monday in January next comes, sup- pose those acts are not yet printed, and some Sheriff, having no knowledge of the passage of the law, fails to qualify at the required time and forfeits his ofiice. Will any one say the Legislature ought not to have the power of granting relief in such cases? That is only one instance, in many, that may occur. Mr. STRAUS. The section, as reported correct. by the Committee of the Whole, does not mean any thing at all. This Convention would do more credit to itself to abolish that section than to attempt to evade the real issue in the manner in which they have done it. WVhat does it say? “No man or set of men are entitled to separate, exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community, except as shall be provided in this Constitution.” Now, you will have to look at another part of the Constitution to find out whether any such privileges have- been granted. It seems to me that the- whole question turns upon the proposition whether this Convention ever intends to allow exclusive privileges of any character whatever to be granted. If that is the sense: of the Convention,we ought to say so in plain terms; we should have the courage of our- convictions. If it is the sense of this Con- vention that no exclusive privilege should ever be granted at all, let us have the cour- age of our convictions and abolish this- section. It is simply a discredit to the in- telligence of this body to adopt the section as it now stands. I agree with the gentle- man from Nicholas on that, and, therefore, I shall support his substitute. I believe‘ there are circumstances under which ex-- elusive privileges ought to be granted; and at the same time I believe that the Legisla- ture of the State ought to retain absolute control over all such grants, so that if such- grants become dangerous to the rights of the people the Legislature can take them. from the incorporators; but let us not. dodge the real question. The section,.. as it is now framed, is a misera- ble dodge. There is no use of talking about the Whipps case. That is a stray case, which the Court of Appeals would not own as its offspring to-day. Let. us come down to a straight business propo- sition. Does this Convention mean to say that no town or city in this State can, by legislative authority, grant to any corpora—- tion or company whatever any exclusive privileges for any purposes whatever? ‘If' 10 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] MACKOY—KENNEDY. [November 12 . you mean to say that, you ought to say so. If you do not mean that, let us come out, like bold and courageous men, and limit this power, so that it will not be dangerous to the people. I think the section drawn by the gentleman from Nicholas cov- ers the question better than any section offered to the Convention. He boldly de- clares an exclusive privilege may be neces- sary, while he reserves to the State the power to collect taxes, that no exemption from taxation shall ever be made in such grant. He leaves it to the Legislative De- partment to grant exclusive privileges, and leaves to the Legislature absolute power and control over such grant. If that is the sense of the body, say so; and if we do not mean to grant any exclusive privi- leges anywhere or under any circum- stances, we ought to say so clearly and plainly. I cordially support the substitute offered by the Delegate from Nicholas. Mr. MACKOY. I desire to offer an amendment striking out certain words. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend the amendment offered by the Delegate from the county of Nicholas, as follows: By striking out the words “and every grant of franchises, privileges or ex- emptions shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amendment.” Mr. MACKOY. Some days ago, in the discussion on the Bill of Rights, I took occasion to state my views on this question to some extent. I do not now propose to repeat what I then said, but I do desire to give very briefly the reason why the words referred to should be stricken out. The only reason upon which the grant of separate exclusive privileges can be sus- tained is, that the person who is authorized or permitted to have such privileges ren- ders a public service; or, in other words, performs a service which the State might do, or would be compelled to do, unless some private agency could be employed for that purpose. And the question is now before the Convention whether we shall put the State in a condition of being com- pelled, as I think we shall do, of itself, in every case undertaking the performance of public duties, or whether we shall still per- mit the State to employ private agencies as we have done for years past? If the State is to perform this duty, if--as we shall do by the adoption of the resolution as con- tained in the report of the Committee of the Whole, or the resolution as presented by the Delegate from Nicholas—either of those be- comes an integral part of the Constitution of Kentucky, it seems to me we do serve notice upon every one that the rendering of pub- lic services in this State will be a matter of great hazard to the persons who undertake to do so. The result will be that the State itself will have to undertake the perform‘ ance of those services. That instead of em- ploying the agency of a corporation to build a railroad. or to build a water-works or gas-works, or any other public improve- ment, the State, or some local subdivision of the State, will have to step in and un- dertake that work, for the reason that pri- vate capital will not engage in an enter- prise so hazardous, or one subject altogether to the will of the General Assembly of this State. Is the State prepared to put itself in that position? W'e all know when a State undertakes to perform public service or make a public improvement, that the doing so is attended with far more expense than when it is made by an individual or corporation; that when a State undertakes a public improvement, it does it by polit— ical agencies; that the abilities of the agents who may be employed to perform the public work are not considered, but rather their political aifiliations, and that they are selected because they are members of some political party, without reference to their qualifications. Mr. KENNEDY. You say you are afraid of this latter part of my amend- ment. I will ask you if that is different from the statute of 1856‘? Mr. MACKOY. It is. I will come to BILL OF RIGHTS. ' . 11 Wednesday,] M ACKOY. [November 12 _ that directly. I do not believe the statute of 1856 is, in all respects, a wise one, but it does contain the saving clause that if there is an amendment or repeal, the vested rights shall not be impaired. And there is this difference between a Constitutional provision and a statute, in that the General Assembly, under the law as it now stands. may, if the emergency requires it, provide that a charter either shall not ‘be repealed or amended, or that it shall only be re- pealed or amended under certain circum- stances. It leaves the matter wholly in charge of the Legislature, and the act of 1856 is much wiser and better in every way for the State of Kentucky, than for us to adopt a east-iron rule such as is embodied in the words which I move to have stricken out. We all know, when the former Con- vention met, one of the things which that Convention was intended to accomplish, was to prevent the State from engaging in the Work of making public improvements. The State had been engaged in that work for years. At the time that Convention met, the debt of the State was more than five and a half million dollars, largely contracted for the making of internal im- provements. The State had expended in the building of turnpikes over two and a half million dollars, and for ten years it had received upon its investment only $290,000, or a little more than one per cent. per annum. Persons who are familiar with that period of the State’s history, say that, up to the time of that Con- vention, the entire revenue of the State from all its investments in pub- lic im rovements had not exceeded two per cedk. per annum. Are we» willing to put ourselves back in that position? In the first place, are we willing to undertake, as a State, the building of public improve- ments? If we are not, if we propose to prohibit it, yet, if, at the same time, we propose to go on with the development of the State, we must certainly give some as- surance to capital that, when ‘it comes into i this State, it will not be subject to the whim and the control of every Legislature that may meet. I believe it was stated by somegentleman on the floor of the Conven- tion, early in the session of the Convention, that section one of the present Bill of Rights was the Pandora’s Box, from which all the evils that have afflicted .the State of Ken- tucky have escaped, and that not even hope had been left behind to cheer us, and that we must change that ‘section radically. That section has been a part of the Consti- tution of Kentucky, that restriction upon legislative power, because it is a restric- tion, has existed now for one hundred years. And yet, when it was attempted upon the floor of this Convention to state the evils that had afliicted the State of Kentucky by reason of that section, we were pointed to two or three cases, and to lotteries as instances of the evils that had grown out of that section, as the total - result of the one hundred years’ history of this State. _ Now, Mr. President, we know the evils of lotteries have not been because of this section, but have been in spite of it; that it is not because a'lottery renders a public service that rights and privileges have been given to it. Take the earliest decision with reference to lotteries in this State in which that question was considered, the case of Gregory’s Executrix, in 2 Metcalfe, you will find that the Court in that case does not derive the power to grant lottery priv- ileges from section 1 of the Bill of Rights. It says in express terms that a grant of a lottery privilege is a mere gratuity; that it may be repealed or withdrawn at any time until money has been invested or loaned on the strength of it. ‘The case of the Com- monwealth against Whipps, 80 Ky. Rep., it is true, was an opinion by a divided Court, and may not be authority for that reason, as one Delegate has said; but so far as the reason assigned for the grant of the lottery privilege is concerned, the Cour 12 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] STRAUs—MAcKoY. [November 12 . bases it upon. exactly the same ground on which it is placed in the Gregory case in 2 Metcalfe: that it is a grant of a mere private privilege or gratuity, which may be withdrawn at any time until' some money had been invested on the faith of the grant. So that it is not because of this section that the evils have afflicted the State, but it is in spite of this section, and, therefore, it seems to me, we should get over the dread and apprehension in which this Convention seems to have been placed by the language certain gentlemen used in the early debates on the Bill of Rights. Mr. STRAUS. Will the gentleman permit a question? Mr. MACKOY. Certainly. Mr. STRAUS. Are you opposed to legislative control over legislative grants? Mr. MACKOY. I am not. Mr. STRAUS. Do you believe that the doctrine of the Dartmouth College case is sound, or ought to obtain ? Mr. MACKOY. Yes, within certain limitations. I believe the doctrine of the Dartmouth College case, as modified by the late decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in a number of cases, is sound doctrine, and one that should pre- vail. The doctrine in the Dartmouth Col— lege case is, that a contract once made shall not be impaired, and, unless the grant ex- pressly withdraws the corporation from legislative control, the late decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States all announce, with no uncertain sound, that wherever property is devoted to public use or public service there, it is the right‘; and duty of the Legislature to regulate it— to fix the maximum prices that will be rea- sonable. I think, guarded as the Dart- mouth College case is, by the recent decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, it is one upon which the wealth and prosperity of the country de- pend. Mr. STRAUS. Is not’ the better doc- trine to the effect that a legislative grant is not a contract, and cannot be a contract‘? Mr. MACKOY. No, sir: I do not think that is sound doctrine. And just there I would like to read from an opinion of Justice Harlan, of the Supreme Court of the United States. I read from the body of the opinion in the case of New Orleans Gaslight Company vs. Louisiana Light Company, reported in 115 U. S. That case was decided by Justice Harlan, who is not unknown to the bar of Kentucky and the members of this Convention. He quotes and ap- proves of the language of Justice Da- vis, and for that reason I read from this opinion, instead of from the original- opinion of Judge Davis. After referring to the Binghampton Bridge Case, 3 Wall; 51, decided by Justice Davis, he says: “Mr. Justice Davis, delivering the opinion of the Court, said ‘that if any thing was settled by an unbroken chain of decisions in the Fed- eral Courts, it was that an act of incorpora- tion _was a contract between the State and the stockholders, a departure from which now would involve dangers to society that cannot be foreseen—would shock the sense of justice of the country, unhinge its busi- ness interest, and weaken, if not destroy, that respect which has always been felt for the Judicial Department of the Govern- ment.’ It was also observed in language applicable to the present casein some re- spects: ‘The purposes to be attained are generally beyond the ability of individual enterprise, and can only be accomplished through the aid of associated wealth. This will not be risked unless privileges are given and securities furnished in an act of incorporation. The wants of the public are often so imperative that a duty is imposed on the government to provide- for them; and, as experience has proved that a State should not directly attempt to do this, it is necessary to confer on others the faculty of doing what the sovereign power is unwilling to undertake. The BILL OF RIGHTS. ' ‘ 13 I Wednesday,] MACKOY. [November 12 , Legislature, therefore, says to public-spir- ited citizens: ‘If you will embark with your time, money and skill in an enterprise which will accommodate the public neces- sities, we will grant to you for a limited period,'_or in perpetuity, privileges that will justify the expenditure of your money and the employment of your time and skill.’ Such a grant is a contract, with mutual considerations, and justice and good policy alike require that the protection of the law .should be assured to it.” Now, it seems to me that the tendency of the present time is not to adhere to the ‘doctrine of the Dartmouth College case, modified by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of the last few years, but it is to swing as far as possible from the doctrine of the Dartmouth Col- lege case. It is to place all property rights under the control of the Legislatures of the respective States, at least the prop- erty rights of corporations. I ask you why should not the same rule exactly ap- ply to the property of individuals? It is true that in this State we have said that '“ the right of property is superior to and higher than any constitutional sanction;” but in the last Convention, one of the ablest members of the Convention denied ‘that there was any truth in the proposition, and that was no less a person than the Hon. James Guthrie, President of the Con- vention. He maintained—and maintained correctly, as many think—that that section --of the Bill of Rights, which was first in- corporated in the last Constitution, did not express a sound or correct principle; but,on the contrary, that the right to all property was conventional, and that unless restric- tions were thrown around the power of the Legislature, it would be within the power {of the Legislature to say to any person what disposition should be made of his property, to take it from him, and that, “therefore, existed the necessity of hedging the power of the Legislature in that re- .spect. I will ask if the right of a stock-- holder to his stock—if his right to the money which he has invested in a corporate enterprise is of less a property same amount importance or right than the invested in real estate or stock or improvements made on land ? Should it not be as sacredly pro- qected and as sacredly guarded? How would it read if we were to take the pres- ent report of the Committee, subsection 5 of article 1 of the Bill of Rights, and tack on to it a proposition similar to that sought to be tacked on to section 2. It now reads: “That the general, great and essential prin- ciples of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, WE DE- CLARE: That all men are by nature free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned, 5. The right of acquiring and protecting property." Suppose we tack on to that, “but the right of acquiring and pro- tecting property shall be held subject to the power of the Legislature at any time" to take away from any man the property which he has acquired, whenever it shall think proper to do so?” To my mind it would be just as wise, as proper and as just to tack such a provision on to. subsection 5 as it would be to add to section 2 the words which the Committee of the Whole and the Delegate from Nicholas have sought to add. Corporations have some property rights which, I think, should be protected. It is true, that if there were no legislative action there could be no corporation; but when the Legislature has acted, when it has provided for corporations, when the corporation has actually entered upon the performance of the duty for which it is established, and when the stockholders have invested their money on the face of the legislative grant and the legislative promise, then, it seems to me, that it would be unwise in the highest degree for the State of Kentucky to say “you may do all this, but our General Assembly can is less of money V take it away whenever they want to do it.” 14 BILL OF RIGHTS Wednesday,] M-AcKoY. [November 712 . It reminds me of the story of the needy Frenchman and his wife who, one night, sleeping in their poor apartments, were aroused by a noise, and the wife said to the husband: “My dear, there is a burglar in the room.” Said he, “don’t disturb him; if he finds any thing, we will get up and take it from him.” That is exactly what the Convention proposes to do. It is a notice to the persons who may want to bring money into the State for the purpose of improving it: “You may come here, you may invest your money, but after you have done it we reserve to ourselves the privilege of taking away those rights and franchises upon the faith of which, and relying upon which, you have attempted to benefit the State of Kentucky.” But are we going to get the work better done, if we resolve not to encourage the formation of corporations ‘? It was urged, as one of the evils of the present section one of Bill of Rights, by the Delegate from Marion, that the control of the Green and Barren river improve- ment had passed from the State to a pri- vate corporation, and that it should have been retained by the State. What were the facts in regard to that improvement, as shown in the reported casein 8th Bush? It was one of the objections made at that time to the grant that it impaired the Sinking Fund of the State, and, therefore, that it was unconstitutional. But the facts in that case showed that that was not true; that it was a burden on the State; that the State derived no income from it; that it was falling into decay, and that the en- tire State was burdened with taxation for the purpose of maintaining it. The burden fell not only on those benefited by the improvement, but upon the entire State of Kentucky. The tax-payer on the Big Sandy had to contribute to it in proportion to the value of his property just ‘as much as a person who lived on the banks of those rivers,and who was benefited by the improve- ment. The works were falling into decay, and ,were in no respect benefiting either the State ‘or the community in the vicinity of it. The State, therefore, as I think, and as the opinion of the Court in 8th Bush says, acted wisely in turning the control of that. public improvement over to a corporation. The burden was felt thereby simply by those who were benefited by it, and the‘ effect was to enhance the value of land in the vicinity. Now, suppose that the State of Kentucky at the same time it turned over to the Green and Barren’ River Navi- gation Company the franchise that was granted to it, had also found a corporation that would have taken control of the im-- provement on the Licking river; $372,000 were spent by the State of Kentucky prior- to the year 18493in improving the Licking river, buildinglocks and dams. To-day' there is not a vestige of that improvement, and no benefit has accrued therefrom to the State of Kentucky. Not only has the- money expended perished, but the enor- mous interest which would have accrued upon it since the date of investment has also perished. Suppose at that time the» State of Kentucky had selected some .cor- poration or private agency, and had said to it, “In consideration of your maintaining these works, we will grant you the right to- collect tolls on that river for fifty or one bun-- dred years,” what would have been the result. to-day? It was before railroads began to- run out of the city of Cincinnati. It was before they had the suburban lines which make the outlying hills so accessible to the- city. The population which has gone to the suburbs of Cincinnati would have been attracted to the Kentucky side of the‘ river. The gardeners, who now have their- places a few miles out from Cincinnati, would have selected the fertile lands along the Licking bottom, and to-day that country would be blossoming as a rose if ' the State, at the same time that it turned over the Green and Barren river naviga- tion to a corporation, had also turned over the Licking river improvement to another- corporation. The work, too, would have BILL OF RIGHTS. 15 Wednesday,] MAcKoY—STBAUs. [November 12. been done more economically and with business method, and the people of that entire section would have felt the benefit of it. As it is, what are we trying to do to- day? "W e are trying to-day to do exactly that which the State of Kentucky tried to do forty or fifty years ago. There are persons interested inland along the Lick- ing river who have for years been endeavor- ing to get‘ Congress to improve that river, so that it may be made navigable like the ' Kentucky and Green rivers, and it is all for that'want of foresight or some private agency which would have taken charge of it at the same time this other improvement was taken charge of. Now, there are other instances in which the grant of ex- clusive privileges are beneficial to the com- munity. Take the Louisville \Vater Com- pany case. Some gentleman suggested that there should be competition in water and gas in cities; that. the State should throw down the bars, and say there should be no exclusive privileges at all. W'hat would be the re- sult in the city of Louisville to-day if there were two water companies, or two, or three, or four gas companies permitted to supply the citizens of Louisville with gas? "Would it be done more cheaply ‘? Experience shows otherwise. Take the history of any city in which there have been three or four gas companies, and you will find that the result of competition has been consolidation and a higher price to the consumer. They have to make up for the loss of capital sus- tained, and wherever consolidation is possi- ble, competition is impossible. Take an- other view of it. Are you going to permit three or four gas or water companies to en- ter into a large city with its granite and as- phalt pavements in order that the principle of competition, as these gentlemen claim, should be carried out to its fullest extent. Every time a person wanted to change from one gas company to another, or one water ' company to another, are you going to per- mit a new service connection to be made ‘? You thereby not only destroy the useful- ness of your streets, but you are impairing the health and security of individual citi- zens, and it is necessary in any number of instances that there should be these exclu- sive agencies. Society cannot exist without them. They must exist in civilized com- munities, and, as I stated in answer to a question propounded by the Delegate from Bullitt, the true theory is to grant these ex- clusive privileges for a limited term; they should not be perpetuities, but for twenty- five or fifty years, as the case may need, re- serving the right. to so control them as that the State and the citizens of the State may receive no detriment from the granting of such charters. Mr. STRAUS. permit a question ‘? Mr. MACKOY. Certainly. Mr. STRAUS. How could that right be enforced, unless you reserve the right to repeal their charter‘? Mr. MACKOY. It can be enforced without any such right. You would sim- ply provide in the charter, or by the gen- eral laws under which charters will, I trust, be hereafter granted. Let the act of 1856 exist on the statute book, or provide in the Constitution that, wherever prop- erty is applied to public service or public duties, the General Assembly shall have the right to regulate the price for which the service shall be performed or the duty rendered. Mr. STRAUS. Can there be any effect- ual power in a reservation, without the power to take away their charter? Mr. MACKOY. Yes. Put in the Con- stitution ‘of Kentucky that, wherever a corporation performs public duties, the Will the gentleman right to regulate the price for the 'commod- ' ity given or services rendered shall exist, and you will secure what you want to accomplish, and without preventing the development of the State of Kentucky. There is this further to say about these words which I moved to strike out: They imply a want of confidence in ourselves—- 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. lights we have Wednesday] MAcKoY-BULLITT. [November 12 . a want of confidence in our ability to pro- We say to the General Assembly of Kentucky: “You tect ;._our own interests. may revoke any charter of any corporation which may come here and be rendering valuable services to the State of Kentucky, without regard to the services they are rendering; you may revoke their charters ; we give you absolute dis- cretion in that matter; and yet whenlit comes to so preparing a char- ter asgthat the rights of the people of theH'State may be fully protected—$0 so preparing a general law under which all charters shall be granted, as that injury shall be done neither to the corporator or the citizen—we are unwilling to entrust you with that power, for the reason we do notuthink you are capable of exercising it in such a manner as that the rights of the people of the State may be protected. And so we put ourselves in that dilemma, and we make that admission with reference to ourselves, that we trust you with the greatest power in one case, while in the other instance we are unwilling to give any thing. The civilized world cannot get along without corporations. They are a necessary incident to civilization. You go to communities to-day in which there are no corporations, and what is the condi- tion of civilization there? You go to communities where there is no security to private property of any kind, and do you find any civilization at all? Will you find a high degree of civilization in Moroc- co, where the Emperér levies his taxes whenever he pleases and in amounts to suit himself‘? Do you find civilization in any of the African countries where there are no corporations‘? Go up the Congo with Stanley, and are there any corpora- tions there, unless they are of English or European formation, organized for the pur- pose of operating there, missionaries not only of civilization but of Christianity as well? I say in Kentucky, with all the with the knowledge we ' have, with the ability which the persons we send to our Legislatures should have, we ought not to say to corporations: “'You cannot come into this State, or if you do you do it at the peril of having the rights which are conferred to-day revoked to-mor- row.” I think the time has come when we should stand still awhile and reason together; that we should not permit our prejudices to carry us away, but we should endeavor to reason together with reference to the interest and prosperity of Kentucky. and we should not be willing to acknowledge that we are not capable to so mould the organic law of Kentucky as that we may be unable to invite corporations here, or capi- tal here, for the reason that we are afraid of them when they come. Mr. B'ULLITT. I shall not undertake to reply to that part of the speech of the ‘ gentleman from Covington in which he talks about the possibility that we may force Kentucky to embark in a system of internal improvement, but the questions I desire to call attention to, are what shall we do in regard to corporations‘? Shall we permit corporations to have privileges and rights that individuals do not have‘? Shall we permit corporations to stalk over our land and lord it over the people with- out giving the people the same rights, or shall we curb them just as we curb the people, and subject corporations to the same surveillance to the powers of the State ‘that the people are subjected to? We ask no more, but we do ask that much, that the corporation shall be subject to such management and control by the law-making power of the State as indi~ viduals are. Mr. MACKOY. Will the gentleman permit me to ask a question‘? Mr. BULLITT. Certainly. Mr. MACKOY. When an individual has engaged in a business, is it competent for the Legislature of the State of Ken- tucky, or do you propose to grant that BILL or RIGHTS. w fiict criticism upon him. Wednesday,] BULLITT. November 12 , ‘power to the Legislature, to come in and .say to him : “\Ve will not permit that busi- ness to be carried on, you must close your business?” ‘Mr. BULLITT. Undoubtedly that power rests with the Legislature now. .How often have we passed local option laws, and deprived men of their business? How often have we deprived men of their business whenever it is found inimicable or hostile to the interests and welfare of .the community? Whenever a corporation becomes inimicable or hostile to the welfare -of the community, the Legislature should have the power to control it just as it con- .trols a citizen, and that is all we ask. Will the fact that we make all charters subject \to repeal or amendment prevent capital from coming to the State is a question to (which I wish to address myself before this Convention. It is well understood that we .are to put all corporations under a general .law. Repeals of their charters will have -to be under a general law, and why will \capital refuse to come to Kentucky under that sort of an arrangement? Under such arrangement it is flowing into Illinois and Indiana. Corporations ought to be put under subjection, and, as the honorable gentleman from Marion exhibited here by ‘the force of his own language, the only way to control corporations is to subject their charters to repeal or amendment. He not only, by his own language, presented that idea, but he read from Judge Cooley, the only man in the United States who has written upon the subject of Constitutional - Limitations, and his book is authority in .all Courts, both State and Federal, and when he presented that idea so plausibly .and justly, the attorneys of one of the most powerful railroads in this State come out in the newspapers, and in- Why did they endeavor to inflict‘ this criticism upon the Delegate from Marion unless they saw ‘that there was the method by which we could control these corporations? There is a system pointed out by the ablest jurist in the United States, whose ability is endorsed by the Supreme Court of the United States and by the Courts of high- est resort of every State in the Union. And because the Delegate from Marion pointed out this method by which the peo- ple could be protected in the enjoyment of equal rights with corporations, the mere creatures of the State, he is subjected to criticism, I do not care in what form these are put, in what connection they are ' placed, the words declared by Judge Coo- ley is what I want. They are in the amendment of the Delegate from Nicholas, ' and I am for his amendment. I do not care whose amendment it is or who makes the proposition, I am for it. It presents to the Convention a method by which we can pro- tect ourselves against the lordly domination of corporations. I concede that corporations are essentially necessary for the develop- ment of the State. I admit that we ought to give them protection, but not give them such protection as will give them the mas- tery over the people. I believe it is our duty here to-day to protect the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky by this Bill of Rights, and I believe if we fully protect the people we will not crush out the corporations, but induce corporations to come, induce capital to be invested in the Commonwealth to aid in the development of the resources that nature has so bounti- fully bestowed on this proud Common- wealth. Now, if I thought that the passage of this resolution would have the effect to crush out corporations and prevent capital from coming here, I would not be for it, but why will they say that the Common- wealth of Kentucky will be untrue to itself if we provide that these repeals shall take place by a general law to ap- ply - equally to all corporations? It prevents the big fish from eating up the little ones, and becomes protection to new corporations that will come in as against the lordly domination and impo- 1s BILL OF RIGHTS. VVednesdayJ hIACKOY—BULLI'l‘iT—hICHENRY. November 12 ,. sition of wealthier corporations‘ that we now have. I want to induce railroads to be built. I want to induce capital to come to the State and help us develop our re- sources, and I am unwilling to say that I will become a servant to any of these corpora- tions or institutions; but I want to force them to subordination to the State. but pro- tected just as much as the gentleman from Covington desires. I believe they should be put under the will of the State. I be- lieve the same laws are in vogue to-day in Indiana and Illinois, and are found good for those States, will be good for Ken- tucky. Capital is flowing into those States, notwithstanding the fact that those States have control of corporations, just as I want‘ here, and as the resolution now before the Convention proposes. They are getting rich underit, and Kentucky will no doubt get rich under it. That is all we want and all any corporation should want, but still, you see. it is not what the Louisville and N ash- ville Railroad wants. You see that from the manner in which its employes are flood- ing the papers with communications as against the gentleman from Marion, because he presented the method or ‘system by ‘which we can be protected-— Mr. MACKOY. Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt him with a question‘? Mr. BULLITT. Certainly. Mr. MACKOY. Are not those gentle- men eminent citizens of the State, and have they not a right to criticise the conduct of Delegates here ? - . Mr. BULLITT. I do not dispute that. Mr. MACKOY. Does it follow because they have done so, they did it as hired agents of any corporation ‘? " Mr. BULLITT. I did not say that. If they had not thought the proposition of the Delegate from Marion was inimicable to their lordly powers, they would not have done this. I i Mr. MOHENRY. I move the previous question on this second question. It is opening an immense debate. Mr. BRONSTON. I am anxious to have the Delegate from Allen explain oer-- tain things about this. Mr. MCHENRY. We have had enough debate on this subject. We have heard. two good speeches this morning. I am willing, if it is in order, that debate on this section be under the five-minute rule, and that no gentleman will be allowed to speak more than that. Mr. BRONSTON. the gentleman who carried this proposition in the Committee of the Whole should be cut off from debate. tinguished Delegate from Ohio does not mean to cut him off. I want light on this- subject. Mii. McHENRY. Then I move to have- a night session. The motion for the previous question was withdrawn. Mr. MCELROY. I am somewhat indis- posed to-day, and I do not feel like talk- ing, and will not detain the Convention five minutes. This section, as proposed to- be amended, takes a general sweep at things. As amended, this section leaves- the provision as to exclusive privileges to be provided for at their proper places Now, is there any gentleman on this floor- that will claim that if a railroad has exclu— sive privileges, that a bank has a similar privilege. Is there any gentleman on this» floor who will claim that a charitable in- stitution of the State requires an exclusive privilege, such as a railroad corporation would require‘? They have said here that- this simply transfers the fight to another place in the Constitution. Whenever cor- porations come up to get any privileges of " that kind, let the Constitution define what those privileges shall be. roads come up, let the Committee having that in charge _define what thosegprivileges. shall be, and let them be provided for by a general law. I do not think it necessary in one general sweep here to provide for all those exclusive privileges. I think they ought to be provided for with suitable pro-- visions under the different heads applying; I do not desire that. I am satisfied the dis-' Whenever rail-- BILL OF RIGHTS. . 19 WVednesdayJ BRONSTON—MCELROY—BECKNER. [November 1 2 . to corporations, and for these reasons I be- lieve the Convention, as the Committee of the Whole did, ought to sustain the pro- vision I ofi’ered. ' M r. BRONSTON. yield fora question? Mr. MCELROY. Yes, sir. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to know what, according to the gentleman’s idea, is the effect of striking out the word, “ but in consideration of public services?” Mr. MCELROY. What the effect of striking that out is ‘.7 Mr. BRONSTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MCELROY. The effect of that is that a man sh all not have exclusive privi- leges, except as provided in the Constitu- tion in a suitable connection; that is, if it is a bank or a railroad, or a city of the first, second or third-class, let the Constitution provide that they may have such privileges as should be held by them, and none other. Mr. BECKNER. The representatives of the people cannot spend their time more Will the gentleman properly than in considering the questionv now before us. The attitude of this sec- tion is not only muddy, but at the present time it is absolutely without meaning with the amendment suggested by the gentle- man from Allen. He says: “Except as provided in this Constitution.” \Ve have made no provision 1n this Constitution. We have put that clause in blindly. 'We have changed that section without any knowledge or comprehension of what may be done hereafter. I say it is unwise to take such action before we see what is in the Constitution. We are trusting to a majority of the Convention to put some- thing to which this sedition may be applica- ble in the Constitution. This Convention might get tired after a while; it might get impatient and adjourn and go home with- out making sufl‘icient provision. I say it is unwise to take such action. Mr. MCHENRY. Let-my amendment be read at this time. I use the old Bill of J Rights clear through, and after the words “ public services” I add, “and that all grants shall be subject to appeal or amend— ment by the General Assembly.” Mr. BECKNER. That is judicious and wise. Mr. MCHENRY. I offer that as a sub- stitute, because I agree with; the Delegate from Clark, that it is meaningless as we have it now. Mr. BECKNER. This is an important matter. It is conceded on all hands that we have greater material resourches in Kentucky than they have in any State of the Union undeveloped. We have greater coal fields, as much iron, more hardwood timber, building stone, fire-clay, and all those elements of wealth which are coming to the knowledge of the outside world, of people who have capital. For us to at- tempt to-day to lay down rules, and say nothing shall be done in the future except as we fix it here, with our limited knowl- edge of what the future will be, is unwise. Our fathers met forty years ago, and de- clared that slavery should never be dis- turbed; and yet we know that within fifteen years slavery was destroyed, and ‘none of the people of our State want slavery at all. It is unfortunate that, with us, public sentiment is always at an extreme on one side or the other, like the pendulum of a clock, which swings at one time as far on one side as it can, ‘and then on the other. These hundred men are se- lected by the people of Kentucky because they have confidence that they will not swing too far either way, but will do what is just and reasonable. I think we should give posterity a chance. I believe in the power of the State to regulate corpora- tions; I believe in it fully, and I think it ought to be asserted on all proper occa- sions. I believe the people are capable of maintaining the right to regulate them- through their representatives, and through the Courts, and I have not the slight st doubt that they will do so. The 20 _ ' BILL or RIGHTS.‘ Wednesday,] MooRE—BEcKNER—MoELRoY. [November 12 , Delegates on this floor are representatives of that sentiment, and a large majority of this Convention are clearly in favor of the right to regulate and control corporations that may do business in the Commonwealth. The Supreme Court of the United States i has declared, in a number of decisions that under the police power they can all be regulated even in the face of the doctrine in the Dartmouth College case; and it has been decided, in many modern decisions, that the people have full and absolute control over the institutions which have done so much for the country, and which we all want to foster in every reasonable way; but for us to say blindly that nothing shall be done in the way of encouraging corporations, ex- cept as provided in the ‘Constitution, when we have as yet madelno provision what- ever, is unwise and foolish, having all due respect‘for everybody connected with the passage of that amendment. Our people want a good government. They want a prosperous State. ‘We all want more money in Kentucky. In Kentucky under the last census we only had $158 to each person, while in some other States it runs up as high as $1,100. Men may abuse cap- ital and talk about money and all that sort, of thing, but I find that everybody wants some of it, and I find that it is a very con- venient thing to have about. The Savior did not denounce money at all. He said the love of money is the root of all evil, when men ‘give themselves up to seeking money for their selfish and mercenary ends. That is the evil, not money itself. Money itself is the means of great good. The ju- dicious use of money is a blessing to the human race, and the acquisition of it by honorable, fair and reasonable means is to be encouraged. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Will the gentleman permit a question‘? Mr. BECKNER. Willingly. Mr. MOORE. Is it not vastly more im- portant for us now to consider the question of distribution of wealth than the accumu- lation of it,and have not privileges to cor-v porations put in the hands of a few the money which should be in the hands of many? Mr. BECKNER. We are now here considering the acquisition and distribution of wealth. We have only $158 a head. where in some other States they have $1,100. I want that great inequality corrected. I want Kentucky to have her proportion of it. That is one of the problems we have to consider—how best to arrange this organic law so as to attract a portion of that capital . which has been congested in other States and bring it here and distribute it among our people for the development of our vast resources. Mr. MoELROY. May I ask the gentle- man a question? Mr. BECKNER. Yes, sir. Mr. MCELROY. Does not the gentle- man think when we come to the subject of railroads we will have intelligence enough to define what they shall have, and when l we come to banks and eleemosynary institu- tions, we shall be able to define what privi- leges they shall have? Mr. BECKNER. I have no doubt of that, but I think also that We are able to frame this sectlon so as to give it some in- telligible meaning. I think we had better do the task before us, and let us dispose of this with some judgment before we assume that afterwards we will do something else wisely and judiciously. I don’t want to give corporations any advantage. I am not interested in any corporation, except a little stock in one or two manufacturing concerns and in a land company which is trying to improve a portion of the State. I have no interest-in any railroad. I am not connected with any of the great corpora- tions you are crying out against. I know the evils incident to an improper and unwise use of corporate power. It is the abuse of corporate power that men are inveighing against. I know that corporations proper- j 1y used are a blessing. Men are willing to ~ ‘BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 ‘Wednesday,] WHITAKER—BECKNER. [November 12 _ put money into a corporation who would not be willing to put it into a partnership. Men are willing to put money into a corpo- tion to be wisely managed, rather than un- dertake to manage it themselves, for fre- quently they are incapable of managing it. Mr. WHITAKER. But if the power of corporations become dangerous, is it not best to control them? Mr. BECKNER. I say yes. I served some years ago as Railroad Commissioner of this State, and I‘had the honor to write the last report of the Commission, to which I appeal to show my absolute belief in the power and duty of the State to regulate corporations. A corporation is nothing but an artificial person created by the State, and the State ought to have the right to control it, and does. Under the Constitu- tion, as it stands, and under the laws of the land, as declared by the Supreme Court of the United States and all other Courts of last resort which have passed upon the question, the State has an undoubted right to control them, but I do not believe that the State ought to take up the work that these corporations are engaged in. I don’t belong to the Bellamy school. I don’t think Paradise is to be restored by giving control of everything to the State. Mr. WHITAKER. Do you not believe the limitation should be put in the Consti- tution rather than leave it to future legislation ‘? Mr. BECKNER. I say yes; let us do it. I am in favor of it, but I am opposed to this section as it stands now. WVe fix it here that the Legislature cannot itself grant nor, in fact, authorize any town or county or any portion of the State to grant any privilege or franchise or immunity in return for public services. That is the effect of it. A few years ago our county desired to secure a railroad which would be of inestimable value to the people of that county. Some of our good citizens were willing to give it aid by subscribing to its capital stock. I and others were opposed to this. We thought We finally got the road by granting it an ex— we could get the road without it. emption from countv taxation for twenty years in lieu of the original proposition to subscribe one hundred thousand dollars. We have had that road nine years, and it has greatly increased the taxable value of our county. They expended nearly five hundred thousand dollars in building their line in Clark. There are twenty miles of railroad which are worth five hundred thousand dollars, which, at the expiration [of the period for which the exemption was granted, will bring us a revenue of $1,800 or $2,000. The increase of the capital of the county, brought into it by reason of the , railroad, helps every man in the Common- wealth. Last week I saw some gentlemen who had come into the county from the State of Michigan, and invested five hun- dred thousand dollars in a manufacturing establishment, organized to convert the timber of Eastern Kentucky into lumber for our people. That capital is here to be taxed. It would not have been here but for that road, and that road was secured by giving it an exemption from county taxes for a period of twenty years. I say that was wise. We could not have had it but for that exemption, and this was had through the action of the Legislature at the instance of our people. At the end of that period we will be that much richer, and in the meantime we have had our taxable values go from five and a half or six million dollars up to nearly eight millions by the influx of capital and the development of the county. We have had our town grow un- til it has almost doubled, and when I was at home last week, notwithstanding the stringency in money circles, I found houses going up about my town, and the spirit of prosperity generally prevailing. I have been sent here as the representative of a constituency composed of progressive, wide-awake, and public-spirited people, and I am opposed to any thing which will. 22 . BILL OF RIGHTS. ‘ Wednesday,] BECKNER. [November 12 . prevent the incoming of foreign capital, which will hinder enterprises from locating in Kentucky, or which will force them to go around this State and locate elsewhere. Every train that goes through the South is loaded with men seeking opportunities to invest their money, through Virginia, Georgia, the Carolinas, Florida and Missis- sippi; and the people of those States are en- couraging them to come. It is going around us. We have had that great barrier on the East, the Pine Mountain, through which railroads have not been able to penetrate. WVe have that vast region which we are trying to bring into a peaceable condition and to which so much attention is being at- tracted in this country and in Europe be- cause of its material resources. I say it is unwise to do any thing which might check the influx of capital into this State; and besides I am opposed to putting any pro- vision into our Constitution which no man can explain. My friend from Allen could not this morning make his amendment clear, and even if he had succeeded in so doing, he will not always be with us. When the question comes as to the meaning of the clause he will not be on the bench or about the halls of the Legislature; and there may be no opportunity to con- sult him; and I say it would be unwise to do such a thing as that when even the author of the proposition cannot explain what is meant by it. I think the clause of- fered by the Delegate from Nicholas en- tirely covers the case, and I do think the Representatives of the people of the Com- monwealth, the great body of whom do not belong to any corporation, and who are not controlled by capital, can be risked to pro- tect their rights and liberties. I am in a fortunate attitude. I am not a candidate, and do not expect to be. I have no desire for any office‘. It has been a habit of my life to speak what I think on every ques- tion of public moment as it arises, andI a.n most emphatically opposed to the section we are considering as.it now stands. ThiS Convention has been in session two months, and it has shown rare intelligence about many subjects, and I think it is in every sense a representative body of the people of Kentucky. And I sincerely hope it will not do what is not desired by the State. I earnestly insist that the members of the Convention will consider the proposition before them and act on it thoughtfully, and knowing the effect of the words in which it may be clothed. The provisions sug- gested by the Delegates from Nicholas and from Ohio give control of corporations to the General Assembly. ,gIn Missouri they have a clause which provides that in case of trusts and unlawful combinations the charter of the corporation may be forfeited. I believe in the right of the State to with- draw charters. I don’t think they should be made perpetual. They should have a limitation in time. Let them run out just as national bank charters do and the charters granted under our General Statutes, which have twenty-five years to run. The General Assembly will always renew the charter if the privileges are wisely used. Congress provides for renew- ing the charters of the National Banks. Let there be a time of expiration to all charters granted by the State, and let the General Assembly, representing the people, say what shall be done with reference to this question as the occasion arises. Let this matter rest between the Legislature and the Courts. We elect the Legislature and the Judges, and between them we may feel sure that our rights Wlll be protected, and the future will not be imposed upon. Gentlemen talk a great deal about the abuse of corporate power in Kentucky. We have had a session of two months, and yet they have not given a bill of particulars or specified where this power has been abused- How few instances have been given. Of course there are a great many instances where the agents of corporations have done things they cught not to have done. But individuals in these instances have done the wrong. Of course the representa- tives_of the corporations are shielded by the BILL OF RIGHTS. 23 Wednesday,] BECKNER—FARMER. [November 12 . ~~corporate name, 'and many of the evils‘ complained of arise from the want of indi- vidual responsibility. It now remains for legislative wisdom to remedy this objection to a system which has conferred inestimable ‘benefits on the human race. I think our peo- 'ple are fair enough, honest enough, and in- telligent enough to throw around these :artificial persons all proper and due ‘protection, and I am sure that no Legislature on ' an unreasonable pretext 'will‘care to interfere with their business, or ‘to rob them of their rights. 'I say it is bet- "ter to make a clearly expressed provision -or trust the representatives of this gener- :ation and of posterity to make provision for the regulation of corporations, and to .say how far they may go, rather than abso- lutely to inhibit the representatives of the ‘people from giving any privilege or grant -of power in consideration of the perform- .ance of public service. I hear expressions -of opinion from members of the Conven- tion, which satisfy me :that the section in ‘the present Constitution which provides "that our State shall not at any time have a debt of over five hundred thousand dollars will be retained. This precludes us from engaging in any enterprise such as has ‘been referred to this morning, even if the ~‘people of the State should desire to do so. Consequently, we are bound to leave these ‘things to persons with capital, and we ought to leave the General Assembly power ‘to encourage people who have capital to invest it in the only way they may be will- .ing to risk it in order to. develop our re- ..sources and give us the-railroads We need, .and furnish us with the advantages which they have in other States. So momentous .a, question ought to be carefully considered. The State cannot engage in theseenter- prises if it were disposed to do so; but our people are not willing to go back to a sys- tem which would land us hopelessly in debt, and which has not su‘fiicient compen- ‘ nation for the burden it would impose. A wise moderation now, and a considerate , disposition of the question before us, will give our children occasion to rise up and call us blessed. Mr. President, I had not intended to say a word this morning; but the question is so critically important, I could not remain silent. Mr. FARMER. I hope the Convention will indulge me, as I do not wish to make any irrelevant remarks; and I do not wonder at the Conventioin wishing debate to end, when so many gentlemen continue 'for a long period making irrelevant re- marks. (Laughter.) And I am in hopes that I will not make any irrelevant re- marks. The proposition that has been made by the gentleman from Allen has been characterized as absolute folly. This amendment was originally offered by my- self, retaining the words of the old Con- stitution, that “no exclusive privilege shall be granted to any man,'except for public services,” but, then, I ‘considered that this needed a limitation, and I put in it, “ no such privilege shall be granted, ex- cept as provided for hereafter by this Con- stitution,” and I would now' offer that as an amendment, and then I have no objec- tion to the provision in the old Bill of Rights staying as it is. It is conceded on all hands that this section in the Bill of Rights needs modification, and all the de- bates in this Convention have been for modifying that; but I do not consider that the proposition of the gentleman from Allen is senseless. What is a Constitution? The great object of all Constitutions is to . define and to limit the power of the Legisla- ture. This is the great end of Constitu- tions, to define and say what the Legisla- tures may do; and on the other hand, say what it may not do. In the old Bill of Rights two principles were announced: one was that no exclusive privilege shall be granted to any private person. An- other principle was announced that the Legislature might grant special privileges for public purposes. I indorse this Bill of Rights, as it stands, with a limitation of ' 24 BILL OF RIGHTS. ' wWednesday,] FARMER—MCHENBY—BUCKNER. [November 12.. this kind. This thing must be limited. \Vould any man in this Convention in- dorse the proposition that the Legislature has all power to grant privileges for public purposes? If we let it stand as it is, we must modify this power of the Legislature. We must either say in this Constitution that the Legislature shall not grant any privileges, except as provided for in this Constitution, or wia must assert the general principle that the Legislature has power to grant exclusive privileges for public pur- ' poses. We all agree that, by subsequent provisions, we must limit this power. It does not matter whether we limit it by saying that they shall not have this power, except as expressed, and go on and specify the privileges, or assert the general prin- ciple that they have this power and by the Constitution limit them. I think it is the better plan to assert this great general principle. 'It is a great general principle that no man or set of men shall have ex- clusive privileges; and in the practical workings of governments,‘ we find that no government can be carried on absolutely in accordance with an abstract theory. I/Ve find that this is impractica- ble, and then we come in and say vwe will, by certain well-defined grants and privileges, allow the Legislature in certain cases to violate that principle for the pub- lic good. I am in favor of the resolution of the gentleman from Allen, but I would prefer that it should stand as in the old Bill of Rights with this modification. I did not think that any gentleman at this late day would advocate, as some have done, the rights of corporations. I will say that, so far as it went, I endorsed every word that was said by the gentleman from Ho- Cracken. If this is not passed—if we can not get the resolution ofi'ered by the gen- tleman from Allen—I favor the resolution of the other gentleman as the best that we can get. One gentleman in his argument refers to the Green and Bar- ren river corporation. I know there has been a great cry against that; I know that‘. ‘almost universally the people in that‘~ sec-3 tion of the country were against it; I live- in the Green river country. I know that the sentiment of the people was against‘ it as oppressive, and its provisions- worked great hardships to the people of' that section. So much, for the Green and-i Barren river corporation. If there is any sentiment among the people that prevails throughout this broad land, it is to confine- the Legislature to general~ legislation; that‘ they shall make such laws as will be applicae ble to all corporations—railways, turnpikes,. corporations, ‘banks—and we should not‘- leave it to the Legislature to go on end-- lessly and charter private corporations. This is the great sentiment of the people- They are almost universally opposed to‘ this thing, and all the people, so far as I know, are for strictly limiting the power of corporations. With these few remarks, I close. Mr. MCHENRY. I now offer my' amendment. I have no remarks to make- on it. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from; Hart has the floor. Mr. BUCKNER. Until recently there was on our statute books a charter granted to a corporation authorizing it to construct a main line railway in a certain section of the State, with the privilege of running branches from any point on its line to any‘ other point in the State, and to run branches:- from these branches to any point that it. might designate. The whole railway prop-- erty, and all the property that it might ac-- quire, was to be exempt from taxation un-- til the full completion of the road. The‘ charter also granted to this corporation the- right to go to any county in the State and. demand a subscription from that county on- very short notice, though that county might; be three hundred miles from the line of the' railway. It authorized it, in addition, to go to any city in the Commonwealth requir~ ‘ ing a submission of a vote by the Commons -BILL OF RIGHTS. 25 {4* Wednesday,] BU CKNER—M ACKOY—WASHINGTON, [November 12 . Council to the people, of any amount that the road proposed, to be voted by that city as a contribution to this railway. It might have gone to Covington, Louisville or Lexington, or any city in the Common- wealth and demanded that, and if the peo- ple of Covington. or Louisville or Lexing- ton unanimously voted against this propo- sition, then the corporation was authorized . to make a contract with the Common Council of the city to assume the entire bonded indebtedness of the railroad com- pany. The proposition made by the Dele- gate from Covington would prevent the Legislature from repealing or changing such a grant at all, however oppressive it might be to the people, however injurious to their interests. I am, therefore, opposed to the proposition set forth in this amend- ment. Mr. MACKOY. May I ask the gentle- man a question before he takes his seat? Mr. BUCKNER. Certainly. Mr. MACKOY. I desire to ask whether that grant of which he speaks was not one of the abuses incident to the power of special and local legislation which this Con- vention will take away, most probably, from the General Assembly, and whether it would be practicable under a system of general laws applicable to all corporations or to all railway corporations‘? Mr. BUCKNER. I think, under the amendment, if the amendment of the gen- tleman prevails, it would be practicable to have such legislation continued. Mr. MACKOY. I "ask whether my amendment would not cover a case of that sort, and- whether it would be in the power of the General Assembly to repeal it? Mr. BUCKNER. It might be in the power of the Legislature. to repeal it; but the very fact that the Legislature has abused this authority shows that we, repre- senting the people in this Convention, should limit the power of the Legislature in that respect. (Applause). Mr. MACKOY. I would ask the gen- tleman what further limitation he suggests to put upon it? How does he propose to limit it? Mr. BUCKNER. When it comes to that point—I was addressing myself in my speech to the amendment of the gentleman from Covington—I would prevent the Legislature from granting any special privileges to anybody or any corporation whatever. (Applause) Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a substi- tute, which I ask to be read for informa- tian. The PRESIDENT. Is there'an objec— tion. . DELEGATE. I object. ‘ The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears objection, and it cannot be read at this time. =' Mr. WASHINGTON. Let it be dis- tinctly understood that I do not rise for the purpose of making a speech,in the ordinary acceptation of that term; but simply for the purpose of making a few remarks to the Convention upon one point, which the Delegate from Covington desires to impress upon us, and that is in reference to the- irrevocability of grants to corporations. I must confess that I listened with a great deal of surprise and no little regret to the remarks of the gentleman from that city. That a gentleman of his character and intelligence, in this day and generation, should seek to turn back, so to speak, the wheels of modern thought upon this question, and reinstate within the borders of this Commonwealth the odious doctrine of the Dartmouth College case, is certainly ‘a very surprising thing to me, living, as he does, right on the boundary line of the great commercial States. What is that doctrine? It is, that when the Leg- islature grants a charter to a corporation, it, e0 instanti, becomes a contract between the State and that corporation, and an invi- olable contract at that. I shall not go into any line of argument for the purpose of demonstrating the impolicy of that prin- 26 BILL OF RIGHTS. 0 Wednesday,] - WASHINGTON. [November 12. ciple. Why is he in favor of the Dart- mouth College case? I understand him to say, simply because, in his opinion, it is sound, as a question of law. I ask the gentleman which is of paramount impor- tance to the people of this Commonwealth, an alleged legal principle or the public good? I do not suppose he will deny that it was discovered, very shortly after the rendition of that opinion, that it was not only not in harmony with the public good, but directly opposed to it; and as the Del- egate from Marion very correctly pointed out, it was very soon after the rendition of that opinion that the idea took possession of the minds of the people of this country of getting around it, by incorporating in their organic law the principle that all grants of corporate powers should be revocable; so that whenever a grant was made to a corporation, this provision entered into it, and became a part of the contract. And whenever a corporation accepted a grant, it did it with full cogn- izance of the fact that it was at anytime revocable by the General Assembly. As to whether the opinion in the Dartmouth Col- lege case was promotive of the general good, I beg leave to read the extract, to which the gentleman from McCracken re- ferred, upo’i'i that subject, the product of one of the ablest legal minds in this or any other country : It is under the protection of the decision in the Dartmouth College case that the most enormous and threatening powers in our country have been created; some of the great and wealthy corporations, actu- ally having greater influence in the country at large, and upon the legislation of the country, than the States to which they owe their corporate existence. Every privilege granted, or right conferred—no matter by what means or on what pretense—being made inviolable by the Constitution, the government is frequently found stripped of its authority in very important particulars by unwise, careless or corrupt legislation; and a clause of the Federal Constitution, whose purpose was to preclude the repudia- tion of debts and just contracts, protects and perpetuates the_evil. (Referring to that clause in the Federal Constitution which prohibits any law being passed im- pairing the obligation of contracts.) Again he says: ~- As the power to grant unamendable and irrepealable charters is one read- ily susceptible of being ' greatly abused to the prejudice of important public in- terests, and has been greatly abused in the past, the people, in a majority of the States, in framing or amending their Con- stitutions, have prudently guarded against it by reserving the right to alter, amend or repeal all laws that may be passed confer- ring corporate powers. These provisions give protection from the time of their adoption, but the improvident grants there- tofore made are beyond their reach. What is the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Nicholas, but the act of 1856 ? The Delegate from Nicholas asked him if it was not substantially the same in principle? The reply was that there was a shade of difference between them; but the gentleman did not proceed to explain to us what that difi‘erence is. I must confess my utter inability to discover any distinction between them. That act has now been in force in this State for thirty-four years. To what extent has it retarded the industrial development of this State? _ My informa- tion is, that the old Common wealth of Ken- tucky compares favorably in the number of miles of railroads that have been con- structed within her boundaries within the last few years with the most prosperous States in this country. To what extent, then, I ask you, has it affected, injuriously, her material interests? One gentleman asked him—I believe it was the gentleman from McCracken—how it had affected the great commercial States? While he was discussing this question, it occurred to me to turn to the Constitutions of three of the most important States in this country. I selected Ohio, Illinois and Pennsylvania; the latter being one of the most corpora- tion-ridden States in this country, perhaps, I find in the Constitution of Pennsylvania this clause: “N o 6.1; post facto law, nor - ' BILL OF RIGHTS. 21 Wednesday,] ' \VAsmxeToN—FL'xK—Kxo'rr [November 12 . ‘law impairing the obligation of contracts, -or making irrevocable any grant of special privileges or immunities shall be passed.’-’ I turn to the Constitution of the State of ‘Ohio, and in the second section of the Bill -of Rights, I find this provision: “ Govern- ment is instituted for the equal protection .and benefit of the people. They have the right to alter, reform or abolish the same whenever they may deem it necessary, and no special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted that may not be altered, revoked or repealed 'by the General As- sembly.” ’ I turn to the Constitution of the State -of Illinois, in'which State has grown up 'one of the greatest commercial emporiums upon the civilized globe—the great city of ‘Chicago. I find in its Bill of Rights the following provision: No err post facto law, or law imparing ‘the obligation of contracts, or making any irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities shall be passed. Again, I ask the gentleman to what ex- tent have these clauses in the Bills of Rights of these great States retarded their growth and prosperity? If they can stand it, it seems to me that the Commonwealth of Kentucky-ought to be able to stand it. It strikes me that this is a good time to put _sucliaclause in our Constitution. I was .glad to hear our grand old Governor—and I say it in no spirit of adulation or of un- due compliment, but because I think he deserves it—I wasv glad to hear him an- nounce the principles he did. I have noth- ing to say upon the subject of exclusive privileges. I shall not weary the attention of the Convention upon this subject. All I desire to say upon that I have taken ‘occasion to say heretofore. But incorpo- rate this principle in the Constitution, in order that the Legislature may not forget its duty, and grant irrevocable privileges ‘to corporations. True it has acted very wisely heretofore. We have had such a statute as this for thirty-four years, and it may be a fair presumption to say that it will continue; but how can we be assured of that? If we have stood it so well in the past, why may we not stand it just as well in the future‘? Who complains that the Legislature has ever abused its power in this regard‘? Who has made any com- plaint upon this subject? I have heard none, from any direction; and therefore I hope that the Delegate from Covington, not- withstanding the earnest and impressive manner with which he sought to enforce his idea, has not secured for it any foothold in this Convention. (Applause). The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks it is improper for the Delegates to applaud. Mr. FUNK. I move the previous ques- tion. Mr. KNOTT. I hope the gentleman will withdraw his motion until my sub- stitute, which I now offer, is read. Mr. FUNK. I vwill withdraw it until that is offered, with the right of renewing it. . Mr. W. H. MILLER. I ask unanimous consent that this substitute now offered by me may be read for information simply. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and both will be read- The Reading Clerk read the substitute offered by Mr. Knott, as follows: C O O I I a That no privilege, immunity, exoneratlon or exemption shall ever be granted to any man or set of men which shall not be as freely and fully exercised and enjoyed by all others under similar circumstances and on like conditions; that no public emolu- ment shall ever be allowed to any person, except in consideration of public services, the performance of which shall be required by law, or for which the Chief Executive Magistrate, or some other officer of the Com- monwealth, shall be legally authorized to contract. That no charter ,or franchise shall ever be granted which the Legislature may not at any time alter, amend or revoke, subject, however, to the owners thereof and to their legal. representatives, all such prop- erty rights as shall accrue or be acquired thereunder. The substitute of the Delegate from Lin- as BILL OFJRIGHTS. Wednesday,] BRONSTON—KENNEDY—STRAUS'. [November 12. coln (Mr. Miller) was read, and is as fol- lows: Separate, exclusive emoluments, immun- ities or privileges, public or private, shall not,be granted by the General Assembly, but in consideration of public services, the nature of which sh all be stated and defined in the act making the grant, and such grants shall at all times be subject to amendment, modification or repeal. The PRESIDENT. The previous ques-" tion is moved upon all subsitutes and amendments to the report of the Commit- tee. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to ask for information. This is the previous question simply upon section 2 of the"Com1nittee’s report and amendments and substitutes offered therefor? The PRESIDENT. That is the under- standing. The motion being put, was carried, and the previous question was ordered. The PRESIDENT. The vote will first be taken on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Covington to the substitute offered by the Delegate from Nicholas. The amendment was 'again read. A vote being taken on the same, it was re- jected. I The substitute of the Delegate from_ Nicholas was read. Mr. KENNEDY. I call for the yeas and nays on that. Mr. STRAUS. I second the motion. The result of the roll-call was as follows: YEAs—52. Allen, M. K. Hendrick, W. J. Amos, D. C. Holloway, J. W. Askew, J. F. Jacobs, R. P. Auxier, A. J. James, A. D. Ayres, W. W. Kennedy, Hanson Beckner, W. M. Kirwan, E. E. Bennett, B. F. McChord, Wm. C. Berkele, Wm. MeHenry, H. D. Blackburn, James Montgomery, J. F. Boles, S. H. Moore, J. H. Brents, J. A. Moore, Laban T. Bronston, C. J. Nunn, T. J. Brown, J. S. - O’Hara, R. H. Buchanan, Nathan Petrie, H. G. Buckner, S. B. Phelps, John L. Bullitt, IV. G. Chambers, G. D. DeHaven, S. E. Doris, W. F. English, Sam. E. Field, WV. W. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Harris, Geo. C. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Sachs, Morris Smith, H. H. Straus, F. P. Swango, G.-B. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. ,Mr. President Clay NAYS—39. Allen, C. T. Beckham, J. C. Birkhead, B. T. Blackwell, Joseph Bqurland, H. R. Brummal, J. M. Carroll, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Farmer, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Hines, Thomas H. Knott, J. Proctor Lassing, L. W. Lewis, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. Martin, W. H. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. Miller, Will Miller, -W. H. Muir, J. W. ' Parsons, Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, W. Scott Trusdell, George Twyman, I. WV. Washington, George West, J. F. VVhita-ker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. ABSENT—9. Applegate, Leslie T.Hopkins, F. A. Burnam, Curtis F. Clardy, John D. Hines, J. S. Hogg, S. P. The PRESIDENT. The Chair Jonson, Jep C. Johnston, P. P. Spalding, I. A. will state that this substitute having been adopt- ed, it precludes action on ‘all other substi- tutes. substitute? Mr. MCHENRY. Does that out off my The PRESIDENT. As a matter of course it does. Mr. MCHENRY. Some of us would have been in favor of it had they under- ‘ stood the matter in that way. I wanted myself to vote for it, if it had not been for my own. But it strikes me that another amendment might be adopted to that. The PRESIDENT. That is against par- liamen tar y usage. BILL OF RIGHTS. 29 Wednesday,] MCHENRY—FARMER—MACKOY. [November 12 , Mr. MCHENRY. I shall not insist upon it. I am very well satisfied with it. It is very near the same as my own. I have no objection to it particularly, but I want ‘to put myself upon record as being in favor of that substitute. I voted against it with a view of getting my own in. Mr. FARMER. A good many of us doubtless acted like the gentleman from ‘Ohio. Mr. MCHENRY. Do I understand the ‘Chair to say that the substitute is not sub- ject to amendment? The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state- this: That. Barclay’s Digest holds that a substitute being inserted, it is not subject to any further amendment; but Roberts’ Rules of Order holds that it can be amended—not by a change of any thing that has been inserted, but by an addition .to it. Mr. MCHENRY. I will ask leave, then, to change ‘my vote, and will withdraw my .amendment. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection and leave is granted. Mr. MACKOY. Do I understand the ruling of the Chair to be that the substi- tute as adopted is open to amendment by having anything added to it? The PRESIDENT. Barclay’s Digest, which is the main authority, does not allow "it; but one authority is contrary. Mr. MACKOY. How does the Chair hold‘? The PRESIDENT. The Chair will hold that that the matter is concluded. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to ask the Chair 'a parliamentary question, and it is this: ‘This has now been adopted as a substitute for all the other amendments as reported by the Committee as I understand, not for the original proposition as before the Conven- tion ; otherwise you have placed Delegates in this Convention in a very awkward at- titude. _ > The PRESIDENT. The Delegate does not understand the situation. This has i been inserted in lieu of the corresponding section in the report of the Committee, but as a matter of course when this whole thing is perfected, it finally is,to be adopted as a whole. Mr. PETTIT. But that gives no one the privilege of correcting his record so far as a preference between the substitutes and the original proposition offered. The PRESIDENT. The Chair cannot , attend to gentlemen’s records. (Applause) Mr. PETTIT. That may be true; but a Delegate wants to be placed in his true light. I infinitely prefer the original prop- osition to the one adopted. . That is the Mr. DURBIN. Stick to it. way I do. Mr. MONTGOMERY. Have I the right to change my vote at this time? The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I voted against the amendment just carried by the House, not because I was opposed to the principle, but because I preferred the language of another amendment that I thought I _would have the privilege of voting upon. Therefore, I want to change my vote to yea. Mr. J. S. BROWN. By leave of the Convention, I would like to say that I occupy exactly the same position as the gentleman last upon the floor. I would like to have the privilege of changing my vote. The PRESIDENT. There being no ob- jection, such leave will be granted. The Chair will state that this vote was to insert the substitute as offered by the gentleman from Nicholas in lieu of the pending original proposition, the report of the Committee. It could not be considered in any other way. If gentlemen favor the report of the Committee they should stand by their votes; otherwise, they put them- selves in an improper attitude. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I~desire to say that I voted against that amendment, be- 3O . BILL OF RIGHTS. \VednesdayJ WASHINGTON—RAMSEY—RODES. [November 12. cause I preferred the section as it stood; and understanding the manner in which I was voting, I stand by it. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the next amendment in order. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Laurel (Mr. Ramsey), as a substitute for section 6, as follows: The right of trial by jury, as heretofore enjoyed, shall be held sacred and remain inviolate: Provided, The General Assembly may authorize a trial in civil cases by a jury of less number than twelve men.” Mr. WASHINGTON. May I ask the gentleman from Laurel one question‘? Mr. RAMSEY. Certainly. Mr. WASHINGTON. \Vill you kindly withdraw the latter part of your amend- ment, as it is before the Committee of which Mr. Goebel, the Delegate from Cov- ington, is Chairman; and I feel a great interest in it, and will desire to say some- thing on the subject when the report of the Committee is made ‘.7 Mr. RAMSEY. I will withdraw that amendment, and ask that the following be inserted in its place. It is the original re- port of the Committee, except it inserts the words “as heretofore enjoyed.” ‘ The Reading Clerk read the amendment as now proposed, as follows: Amend section 6 by inserting after the word ~‘ jury,” and before the word “shall,” in the first line of said section, the follow- ing words, “ as heretofore enjoyed,” so that the section will then read: “The right of trial by jury, as heretofore enjoyed, shall be held sacred and remain inviolate, subject to such modifications as may be authorized by this Constitution.” Mr. RAMSEY. The only amendment made there is to insert the words “as here- tofore enjoyed.” The question has been raised as to whether or not, standing as it does, it might not put it in the power of the Legislature to say that a less number than twelve should be a jury. I insert the words “as heretofore enjoyed,” and think it removes that question. Mr. CARROLL. I would like to have the Clerk read the section to which this is an‘ amendment. The Reading Clerk read the same, as- follows: The right of trial by jury shall be held sacred and remain inviolate, subject to such modifications as may be authorized by this. Constitution. Mr. CARROLL. I understand that to have been voted down yesterday. . Mr. RODES. It was voted down yes-- terday. Mr. CARROLL. I would like to have- the report of the Committee, section 6, read, because I understand his amendment is an amendment to that section. The Reading Clerk read the same as fol- lows: _ The ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, subject to such modifications as- may be authorized by this Constitution. The whole section as amended would. then read : ‘- The ancient mode of trial by jury, as- heretofore enjoyed, shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, sub- ject to such modifications as may be author- ized by this Constitution. Mr. RAMSEY. That was not the in- tention of my amendment. I did not know that the report of the Committee had beenv changed, and the object of my amendment was to have that section read in this way: “The right of trial by jury, as heretofore’ enjoyed.” I therefore move to strike out the words “ ancient mode” and insert my amendment, so it will then read, “ The- right of trial by jury, as heretofore en- joyed,” etc.' Mr. MCDERMOTT. I would like to- have that section, if the Convention does not object, passed until we come to section 10. I should like to offer this to go in sec- tion 10: “The ancient mode of trial by jury in criminal cases shall be preserved.” I may make a motion to leave out the pres- entvsection, and leave to the Legislature the right to regulate jury trials in civil. cases. BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 31 "Wednesday,] COKE—BECKNER. [November 12 . The PRESIDENT. The Convention has not adopted a rule by which this report is considered section by section, and amendments are considered in the order in which they are presented to the Con- vention. Mr. COKE. I would like to offer an amendment to section 24. A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Laurel, the same was re- jected. The Reading Clerk read the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Washing- ton, as follows: Amend the Preamble as reported by the Committee by substituting the following: “Humbly invoking the blessing of Almighty God,we, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, do ordain and establish this Constitution for our government.” Mr. BECKNER. Just a word about that. The Preamble reported by the Com- mittee is in these words: “We, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, grate— ful to Almighty God for civil, political and religious liberty which, we enjoy, in order to secure to ourselves and to succeeding gen- erations the continuance of these blessings.” I have talked about this question with the people of county and with others, and many intelligent persons have construed it to mean this: That we are thankful to God for what He has done for us, but we are not sure whether He will stay with us in the future; and we now propose to manage the business for ourselves. That construction can be put upon it, and it is a reasonable one. Of course, that was not intended by this Con- vention, but this is an instance where that erroneous opinion is held by the people con- cerning a part of our work here; and we ought to be sure thatthe language used ex- presses what we intended. Of course, it is designated to be reverential and grateful, and we did not think when were adopting it that we were saying we have no confi- dence that God will continue to vouchsafe and secure these blessings to us; but it does not bear that construction. I will read it ‘from the people. in full: “We, the people of the Common- wealth of Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious lib- erty which we enjoy, in order to secure to ourselves and to succeeding generations the continuation of these blessings, do ordain and establish this Constitution.” Does it not look as if we intended to take it in hand ourselves? There is another thing. The Preamble above says, “We, the people of the Com- monwealth.” The people of the Common-, wealth do not adopt the Constitution. We are sent here, under the old Constitution, to meet within three months after our elec- tion, for the purpose of “readopting, amending or changing this Constitution.” Who does that? The people do not meet here to do it. The representatives of the people, the Delegates selected under this old Constitution, meet here for that pur- pose, and will ordain the new Constitution. We expect to submit it to the people, of course. Whether it will meet their ap- proval or not, is a different matter; but there cah only be an expression of opinion I take it that this ‘Con- vention will meet again, after the people ‘ have expressed their opinion, and sign the Constitution, if they approve it. That was the course pursued before, and has been advocated by all who have written upon the subject, and all with whom I have talked. That would be the proper course to be taken now. We frame the Constitu- tion, or adopt it, or revise or amend 1t, taking the old Constitution as the frame- work, and changing it to suit the wishes of this body, and submit it to a popular vote, to see whether they approve what we have done; if they approve it, then we will. ordain it. The substitute offered by me says, “WVe, the people of Kentucky, through their representatives,” and instead of having the wording of the Preamble as it is in the report of the Committee, pro- vides that we shall say, “that under God we ordain.” “The people, through their representatives, do, under God, ordain thi \ 32 BILL ()F RIGHTS. WVednesday] MACKOY—HENDRICK. [November 12 . Constitution.” That recognizes God. It is reverential in the highest senses—recog- nizes His superiority in providing this Con- stitution ; but it is not open to the objection that is made to it as the Preamble stands now. Mr. MACKOY was recognized by the Chair. Mr. HENDRICK. Will the Delegate permit me to offer an amendment, on which I desire to say a few words after he - has concluded, and the Delegate can also discuss that now? The Reading Clerk read the amendment of Mr. Hendrick, as follows: Substitute for the Preamble the follow- ing: “We, the people of the Common- wealth of Kentucky, under God, do ordain and establish this Constitution.” Mr. MACKOY. I have offered a sub- stitute providing that the Preamble of the present Constitution shall be inserted in- stead of the Preamble reported by the Committee. It is not with any feeling of irreverence, nor because I do not recognize theeoverruling Providence of God in the aifairs of men, that I have made the mo- tion; but the Preamble as it now is has been in existence since our first Constitu- tion. Kentucky under it has not become an irreligious State; it is not to-day an irre- ligious State, but as compared with other States, there is probably to-day more true religion in the State of Kentucky than in almost any State in the Union, unless it may be the old State of Virginia. I would not, therefore, as it has not affected us morally or religiously, do any thing that would affect in any way the conscience of any person in this State, whether he be a believer or not. If there is one who is not a believer in the overruling Providence of God, it does violence to his conscience, and we can accomplish‘ no good by adopting the report of the Committee. I think that we shall be wise if we imitate God himself. He has nowhere set up any sign-board in nature stating that He is God, or the Author or Creator of this world. He has permitted Himself to be revealed through nature by His works,and they manifest Him abundant- ly. We shall do well if we imitate His exam- ple, and if we make a Constitution which, in its spirit, and by guarding the rights of the people, shall show that we are imbued with some portions of the feelings that charac- terized His Son upon this earth. Let us acknowledge our reverence for and confi- dence in the Great Ruler of this Universe by our works rather than by mere words. Mr. HENDRICK. I think if the Dele- gate from Covington, for whose learning and wisdom I have very great repeet, had been present in the discussion of this mat- ter before the Committee of the Whole, he would, perhaps, not have offered the substi- tute which is presented, for the reason that that was presented during the discussion of this matter in the Committee of the Whole I want to say in addition to that, 1 am very much devoted to the Preamble as presented by the Committee upon Preamble and Bill of Rights; and I have consistently, as far as I have been able,'by my conscience, stood by that Committee during this entire struggle over this very important matter. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark, it seems to me, is not, if we are to make any change, as concise as it should be. I believe this Convention has hereto- fore declared solemnly its conviction that there should be a recognition of Omnisci- ence in this Constitution,—-of Almighty God as recognized and acknowledged in the Pre- amble reported by the Committee. If there is to be any change, and I merely offer it for that reason, it seems to me that you could not be more concise, more direct, more precise than you are in the amendment which I have submitted to the Convention. I believe that amendment reads: “We, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, under God, do ordain and establish this Constitution.” The criticism made by the Delegate from Clark, it seems to me, is not applicable.~ We are, as has been very well BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 33 Wednesday,] ;.__McCHoRD—McHENRY-FUNK. [November 12. said by the Chairman of that Committee, the people of the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky in our representative capacity. We are here as the people of the Common- wealth of Kentucky, not one hundred men, but two millions of population are repre- sented upon this floor. The people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky ordain and establish this Constitution. And if the report of the Committee is not to be adopted, I suggest that the amendment offered by myself be adopted, for the simple and sole reason that it expresses every single idea contained in the report of the Committee, with that reverence to the Almighty, which is implied in it, except that we do not in terms return our thanks for the civil, political and religious liberty which we have heretofore enjoyed. But we declare that under Him, under His guidance, by His blessings, we ordain and establish this Constitution; ordain it, estab- lish it, for the protection of the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky to per- petuate their institutions, to make it as they have heretofore been, a blessing to our people. Mr. MCCHORD. The amendment that I offered, it seems to me, embraces every idea that is in the Preamble as offered by the Committee. It is short; it is as short I think as language can make it, and is in these words: “ That humbly invoking the blessing of Almighty God, we, the people of Kentucky, do ordain and establish this Constitution of our State.” that this, in fact, expresses the idea and sentiment that we ought to express in a Preamble—no more. no less. Mr. MCHENRY. I think this Preamble is just as well written by the Committee as it can be. We express our gratitude to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which we enjoy, and in order to secure to ourselves and to the suc- ceeding generations the continuance of these blessings that we now enjoy,” we make what? We make a Constitution for It seems to me ' our government, which is to be in a religi- . ous and proper form, in order to con-' tinue these blessings, and hold ourselves grateful to God for the blessings which we now enjoy. We adopt this Constitution. We are the people; especially are we the ‘ people after we submit this to them, and they ratify it; and if the people do not rat- fy it, then no harm is done; and I think that a few words extra as they have here, are better. The objection that I have to the amendment offered by both gentlemen who have just spoken, is, that they have simply inserted the word “God,” and it looks like they want to get away from Him as soon as possible. We want to make an acknowledgement here that it is under God that we have these blessings; and we ought not to put Him in here, and say we are bound to acknowledge God Al- mighty, and we will do it in as few words as possible. We have it here exactly right, and I do not think it is amenable to the objection of the amendments offered by the gentleman from Clark and others. Mr. FUNK. I move the previous ques- tion. ' The motion being seconded, was put and carried, and the previous question was ordered. 0 The PRESIDENT. The vote will be first taken on the substitute offered by the Delegate from Clark. A vote being taken, the substitute was rejected. The amendment of the Delegate ‘from Bracken was read, and is as follows: We the people of Kentucky, with a deep feeling of gratitude to Almighty God for the blessings we have enjoyed, and trust- ing to Him for guidance herein, do ordain and establish this Constitution. A vote being taken, the substitute was rejected. , The'substitute of Mr. Mackoy was read, which was the Preamble of the present Constitution. s4 * BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] FUNK—PETIT—YOUNG. I [November 12 . Mr. MACKOY. I call for the yeas and ' nays on that. Mr. FUNK. I second the call. Mr. PETTIT. I rise to a Parliamentary _inquiry. Here the yeas and nays are de- manded upon a very important question. I intend to vote, as a matter of course, for this Preamble as reported by the Committee on Bill of Rights; but here the proposition is to strike that out, and insert the original. How are the Delegates to vote? Suppose we vote for this proposition and it be adopted; we never get to the proposition in our original report; we are then left in a false attitude. The question should be on the adoption of the substitute as amended. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will ex- plain the status of the question: When there is an original proposition pending, and a half dozen substitutes, for instance, if a gentleman votes for the first substitute, he votes for that substitute, and against all ‘ other substitutes; and if he is for some other proposition then, as a matter of course, he votes against that substitute, and that still allows the original matter to be ‘ "open to amendment, and in that way every 1 possible expression of opinion can be had in the whole matter, and as long as the pleasure of the Convention will admit of it. Mr. PETTIT. That is if it is voted down; but if it is voted in place of the original, we might prefer the original, yet we get no record on it. The PRESIDENT. If it is voted as against all others, that is the _will of the Convention, and should stand. Mr. YOUNG. It is evident that this matter will not be concluded to-day, and I- would like to rise to a question of personal privilege. I desire to ask a favor of every member of this Convention, to offer him an emolument without money and without price; and to prove that buffaloes were the greatest engineers that ever lived in Ken- tucky, as shown by their traces along which railway lines have generally been located I can do it in seven minutes if gentlemen will allow me. DELEGATES. Leave! Leave! Mr. YOUNG. The attainments of bridge engineers in America have marked a peculiar phase of national character and their skill, backed by American progres- siveness, has subdued the wilderness, and defied nature’s barriers against human ad- vancement. Five of the great bridges of the world are within the limits of this State. Two across the Kentucky river, and three across the Ohio. N ow, gentlemen, I may speak a little flatteringly of myself; I know the Scriptures say, one should not think _more highly of himself than he ought, but it does not say you shall not think well of yourself. [This is not to go in the record] Mr. L. T. MOORE. I would like to ask the gentleman what subject he is dis- cussing ? Mr. YOUNG. If the gentleman will bear with me patiently, he will know in a moment. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Is it to throw light on the Bill of Rights? Mr. YOUNG. Well, yes. In the midst of beautiful Babylon, nearly three-quarters of a century before the Christian era, the Assyrian engineers spanned the Euphrates and diverted that stream, by artificial ways, from its natural channel in order to sink their coffer-dams in its bed, and reach foundations for their stone piers to support their structure across its floods. On our own continent the Peruvians, hundreds of years ago, commenced bridge erection by stretching ropes across chasms and pulling passengers and burdens in has- kets. One of the most beautiful and touching of the world’s martial poems is founded upon the story of Horatius Cocles, in his defense of the Pons Sublicus against the ad- vancin g hordes under Porsena. I will say to the gentleman from Boyd I am almost through. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I hope you are. BILL OF RIGHTS. 35 Wednesday,] YoUNG. [November 12 . Mr. YOUNG. When Rome was about to be destroyed by the barbarians, and they were about to take this bridge, Horatius Cocles, and three of his comrades undertook to defend the city against barbarian adv ance- ment. As the Consul considered this, the poet says : But the Oousul’s brow was sad, And the Consul’s speech was low, And darkly looked he at the wall And darkly at the foe ; Their van will be upon us . Before the bridge goes down ; If they once may win the bridge, What hope to save the town ‘I Then out spake brave Horatius, The Captain of the gate : “To eve ry man upon this earth Death cometh soon or late ; And how can man die better Than facing fearful odds, For the ashes of his fathers And the temples of his gods?” But with a. crash like thunder Fell every loosened beam, And like a dam the mighty wreck Lay right athwart the stream, And a long shout of triumph Rose from the walls of Rome As to the highest turret tops Was splashed the yellow foam. “0 Tiber! Father Tiber l To whom the Romans pray!‘ A Roman’s life, a. Roman’s arms, Take thou in charge this day.” So he spake, and, speaking, sheathed The good sword by his side, And, with his harness on his back, Plunged headlong in the tide. And now he feels the bottom ; Now on dry earth he stands; Now round him throng the fathers, To press his gory hands ; And now, with shouts and clapping, And noise of weeping loud, He enters through the river gate, Borne by the joyous crowd. In the darker ages, when the barons along the Rhine claimed as their perquisites and prerogatives, the right to rob and des- troy at the fords and passages of that: stream, and as so thrillingly told in beau-L. tiful story, The Dove in the Eagle’s Nest, they overturned the wagons, and stampeded the horses of the traveler, in order that they might obtain the opportunity to prey upon his stores, and kill in order that they might possess his riches. The pious priests of those times built stone bridges across‘ this and other streams, to rescue the traveler from these dangers, and spare them these murderous assaults, and thus so happily blended religion, mercy and en- gineering for the defense and protection of man. ' Beginning with ropes, then using stone ‘and wood, and then coming on to the age of iron and steel, man’s ingenuity and skill Ihave never faltered in these efforts to overcome nature’s forces or nature’s bar- riers. The longest wooden span ever erected was 390 feet in length; the longest stone span 200 feet in length, and the first iron bridge completed was in 1755—less than a century and a half ago. In 1819 the first wire suspension bridge was constructed, and in 1845, Robert Stephenson designed and built the Menai Strait bridge, which in - boldness of conception, and skill in struc- ture, amazed the people of his day. In order to prevent the building of the Chesterand Holyhead Land Railway, which was compelled to cross these straits, the op- ponents of the line put such terms into the Parliamentary grant that to any ordinary statesman ‘it,’ meant absolute’ prohbition; But the railway vmanagers, not to be baf- fled, defied these obstructions in the path- way of progress. They employed Robert Stevenson, who associated with him two other men, and after careful experiment, they decided they could build a span over the channel 460 feet long; that they could meet the demands of the act of incorpora- tion, and put the bottom line of the bridge 100 feet above the tide, and build it with- out interrupting traffic by false work or support of any kind. The great tubular iron bridge across ‘_‘Menai Straits rose,_as if by magic, and theengineer again triumphed over man’s machinations and nature’s in- terventions. But a new age, demanding man’s fur- ther efforts, was to dawn. The mighty tide of population and prdgréss,'_"moving Westward and southward, ‘was-a meet 36 BILL OF RIGHTS. r Wednesday,] YOUNG. [November 12 . other difficulties, and the pioneer of Ameri- can civilization was to face other problems and determine if man was capable of their solution. Tremendous chasms stood in the path of the Western and Southern railway pion— eer, and mighty streams, with currents almost as rapid as the wind itself in its cyclonic march, passing along beds rich in alluvial wealth, yet almost bottomless, when searching for stone upon which to rest foundations, raised their warning hands and motioned the advancing hosts to turn backward. Along in the seventies it was deemed necessary to cross the Mississippi river at St. Louis. The illustrious Eads, who con- structed the jetties at the mouth of the Mississippi river, offered to build a metal arch bridge, with a span of 520 feet in the center. To reach a sure foundation, it was required to sink the piers 136 feet below the water line, and to work at this extreme depth required an air pressure provided by machinery, which would equal sixty pounds to the square inch, the force of which would. in one-third the cases brought under its influence, burst the ear-drum be- fore a man could inhale sufiicient com- pressed air to equalize the pressure from within and without; and, worst of all, a convention of engineers was called, who, after deliberation, decided that it was im- possible to construct a 500-foot span suf- ficiently strong to carry railway, street- car and wagon-way trafiic over the river at. this point. But Eads defied their calculations. He found men willing to back him with money, but three companies broke before the work was finished. In the end the engineer pre- vailed over financial and natural difficulties, and the St. Louis bridge is to-day a menu-- ment of human perseverance and engineer- ing ability. Then came the Cincinnati Southern Rail- way, and it was brought face to face with the mighty gorge that the 'WMBI‘B “0f i116 Kentucky river had cut in the limestone banks through the ages of the past, in their grandeur and in their frightful depths lift- ing their protest against man’s invasion 0 dominion. ‘ Schaler Smith, a Confederate engineer, said: “I can span this distance. I can cross its mighty height of 300 feet, and without a trestle-Work or support of any kind. I can project a mighty span from shore to shore, which shall meet in the center of this awful gorge, and which, when once fastened with an iron rod of one and one-half inches in diameter, will bear the heaviest trains over its apparently fragile limbs, and carry the commerce of a world, and bear along its iron lines a traffic greater than all the ships of the Mistress of the Ocean carry from clime to clime.” No such bridge had been built, but the man of figures demonstrated to his own mind that the desired result was possible and attainable. Taking with him the prin- ciple used in the construction of a project- ing roof, he concluded that he could build from a common point outward so long as he could find weight to counterbalance the pro- jected arm. Carpenters call the piece that supports the'roof, where it projects over the wall, a cantilever, and Schaler Smith, apply- ing this idea of supports to bridge building, constructed the High Bridge over the Ken- tucky River, with a span of 350 feet, and with a height from the water of 286 feet; and thus erected it is, from the water line, the highest bridge in the world. To test this bridge, two heavy engines, followed by twenty cars of loaded stone, were started over the apparently fragile structure, ‘with a speed of forty miles per hour, and brought to a sudden stand-still. Every bolt, every bar, every joint, under this awful ordeal, shivered and trembled for a moment under this fearful strain, and then resumed its normal place, and man again proclaimed that nature was van- quished, and he was master over its forces 1311.1. OF RIGHTS. 37 Wednesday,] YOUNG. [November 12 . Then came the Henderson Bridge, with a 525 foot span, still farther pushing its iron girders into the unknown domain of engineering possibility, and adding another to the victory of mind over matter. Then the speaker, associated with some other gentlemen in Louisville and New Albany, Indiana, moved by a desire to relieve Louisville of the exactions of a single bridge, connected his adopted city with the tide of traflic and travel, which poured into its lap from the regions north of the Ohio river, undertook with other gen- tlemen at the foot of the falls to erect another structure, along and over which a nation’s commerce should pass from section to section. It was designed with two five hundred foot spans and a single connected chord of over 1,800feet. It was to cross the beauti- ful river at a point where its mighty cur- rents rose higher than at any other along its shores from its source, amid mountain heights of Pennsylvania, to where in the valley of the Mississippi, it lost its cur- rents and its volume in the bosom of the Father of Waters. The vast structure con- taining nearly 8,000,000 pounds of steel and iron, was to be built without trestle or false work, must be its own support and carry its own burden safely over the rag- ing waters, that with such violence and anger rolled against the base of its tall piers and uttered a protest against man’s invasion of this watery kingdom. For hundreds of years, where only savage ears listened to the sublime sounds that these'rushing torrents gave back as they dashed over the mighty rocks, and along the steep declivity of this fall, its mighty roar was lost in the forest wilds; but now these keep time to the whistle of the loco- motive or the rattle of the car wheel, and unite in harmonious and musical accord with these newer agencies of man’s crea- tion and invention, and swell the chorus of peace, plenty and prosperity which broods over the fertile valley of the Ohio, while more than a hundred feet above these lash- ing waves pass the trains, vehicles and travelers, which hourly and daily lend their forces and powers to the wealth and the growth of Kentucky's metropolis. This new bridge gave Kentucky the largest cantilever system in the world. But yet other calls were made. Commerce and engineering were yet to meet on another spot, and unite in another victory over nature’s opposition. ' For years some of the largest railway associations in America had been endeavor- ing to cross the Kentucky river, at its ex- treme heighth, a second time. The first effort had been successful from an engineering stand-point, but a dismal failure financially. The Louisville Southern Railway Com- pany had surveyed a line from Lawrence- burg to Versailles, but the great length of , crossing, the almost unfathomable depths for foundations and the immense height of the proposed structure, deterred them from making this costly experiment. The railway company, the construction company and their associates hesitated and declined this hazardous work. The bridge work was to be done in five months, and in addition twenty-five miles of the most costly railway work in Kentucky to be constructed Not only was the structure to rise nearly 300 feet above the water’s edge, but the span was to exceed in length any one of a simi- lar kind ever erected. Five hundred feet had hitherto been the limit of a cantilever span. I modestly said to the companies, I will build your bridge—I will extend your span 51 feet beyond the length ever known before. We will make it the longest canti- lever span in the world, and measuring from the bottom of the work in the fourf- dations, the highest bridge in the world‘; and I will put up as a forfeit of $100,000 to build nnd complete it within "the? g'iv‘eh period. And then began the race in construc- tion and erection against time. Nine- tenths of the people who knew any thing of the condition of affairs prophesied deg 38 BILL OF RIGHTS. Wednesday,] YOUNG—MACKOY—HENDRICK. [November 12. feat and loss, and to add to my misfor- tunes a dangerous illnessjntervened to still further test my patience, my hope and my courage. The bridge was 1,664 feet in length; the middle span was to be 551 feet in length, and the heighth from water to rail 279 feet. Thousands of people came to witness the result of this unequal contest of one. man against Nature and its obstructions. Slowly the vast arms came into place. At‘ last two mighty steel towers arose on either side the stream, and, with only thirty days left, each arm started from its respective pier to reach across the mighty gulf, with its steel joints to reunite the sundered shores and to bear up the current of trafiie which, thus elevated above its settling tides, should be safely and conveniently borne aloft over its defiant chasm. On motion, the time of the session was ex- ‘ tended. Foot by foot the great structure grew until at last the two arms, now' weighing 850- 000 pounds each, met over the deep abyss; and so accurately had human skill calcu- lated the desired result, that when these tremendous masses of steel met in the mid- air, 278 feet from the water’s surface, the estimate had not varied a thousandth part of an inch, and it was only necessary to in-r sert a single pin and bind all the parts of ' this vast combination of trusses together. The figures as to time had not been un- derestimated. The great work was finished, the race against the elements above and beneath the surface were conquered by human will, and thirteen days ahead of some. The task had been accomplished, and “Young’s High Bridge,” named in honor of the speaker, stood forth, not only in its superb beauty, symmetry and strength, the engineering wonder of Ken- tucky, but elevated to the foremost rank as the most quickly erected structure of its kind ever built in the world, and no mean testimonial to the willingness and ability of Kentucky’s people to meet and to master the difficulties of any situation. To-morrow is the last evening we shall have. I have a train, and I want every man of you to see that bridge; and I _want each of you, with Kentucky gallantry, to take a lady with you. Mr. MACKOY. I move to accept the invitation. Mr. MOORE. I make the point of or- der that the time was only extended to allow the gentleman to finish his remarks. The PRESIDENT. This is part of the same matter. Mr. HENDRICK. I offer a resolution: The resolution was read, as follows: Resolved, That the Delegate from the Fourth Louisville District be recommend- ed by this Convention to the authorities of the Federal Government as a competent lecturer on bridge engineering; and we suggest that the “ bloody chasm ” might be bridged under his supervision. Mr. MACKOY. I move that this Con- vention thank the gentleman for the invi- tation, and that we accept it. Mr. L. T. MOORE. On that I demand the yeas and nays. Mr. YOUNG. It is a personal invita- tion, not official. The motion of the Delegate from Cov- ington was withdrawn. The Chair announced the Committee of Reception of the survivors of the Conven- tion of 1849, provided by resolution: J. Guthrie Coke, J. M. Wood, C. J. Bronston J. T. Nunn and A. J. Auxicr. The Convention then adjourned. CZonncntion Becorq counties on the same subject. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 'Vol. 1 . FRANKFORT, NOVEMBER 13. 1890. No.51 "Thursday,] MOORE—MILLER—WOOD. [November 13 . The Convention was called to [order by ‘the President, and the proceedings were 'opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr Darsie. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. Leaves of Absence. Leaves of absence were granted to the Delegates from Estill, Floyd, Marshall and ‘Washington. Mr. MOORE. I have a petition from :sundry citizens of Carter county, request- ing a provision in the Constitution for the relief of disabled Confederate soldiers. I :am at a loss to know what Committee it should go to; but I think it should go to :the Committee on Militia. The PRESIDENT. That Committee .has already reported. It should go to the Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. -L. T. MOORE. I have a number ‘of reports from Clerks of different counties, showing the amount paid to Jailers, which were referred to the Committee on Circuit Courts—why I do not know. That Com- mittee ask to be relieved from them, and ask that they be referred to the Special Commit- .tee getting up the data for the State. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, 'the communication will be referred to the Special Committee, of which the Delegate from Anderson is Chairman. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a com- munication from Pike, Clay and Trigg I ask the same reference. The PRESIDENT. The reference will be made. The Chair has a communication from Bell and Knott counties, which. will be referred to the same Committee. Reports from Standing Committees. Mr. WOOD. I desire now to give notice that I will to-morrow move a reconsidera- tion of the vote by which the amendment to the Bill of Rights, offered by the Dele- gate from Nicholas, was adopted, and also move a reconsideration on the vote by which the previous question was ordered. The PRESIDENT. The necessity for giving notice is only in regard to matter that is not before the C0nvention--matter that has been disposed of. The matter to which your notice refers will be before the Convention in a short time, and then will be the proper time to make the motion. Reports from Standing Committees. Mo- tions and resolutions. Mr. L. ‘T. MOORE. I move that we. proceed with the consideration of the Special Order. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. _ Correction of the Record. Mr. MCELROY. I wish to make a per- sonal explanation this morning. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman will proceed. Mr. MCELROY. On the 10th of Octo- ber a resolution was offered here that this Convention elect an Assistant Sergeant-at- Arms. I made some remarks against that proposition at the time, and voted against it, and called the yeas and nays. In the proceedings I am put down as voting for it. I hope the Record will be made to show that fact. The Clerk’s Journal shows I voted against the proposition. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I did not care any thing about it, but while the gentleman has brought up the proposition, I voted against the proposition, and I am recorded as voting for it. 2 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] BRENTS—PHELPS—BLACKBURN. [November 13 .,- Preamble ‘and Bill of Rights. The CLERK. The amendment under consideration is the substitute for the Pre- amble offered by the Delegate from the city of Covington. He moves to substitute the Preamble of the present Constitution for the Preamble reported by the Committee. Mr. MACKOY. On that the yeas and nays were called. Mr. BRENTS. amendment ‘.7 The PRESIDENT. The Secretary in- forms the Chair the previous question was ordered on the substitute, and therefore the amendment is not in order. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I understood the previous question was only moved on the second section of the Bill of Rights. The Secretary will inform the House. The SECRETARY. Mr. Funk moved the previous question. Mr. BLACKBURN. The Delegate from Louisville moved the previous question, and the Delegate from Marion asked him "if it was on all sections, ‘and the Delegate from Louisville said no, it was upon the then pending amendments to this section only. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the Journal on. this matter. The SECRETARY. “The Convention then took up for consideration the Pream- ble reported by the Committee on Bill of Rights. Mr. Hendrick offered the following substitute, &c. Mr. Funk moved the pre- vious question on said substitute. The President announced: Shall the main question he now put? and it was decided in the affirmative.” The PRESIDENT. The Chair will have to decide according to the Journal, and decides that the previous question was moved on the various pending substitutes. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I move to cor- rect the Journal, and make it show that the Delegate from Louisville moved the previ- ous question on the second section of the Bill of Rights. Is it too late to offer an The PRESIDENT. The Journal shows-'- that he did that also. He made the motion for the previous question on two different sections. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. The present pend- in g section? The PRESIDENT. Yes; the oiily way to get from under the previous question is to move to reconsider the vote by which. the previous question was ordered. visas—~20. Amos, D. C. Elmore, T. J. Askew, J. F. Field, W. W. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Hines, Thomas H.. Holloway, J. W. Bennett. B. F. Johnston, P.'P. Blackburn, James Lassing, L. W. Brents, J. A. Mackoy, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Sachs, Morris A.- Buckner. S. B. Smith, H. H. Bullitt, W. G. Straus, F. P. stars—57. Allen, C. T. Miller, Will. Auxier, A. J. Miller, W. H. Ayres, W. W. Montgomery, J. F.- Berkele, Wm. Moore, J. H. Birkhead, B. T. Moore, Laban T. Blackwell, Joseph Muir, J. W. Boles, S. H. Nunn, T. J. Brown, J. S. Parsons, Rob’t T. Brummal, J. M. Petrie, H. G. Buchanan, Nathan Pettit, Thos. S.~ Burnam, Curtis F. Phelps, John L- Clardy, John D. Phelps. Zack Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. Durbin, Charles Farmer, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Harris, Geo. C. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, W. Scott Swango, _G. B. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. James, A. D. West, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. \Vhitaker, Emery Lewis, W. W. Williams, L. P. V. Martin, W. H. \Vood, J. M. May, John S. WVoolfolk, J. F. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. ABSENT—23. Allen, M. K. Hendrick, W. J. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, J. S. Bourland, H. R. Hogg, S. P. Carroll, John D. Hopkins, F. A.. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay \Vashington, George-- BILL OF RIGHTS. 3 Thursday,] WHITAKER—PHELPS. [November 13 , Jacobs, R. P. Jonson. Jep. C. Kennedy, Hanson Knott, J. Proctor McChord, Wm. C. O’Hara, R. H. Spalding, I. A. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Doris, W. F. Edrington, W. J. English, Sam. E. Funk, J. T. Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. The PRESIDENT. ‘Report the next amendment. Mr. WHITAKER. Is it in order to offer an amendment to the Preamble‘? The PRESIDENT. No, sir. It is not in order. ‘ The CLERK. The'next in order is the substitute for the Preamble proposed by the Delegate from Laurel, which reads as follows: We. the people of Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings, form a more perfect government, insure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare, do estab- lish this Constitution. A vote being taken, the substitute was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next substitute. The CLERK. The next in order is the substitute for the Preamble proposed by the Delegate from Clark: We, the people of Kentucky, through our representatives in Convention assem- bled, in order to secure to ourselves and to succeeding generations the enjoyment of civil, religious and political liberty, do, under God, ordain and establish this Con- stitution. A vote being taken, the substitute was rejected. The PRESIDENT. substitute. The CLERK. The next is that pro- posed by the Delegate from Fleming: Report the next We, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, under God, do ordain and estab- lish this Constitution. A vote being taken, the substitute was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next ubstitute. The CLERK. Those are all the substi- tutes to the Preamble. There are some amendments. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The‘CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from the city of Louisville, First District: Amend section 11 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights by striking therefrom the following words: “ Except in such cases as do not amount to a felony.” I Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I have not taken any part in the discussion on the Bill of Rights. When I saw the Com- mittee’s report, and took it and compared it with the old Bill of Rights, I confess I went to my room and determined to make a speech; but when I witnessed with what marked ability the questions involved were discussed, I came to the conclusion that any thing from me on the subject would be superfluous; so Idecided that in the consider- ation of the Bill of Rights I would have nothing whatever to say.‘ I feel, however, that if the innovation contained in this new section is allowed to go by without my protest, I should be lacking in my duty. I ask the Convention to pause for a mo- ment and consider this section with the insertion which is proposed by the Com- mittee. It seems to me that the safe .rule of legislation is, when a measure is pro- posed as an amendment to an existing measure, to consider, first, the operation of the existing law; second, to find out if you can what is the mischief in the exist- ing law, and then, thirdly, to hunt around and find what is the proper remedy. Take the old Bill of Rights in this case, and inquire what has been the operation thereunder with reference to the administration of the criminal law in Ken- tucky ? Has there been any lack of op- portunity to present criminals? Has there been any failure to have criminals brought before the bar and tried? Has there been any lack of protection to the criminal? Is 4 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] PHELPS. [November 13 , it not true, under the present system, every possible safeguard is thrown around the criminal, and that he is given every oppor- tunity to make his defense? Is it not true that the Commonwealth is given every op- portunity to bring witnesses from any part of the State to be heard in the prosecution of any man on trial? Is it not true that, under the existing system, a man can be ar- rested, presented, indicted and brought before the judge and jury? Therefore, I say, under the present system the opera- tion of the criminal law, in that respect at least, is satisfactory. True, there has been complaint, the complaint being a lack of speedy trial. If the amendment proposed here is any improvement in the matter of speedy trials, let us adopt it. If it be not, it does not meet the difficulty. What is the mischief? The mischief, I think, is in the lack of Courts. That mis- chief, I understand, is to be cured by the Committee on Courts, by increasing the number of Circuit Courts. I ask the Con- vention to note that the change made from the old Bill of Rights by the Committee is by the insertion of a clause in the section, which, as amended, reads thus: “No person, for an indictable offense, shall he proceeded against criminally by information except in such cases as do not amount to felony,” &c What cases do not amount to felony ? What punishments can be administered in cases that do not amount to felony? I have in mind a case which occurred in the borders of Kentucky not long since, where a law- yer undertook to chastise a Judge. This was a mere misdemeanor, not a felony. Still, when he was presented for trial and the case was heard, he was fined heavily, and a punishment of three years’ imprison- ment in the county jail inflicted. That was not a felony. I have in mind a case, which occurred in my county, a mere misdemean- or, where the defendant was fined three thousand dollars and given one year in jail. Is it the intention of this Convention to make it possible that a man may be ar- ' rested for a misdemeanor without a war- rant, without indictment, upon mere infor- mation? Is it possible that you would make it so that your neighbor may have you arrested every day in the week with- out a warrant, without an affidavit, with- out indictment? Can it be possible that you would say that an irresponsible man can wreak his vengeance on some adver- sary, and, without warrant, have the defend- ant dragged from his hearth-stone, taken to the Courts, and compel him to employ counsel to make defense? If a man be required to make aflidavit or go before a Grand Jury and make oath when he in- forms on his neighbor and causes him to be put under arrest, the man arrested has a remedy. 1f the party who swears out the warrant, or causes the arrest, is responsible financially, he may hold him in damages; if he has no property, he may proceed against him for false swearing; but if the innovation now proposed be adopted, it will be possible for an irresponsible man, a man without property, to cause your arrest every day in the week; cause you to be presented before the Courts, and leave you entirely without any remedy in damages, or by prosecutioa for false swearing. Is it the in- tention of this Convention to leave the law so that this will be possible? I do not in- tend to say that the Legislature will allow it, but I do say that the intelligence of this Convention should rise up against a possi- bility that any such rule should prevail in Kentucky. Why is it, I ask the Chairman of the Committee, that it is made necessary to insert this provision in the old Bill of Rights? Is it diflicult for a party desiring to make complaint against any other party for misdemeanor, to cause a warrant to issue, to make affidavit, to go before the Grand Jury? Is it asking too much of the man who desires to make complaint against another, to require that he, at least, make an afiidavit upon which to base com- plaint? Ithink not. I think no reason- able man will say, that when a man is tak- BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Thursday,] A UXIER—RODES. [November 13 . en from home and required to give bail and to employ counsel, he, at least, has a right to have the charge made in a digni- fied way by some one he can hold respon- sible for it. I do not care to make any lengthy speech on this matter. I simply call attention to it, and warn you that there is danger in the amendment, and suggest that, as the present rule of the Bill of Rights has been found ample, there is no need for the innovation. Mr. AUXIER. In the Committee of the Whole I had the honor to introduce a reso- lution similar to that introduced this morn- ing, - and it was there acted upon, and, to my great surprise, it was voted down. I then gave the reasons why I offered that amendment to strike out this innovation in the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill ‘of Rights; but at that time there were not many here, barely a quorum, and I do hope that this Convention, in their final action, will not place in the hands of the County Attorney, or some individual who bears malice towards his fellow-man, such ex'tra- ordinary power as would enable him to arrest and persecute him. There is less danger in giving this power in cases of felony to a prosecuting ofiicer than in mis- demeanor cases. When a felony is com- mitted everybody feels outraged, and the officer is apt to cause an inves- tigation, ‘ and the people will de- mand investigation by information, or indictment; but, as said by the Delegate from the First Louisville District, there are so many misdemeanors where the penalty is severe and the punishment is ex- treme, that to place this power in the hands of an individual, without the investigation by the Grand Jury, ‘is an innovation upon the spirit of our institutions. I think this Convention ought not to adopt the report of the Committee. I hope the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Louisville will be adopted. Mr. RODES. This matter has been up before, and so much has been said about it, and so much explanation offered, that I hardly know whether it is worth while to go over it. By this section, as proposed, the Convention will see that it does not determine what are indictable offenses. It may embrace all manner of misdemeanors. It confers that power on the Legislature to make them all indictable, if the Legisla- ture so chooses; but it does require that all cases amounting to felony shall be indicta— ble, shall be prosecuted through a Grand Jury, and in cases not felony it leaves it discretionary with the Legislature. The Legislature ought to have the power. It has had that power all the time, and there are hundreds, and I believe thousands, of cases that are prosecuted without indict- ment by a Grand Jury. The laws are sub- ject now to the same invective that the gentleman has just uttered against this sec- tion. I apprehend there is no reason for finding fault with it. If it is a misde- meanor case, the Legislature can say it shall or shall not be prosecuted by indict- ment, or it may be prosecuted in some other way. The tendency of the age is to shorten the process by which we arrive at the settlement of cases of that description. In some cases they are not required in cases of higher degree to he proceeded against by indictment. They may be proceeded against by information in some States, even-in cases amounting to felony. The old thirteenth section says “that no person shall, for any indictable offense, be proceeded against criminally by information. except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service, in time of war or public danger,” &c. We know that there are a great many cases which can be prosecuted by information, those committed in time of public danger, or by leave of Court for misfeasance in office. Why make any exception at all? Why not include all in indictments, if there be any danger to the liberty of the citizen or country? There must be some exceptions; there must be a 6 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] R-ODES—BRONSTON. [November 13 . line drawn somewhere, and the Committee propose to leave it to the Legislature to say that in a certain kind of cases they may or may not do it. I cannot see that there is any particular danger in leaving it to the Legislature to discriminate among the cases, when [we provide that in all cases where life and limb are involved they must he proceeded against by indictment. We know there are numerous cases involving personal disrespect to a Court that are not proceeded against by indictment. There was a casein Jessamine county and two in Simpson, where people were fined heavily for contempt. Why not exclude all? I say it is proper to leave it discretionary with the Legislature, who are at least sup- posed to have some regard for the rights of the people. Mr. BRONSTON. I have no disposi- tion to interfere with the tenacity of the Committee in clinging to the words they have usedin this section. If the Conven- tion desires to introduce that innovation in the system of criminal prosecution in Kentucky, of course, I will submit to that better judgment gracefully. I do not understand the explanation of this section given by the Chairman of the Committee. He claimed in one instant that it was a limitation upon the power of the Legisla- ture, and in another instant, before he closed his argument, he admitted it was an enlargement of the power. I have simply arisen at this time to make a statement, which I was denied by the objection of the Delegate from Hardin, during the discus— sion in the Committee of the Whole on this question. It ‘will be remembered that, under the relaxation of the rule, the Dele- gate from Marion, just before the vote was taken on this section, took the position that these words were a limitation upon the power of the Legislature rather than an enlargement. And no opportunity was given to answer that position. He assumed the same position that has been taken by the Chairman of the Committee to-day. He said, under the language of this section, inasmuch as the Constitution did not de- fine what was an indictable offense, that it was in the power of the Legislature to say what offenses should be indictable. That position is absolutely untenable. When the Constitution of 184.9 was adopted, and the language, “ no indictable offense shall he proceeded against by inform- ation,” was used, it was construed, and has from that time to this been construed to mean, that whatever offenses were indictable, either at common law or by statute, could not he proceeded against by information. And that is the law of ‘Ken- tucky to-day; so that if we now insert the same Words in the Constitution, and say that “no indictable offense shall he proceeded against by information,” the Legislature cannot infringe upon that provision of the Constitution by authorizing proceedings by information for offenses, which were in- dictable at the time of its adoption. It was not indictable before, and the rule would be this: that at the time this Constitution takes effect, whatever offenses are indictable, either by common law or statute, which may have been enacted previous to that time, cannot he proceeded against in any other way than by indictment. So that, if you were to adopt the old Bill of Rights, it would be the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Louis- ville. It would mean this: “No indictable ofic'ense shall he proceeded againstnby infor- mation.” That is, when this Constitution takes effect. The rule as to prosecutions then will remain asit is now. And what is that rule? It is clearly defined and clearly understood, that to-day, under the jurispru- dence of Kentucky, you cannot . proceed against any person by information for any offense, the punishment for which is more than a fine or imprisonment for not exceed- ing fifty days. That is the rule now, and the only question for this Convention to consider is, will it adhere to that rule? If, however you desire to change the rule, you may say “except in cases not amounting to BILL OF RIGHTS. 7 “Thursday,] BRONSTON—MILLER. [November 13 , .felony.” And by thus doing you would put it in the power of the Legislature to make offenses subject to'information, the adoption -of the Constitution, which are not so now; :and is not that an enlargement of the power ‘of the Legislature? Do you mean to enlarge 'it? Do you mean to give the Legislature such power? tion, you must come up to this question squarely. It is not worth while to dodge it. The gentlemen of the Committee might just as well state what they mean_ ‘There is a growing disposition to dispense 1with the intervention of the Grand Jury. “There is a disposition to abridge the power "of the Grand Jury system, and it is grow- ing in Kentucky. If you want to do that, .say so. But I say to you, according to my experience and the experience of gentle- men with whom I have talked: with all its faults, the right of_ investigation by the ~-Grand Jury is one of the greatest protec- tions the citizen has. Force a man to go before sixteen men, and there, upon oath, with them looking into his eyes, and hear- ing his statements, make his charge against his neighbor, and give his neighbor a chance to explain before he is indicted and brought into the Court. I repeat to the Convention, that no man, who had any re- spect for himself, would be willing to take the office of Commonwealth’s Attorney, if .he were forced to pry into the affairs of his fellow-men, and say, without affidavit, whether A, B, C or D shall be dragged into Court. For instance, let a friend of the prosecutor be charged with one of the most serious misdemeanors known to the law— one like that referred to by the gentleman from Louisville—an assault on the Judge, ‘cruel and willful; the Grand Jury cannot investigate it; no afiidavit would be re- quired. It would simply repose in one man the power to say whether or not the prosecution shall be instituted. .If he were hostile to the accuser, or friend- 1y to the, accused, he could say upon his {investigation there was no case, and the Gentlemen of the Conven-. prosecution should not be bad. But, on the other hand, he could bring one of the best citizens of the community into Court, by charging him with crime for some insig- nificant ofl'ense which might degrade him in the eyes of the community, if he, as Prosecuting Attorney, had malice towards him, although there was nothing on which to support the charge; he could institute a prosecution against him, publish it in the record, place him in the dock, and thus de- grade him; and yet, when the case came to trial, in less than two minutes it might be dismissed. I will ask the gentlemen on the floor of this Convention what necessity is there for placing it in the power of the Legislature to pass such a provision as that? Can the gentlemen of the Committee give any reason for it? They have said that Courts have punished. Of course they have, because it is an inherent power in the Courts to punish for contempt. Why will you desire to go back—not simply for forty yeans, but more than one hundred years—to the age of semi-barbarism, and say that the individual citizen may thus be dragged from his home without the inter- vention of a Grand‘ Jury, or without even an affidavit? If you want to do it, I will submit, because I have as much or more confidence in your judgment than my own; but I beg of you to think for a moment as to what you may do. If the gentlemen can controvert‘ the legal proposition which I have stated, I would be glad for them to do so. I have, since the Committee of the Whole adjourned, conferred‘with almost every lawyer on the floor, and they unani- mously agree, that by the insertion of the words in the Committee’s report, you en- large the power of the Legislature and in- vest them with a power which they have not had, and in my judgment should never have. Mr. W. H. MILLER. It seems to me that the Delegate from Lexington is unnec- essarily alarmed. I do not think the gen- tleman is quite consistent in the positions he 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] M I LLER—PETTIT—PH ELPS. [November 13 . takes upon the subject of criminal prosecu- tions. One day he wants the power of the Legislature in one direction enlarged, and the next day he wants it restricted. It does not follow simply for the reason that the Legislature may have the power to au- thorize a public officer to institute pros- ecutions by way of information, it will inevitably do so. N ow, the definition of an information, as laid down in the civil law, is the act or instrument which con- tains the depositions of Witnesses against the accused. Under the common law, it is a complaint or accusation exhibited against a person for some criminal offense. An accusation in the nature of an indictment, from which it differs only in being present- ed by a public oflicer, on his oath of oflice, instead of a Grand Jury on their oath. It is not the fearful instrument which the Delegate from Lexington insinuates, and under some circumstances it may become a very useful and necessary procedure. It does not follow, from the adoption of this portion of the Committee’s report, that the Grand Jury is to be cut off from the inves- tigation of all offenses. Both the Attorney for the Commonwealth and the Grand Jury may look into offenses; and, if one omits any offense, then the necessary prosecution may be instituted by the other. I do not think there is any thing in the history of the conduct of Attorneys for the Common- wealth in this State that justifies the insin- uation which has been made by the Dele- gate from Lexington. I do not think that he can point out a single instance in the his- tory of the State of Kentucky for one hun- dred years, where a public ofiicer of this State has so far forgotten his duty as to be- come a public prosecutor. A Grand Jury may omit to discharge its duty; it may overlook offense in a period of excitement; a man may do a great wrong and the Grand Jury in that community may be in sympathy with him. The public officer whose duty it is to inquire into and prose- cute this offense, may come from another locality, and whenz‘he comes and inquires; into the matter, and sees that the Grand Jury has'omitted to do its duty, or omitted to set on foot an inquiry to see whether or not a public wrong has been committed, can set the necessary prosecution on foot- What are the instances, why is complaint made, that we enlarge our opportunities for investigation into the commission of crime in the State? If a man is innocent, he- does not fear it, and if a man is guilty, he ought to be subjected to it, and the enlarge-- ment, if fany enlargement there be in this section of the Constitution, ought to be up-- held by this Convention. Mr. PETTIT. I have a resolution which! I ask unanimous consent to put on its; passage. The resolution was read, as follows : Resolved. “That J. Russell Hawkins, of ' Franklin, the only surviving legislative- clerk of 1849, be invited to a seat upon the‘ floor of this Convention to-day, as a mark of respect to the honest man and faithful oflicer. A vote being taken, the resolution was- adopted. . Mr. ZACK PHELPS. As I believe- conscientiously that this matter will be very important in the administration of crimi- nal law in this State, I call for the yeas and. nays. ‘ Mr. MACKOY. I second it. The result of the roll-call was as follows : YEAS—52. Allen, M. K. Holloway, J. W. Amos, D. C. Johnston, P. P. Askew, J. F. Kennedy, Hansom Auxier, A. J. Kirwan, E. E. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Lassing, L. W. Mackoy, W. H. May, John S. Miller, \Vill. Boles, S. H. Moore, J. H. Brents, J. A. C’Hara, R. H. Bronston, C. J. Parsons, Rob’t T.. , Brown, J. S. Phelps, John L. Buchanan, Nathan Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Sachs, Morris As Smith, H. H. BILL or RIGHTS. MCDERMOTT—PUGH. [N ovember 13 . Thursday,] Durbin, Charles Straus, F. P. Elmore, T. J. Swango, G. B. ' Farmer, H. H. Washington, George Field, W. W. West, J. F. Forrester, J. G. Whitaker, Emery Forgy, J. M. Williams, L. P. V. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. NAYS—QE). Allen, C. T. McHenry, H. D. Ayres, W. W. Miller, W. H. Bennett, B. F. Montgomery, J. F. Berkele, Wm. Muir, J. W. Birkhead, B. T. Nunn, T. J. Brummal, J. M. Petrie, H. G. Pettit, Thos. S. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, W. Scott Burnam, Curtis F. Clardy, John D. Harris, Geo. C. Knott, J. Proctor Martin, W. H. Trusdell, George McDermott, E. J. Twyman. I. W. McElroy, W. J. ABSENT—23. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, Thomas H. Bourland, H. R. Hogg, S. P. Carroll, John D. Hopkins, F. A. Chambers, G. D. Jacobs, R. P. Coke, J. Guthrie James, A. D. Doris, W. F. Jonson, Jep. C. Edrington, W. J. Lewis, W. W. English, Sam. E. Funk, J. T. Graham, Samuel Hendrick, W. J. Hines. J. S. So the amendment was adopted. Mr. McDERMOTT. Is it in order to offer an amendment to another section of the report? I-Ihave spoken to the Chair- man of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights on the subject, and he indi- vidually does not object to my amend- ment. I should like, if it is in order, to offer it. The PRESIDENT. The amendment can be offered, but it will be voted on in ‘the regular order. The amendment of Mr. MeDermott’s was read, as follows : Add to the end of section 4 of the re- port of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. as amended, these words: “No human authority shall, in any case McChord, WVm. C. Moore, Laban T. Spalding, I. A. Wood, J. M. i whatever, control or interfere with the- rights of consciences Mr. McDERMOTT. I will explain briefly. Some words were stricken out of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Marion, and it was then adopted. The words stricken out of his substitute- were: All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience. These words were put in the first part of ' the Committee’s report as amended. I am not absolutely sure, nor do I think any- body else can be sure, that the words are- equivalent to those that I offer as an amendment. the Gospel might receive from _a criminal some confidential communication; and‘ I am not sure that, under the language hith-- erto adopted, this privileged communication could not be extorted from him. In order- to make that right absolutely secure, I would like to have the words of my amend-4 . ment added. That addition does not harm the symmetry of the section, and it is. safer to retain the words. They were in the- old Constitution. ‘The PRESIDENT. Discussion of your’ amendment is out of order now, as it will have to take its regular’ order. Report the- next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is- the amendment offered by the Delegate from Lewis county. Mr. PUGH. At the request of some friends who voted against the proposition in the Committee of the Whole, I will ask leave to withdraw that and offer this in lieu of it. The amendment substituted by the Dele- gate from Lewis county was read, and is as- follows: Amend the Bill of Rights proposed by the Committee by striking out section 17' and substituting in lieu thereof the follow‘ ing: “No person shall be imprisoned for debt in this State, but this shall not prevent. the Legislature from providing for the im- For instance, a Minister of" 10 BILL oF RIGHTS. Thursday,] PUoH. [November 13 . prisonment or holding to bail persons charged with fraud in contracting or seek- ing to evade the payment of said debt, or from prescribing like punishment for any violation of law.” Mr. PUGH. As this question involves the highest principle of personal liberty, ‘the right to incarcerate in the absence of crime or even criminal attempt, and as it, for some inscrutable reason, passed the lin- gering and searching ordeal of the discus- sion in Committee of the Whole without eliciting favorable comment or adverse criticism, I hope a few additional remarks to those that I was permitted to make under the five-minute rule, will not be regarded .as obtrusive or presumptuous on my part. On the evening of the day that this ques- tion was voted upon in the Committee of the Whole, an ex-Chief Justice of the State facetiously remarked to me, that if Kentucky to-day proposed in her supreme Delegated Power to reaffirm the doctrine of the abstract principle of imprisonment for debt, as enunciated in the Constitution of 1792, it does well to pass section 24, which provides that emigration from the State shall not be prohibited, for he thought many good Kentuckians would want to leave the State, if Kentucky sees fit to re- aflirm that doctrine, and also cling to the {old doctrine of the deodand, which has not obtained in any civilized country in the last century. I remarked to him that philanthropy was not circumscribed by State lines; that it was not confined within ‘the boundaries of Kentucky, and if that doctrine represented our highest type of citizenship, true philanthropy would sug- gest to us the propriety of keeping our people at home, lest they might inoculate the citizens of other States with ideas long since refuted. He said from that stand- point he believed I was right. I do not believe that that doctrine will ever receive the sanction of this Convention. I know it is proper to cling to things that are old, - provided they subserve the‘ spirit and senti- ment of the present age. Not so with this. I abhor a doctrine that involves a na- tion's disgrace as well- as dishonor to our mother State. ion that sufi‘ered Robert Morris, when re- duced to extreme poverty in his old age, to be cast into prison and detained there through his declining years, sufi'ering the inexpressible anguish of his country’s in- gratitude, linked to his loss of liberty— Robert Morris, Delegate to the Continental Congress, one of the framers of the Fed- eral Constitution, and whose signature graces the Declaration of Independence; at one time the great superintendent of public finance, and who thereafter, as a member of the Committee of Ways and Means, in the time of extraordinary peril, i pledged his personal credit to the amount of one million four hundred thousand dol- lars, thus laying his magnificent fortune at the nation’s feet, that the nation might live—a prisoner for debt! Misfortune hav- ing robbed him of the means to meet his creditors’ demands, he was thrust into a culprit’s cell, without manhood enough in America to come to his rescue! “O perfidy in friend or fee— In husband. brother, lover, wife-— Thou art the blackest drop of woe That bubbles in the cup of life i” As a Kentuckian, and in her name, I would stamp upon the so-called “rule of right” that held Simon Kenton in durance vile—not for crime, but because of the in- ability his indigence had wrought. I cannot tolerate a doctrine which has been the specious cloak for innumerable wrongs; that has been the engine of op- pression in the hands of the rich against the down-trodden and poor. I am here as one ready, willing and anxious to strike it out as unworthy the present day and gener- ation. You talk to me about consistency that should obtain in this high. this Supreme Delegate Convention of the State of Ken- tucky, and yet, in the first two sections that we adopted you feel the necessity in one in- stance to say that a county shall be heard; that she shall have an opportunity to ex- I cannot sanction a provis- ' BILL OF RIGHTS. 11 ‘ Thursday,] [November 13 . press her wishes and will in regard to changing her lines or lessening her area, and yet we say in the more important mat- ter of abolishing the entire county, she shall neither have notice nor have any voice whatever. Is that consistency? Now, what are you about to do in this matter? You have already passed section twenty- four, which provides that “slavery and involuntary servitude in this State are forbidden except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,” and in this you propose to allow imprisonment for debt in the absence of crime or criminal intent; but the only of- fense you thereby punish is poverty. Do you say that, too, is consistency? My at- tention was called to that matter by the same gentleman who offered the criticism, and I take it his criticism would obtain be- fore the members of the bar and the citi- zens of the State wherever heard. That section is almost a verbatim copy from the provision in the Constitutions of Alabama, Georgia, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin, and it is a singular fact that each and every one of those States expressly say that there shall be no imprisonment for debt. The provision I here offered grants all that any ' gentleman could ask. It gives all that is in force under our statutes. It allows the bail writ, but does not recognize the odious and contemptible abstract principle of im- prisonment for debt where there is neither fraud nor intention to defraud, and I hope it will be supported on this occasion. The only thing offered in support of this sec— tion in the Committee of the Whole was the remarks of the Delegate from Ohio, which were as follows: We have a law which is nothing but im- prisonment for debt, and it is a law that ought to stand. We need it in Kentucky, if we don’t need it in Texas. It is a law that requires that a man who should support a child which ought to be near and dear to him, and who fails to do it, shall be im- prisoned. There is no construction of that except that it is an imprisonment for debt. You cannot keep the man in jail longer than ten days. He gives notice that he will take the insolvent debtor's oath, and in ten days he is out, and that is an end of it, so far as the imprisonment is concerned. I would pause here to inquire whether this supreme power of the State in sover- eign Convention cannot see some mode by which that offense can be punished without opening wide the flood-gates for all sorts of oppression? We are going to leave a great many things to the wisdom of the Legislature, and why not do the same with this much smaller matter? I think the Legislatures have been far in advance of the Constitutional Conventions on this sub- ject. I know in this State they have not recently gone as far as the law permitted them, and have only imprisoned in cases of fraud. The eyes of the world are turned on this Convention, and we are ex- pected to enunciate the principle of to-day. Have we the manhood and courage? Will we do it, or will we say we will leave it all to the future? 1 have confidence in human nature. I know that the masses of the people and their representative bodies will ordinarily do what is right; but when it comes to a question of individual greed, I have seen the heart perverted, and op- pression meted out in Courts of Justice, by virtue of this self-same provision ; and I have older practitioners all around me who tell me they have more frequently seen it a means of oppression than of enforcing that which was right. I would that the Con- vention would aid me in obliterating it; but I presume they will not go that far, and I have therefore not undertaken it. How does it operate? You all know a creditor will watch his opportunity, when a man is ready to go to another State, and has his goods prepared to move away; he is unable to pay his debts, and he will be arrested and cast into some prison with his furni- ture, and, perhaps, his family at the wharf- boat or at some railroad station, and he must give up the little remnants he has or re- main in prison ten days, probably leaving ‘12 BILL or RIGHTS. Thursday,] PUGH—TWYMAN—MCHENRY. [November 13 . his wife and children to the mercy and charity of strangers; and that is the ma- chinery with which the poor are oppressed. and, nine times out of ten, rather than go to jail, they would give up what the law could not compel them to surrender. That must have been the observation of a majority of these Delegates; and will you, in order to aid one man out of ten, oppress nine in- nocent ones, adhere to that which you know may so operate? I would hardly be willing to go to that extent. I have had a number to come to me since this matter has been under consideration, and say they think it involves a principle of serious import, and they will render cheerful co-operation. I ask the members of the Convention now, as a matter of justice to themselves, to show that they are worthy sons of Kentucky, and aid me in doing away with the abstract principle of imprisonment for debt. Mr. TWYMAN. Do you mean to say that we ought not allow imprisonment for debt in bastardy cases ? Mr. PUGH. I say leave that matter to the Legislature, which will have all power to punish. Why pick out one offense and provide for it here, and leave arson, rob- bery, murder and all such important mat- ters to be attended to by the Legislature? Mr. MCHENRY. I ask you whether you are not willing for a man to be im- prisoned in the kind of case referred to, when it is nothing but debt ? Mr. PUGH. It is not debt; it is in the nature of a penalty. 1 say it is to the shame of Kentucky that the offense, result- ing in that character of case, is only punished by a fine. I will go hand in hand with any man in punishing that as it deserves. Mr. MCHENRY. I believe we both agree on this subject, but the point with me is, if we adopt the amendment of the Delegate, we take it out of the power of the Legislature. Mr. PUGH. I beg your pardon; you do not comprehend the scope of my amend- ment offered this morning. I modified my former amendment to meet your objection, and it is now approved by the Chairman of the Committee. Mr. MCHENRY. I thought it was your old amendment. Mr. PUGH. I call the yeas and nays on this amendment. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I second it. Mr. BULLITT. The proposition made by the gentleman I regard as unwise, for the reason that as the law now stands no man can be imprisoned for debt, unless he is about to abscond from the Common- wealth, carrying assets with him. That is the only imprisonment allowed by the law as it now stands, or by the report of the Committee or by the old Bill of Rights. I understand, from the reading of the amendments proposed, that if a man has perpetrated a fraud in the transaction of business out of which the debt arises, that he may be imprisoned for debt. The law now allows him, although he may have perpetrated a fraud in the transaction of business out of which the debt arises, after he renders a schedule of his assets to be released from prison, and he cannot be punished for fraud in that way; but if he is to be punished for that fraud, it must be by indictment and trial in a Court of justlce. Why the gentleman wants to take away from the citizen that right, I cannot understand. We have the right now to hold him as long as there is a vestige of property anywhere that may possibly be reached; that he may be forced to produce and sur- render by being put in prison; but when he surrenders that property, he ought to be turned loose, unless the offense which he has committed shall be sufficient to author- ize an indictment and punishment. Mr. PUGH. mit a question‘? Mr. BULLITT. Yes, sir. Mr. PUGH. I ask you to state if, in a large majority of cases, that persons who are arrested under bail writ are not those Will the gentleman per- BILL OF RIGHTS. 13 ‘Thursday,] .. stances ? BULL1TT—PUeH-C LARDY. [N ovember 13 . who have no property whatever but what 'is exempt; and if it is not used as a means --of oppression to exact from them what the law would'not require under other circum- Do they not frequently surren- der up property exempt rather than suffer imprisonment for ten days ? Mr. BULLITT. I will tell you my expe- rience: that if a man is secreting property, or is believed to be secreting property bya cred- itor, and is absconding with it, the creditor may have him put in jail, and compel him to :surrender a schedule of his property under oath. Then there is another clause, where imprisonment for debt is authorized, and ‘that is where some man, who is a vicious- disposed individual, goes about slandering :some female member of a man’s family, and after obtaining judgment for slander against him, if the man has no property, he then may be imprisoned; but that is .after a judgment and trial-in Court. Mr. PUGH. But do you not measure his right to liberty by the simple fact of whether he has any property or not‘? Mr. BULLITT. After he has been put in jail under that character of a judgment, after he has had his day in Court, and after he has failed to show any defense, then he is sent to jail unless he pays the fine or _judgment obtained by plaintiff ; but even in that character of case, after he renders his .schedule, he cannot keep him there any longer than ten days. Now I think the law had better stand just where it is. I do not believe we ought to be piling up these , obstructions to the people who are poor and not able to pay their debts, but let them go :away and go to work and make money to pay their debts ; turn them out of jail; do not keep them in jail at the instance of a ‘creditor, but let them go to work and help support their families, and if they can make enough to support their families and pay their debts, let the debts be paid. Mr. CLARDY. It does appear to me 'that the matters in‘ this Bill of Rights have been fully and amply discussed. They have been discussed in the Committee of the Whole section by section, and clause by clause, and have also been discussed in the Convention. Now, it appears to me if we are not all’ convinced as to what we should have in our Bill of Rights now, we “ would not be convinced, though one rose from the dead.” I move the previous question on this section, and on the entire Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman can move the previous question on the whole matter, if he desires. Mr. CLARDY. I do that so that we can stop talking and get through with this matter. Mr. PUGH. Will the gentleman with- draw the motion for the previous question for one suggestion? Mr. CLARDY. Mr. PUGH. I simply want to say, so that the Delegate can understand the scope of my substitute; that I permit the Legis- lature to prescribe penalties for punish- ments in all matters of tort or fraud. My substitute does not take away any power of the Legislature; but I draw the line against the abstract principle of imprison- ment for debt. Mr. CLARDY. I did not yield the floor for anybody to make a speech, and I insist on the previous question. Mr. MACKOY. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him a question? Mr. CLARDY. Yes, sir. Mr. MACKOY. I would like to know when you returned to the discharge of your duty in this Convention? Mr. CLARDY. I have been in my place about as punctually as any other Dele- gate of the Convention, and a great deal more so than the gentleman who asked me the question. Mr. BRONSTON. Will you allow me to ask a question? Do you mean to change the rule to which we have been adhering for the last two or three days? It was un- derstood that this Committee‘s report swould be perfected, and then there should Certainly. 14 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] CLARDY—HENDRICK—FUNK . [November 13, be an opportunity given to perfect the sub- stitutes offered by the Delegate from Scott and the Delegate from Marion. Now, un- der this motion, the Convention will cer- tainly deny to those gentlemen the right for which they have so patiently waited. Mr. CLARDY. I simply wish to say that I do not deny to any gentleman the right to perfect his report. The object of my motion is to stop the discussion. We have had an ample supply of that, and the object of my motion is to stop the discus- sion and get to voting. — Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a Parlia- mentary inquiry. I understand the gen- tleman from Christian county moved the previous question on the pending Bill and all amendments, Does that out off all other amendments? The PRESIDENT. It does. Mr. HENDRICK. If that is so, I would like to offer an amendment before that motion is made. Mr. FUNK. I have an amendment to offer. Mr. MACKOY. I think we had better move that the roll be called, and each gen- tleman put in his amendment. Mr. GLEN N. I would like to inquire of the Chair what the effect of the previous question will be with reference to the sub- stitutes offered by the Delegates from Ma- rion and Scott? The PRESIDENT. If the Convention orders the main question, the Convention will immediately proceed to vote on the pending amendments, first to the report of the Committee, and then upon the pending amendments to the first substitute, and after the first substitute is perfected by the Convention, the vote will then be on the adoption of the substitute. If the first sub- stitute is voted down, the Convention will take up the second substitute, and, after perfecting it by passing on the pending amendments, the vote will then be on its adoption, and, then, upon the final adoption of whatever is agreed upon. Mr. GLENN. Will there be any other amendments permitted to those already offered to those substitutes‘? The PRESIDENT. No, sir; the effect of the previous question will be to cut off all debate and all amendments, and only the amendments will be voted on which are already offered. Mr. HARRIS. I would like to offer an amendment. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, the gentleman has leave to offer the amendment. .Mr. COX. On the motion for the pre- vious question, I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. CLARDY. I second it. The result of the roll-call was as fol~ lows: YEAS—4I. Allen, C. T. . Lewis, W. W. Allen, M. K. Martin, W. H. Amos, D. C. McElroy, W. J. Auxier, A. J. McHenryfH. D. Ayres, W. W. Miller, W. H. Beckham, J. C. Moore, J. H. Bennett, B: F. Moore, Laban T. Berkele, Wm. Muir, J. W. Birkhead, B. T. O’Hara, R. H. Blackwell, Joseph Pettit, Thos. S. Boles, S. H. Rodes, Robert Brents, J. A. Smith, H. H. Brummal, J. M, Swango, G. B. Burnam, Curtis F. Trusdell, George Clardy, John D. Twyman, I. W. Cox, H. West, J. F. Durbin, Charles Whitaker, Emery Field, W. W. Williams, L. P. V. Forrester, J. G. Young. Bennett H. Funk, J. T. Mr. President Clay- Lassing, L. W. anus—38. Beckner, W. M. Kirwan, E. E. Blackburn, James Knott, J. Proctor. Bronston, C. J. Mackoy, W. H. Brown, J. S. May, John S. Buchanan, Nathan M cDermott, E. J. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, Will DeHaven, S. E. Montgomery, J. F“ Elmore, T. J. Nunn, T. J. Farmer. H. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Forgy, J. M. Petrie, H. G. Glenn, Dudley A. Phelps, John L. BILL OF RIGHTS. ~ 15 Thursday,] HExnRIcx—W'ooD—McDERMoTT. [November 13 , Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Harris,Geo. C. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Hendrick, W. J. Ramsey, W. R. Holloway, J. W. Smith, W. Scott James, A. D. Straus. F. P. Johnston, P. P. Wood, J. M. Kennedy, Hanson Woolfolk, J. F. ABSENT—21. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, J. S. Askew, J. F Hines, Thomas H. Bourland, H. R. Hogg, S. P. Buckner, S. B. Hopkins, F. A. Coke, J. Guthrie Jacobs, R. P. Jonson, Jep. C. McChord, Wm. C Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Washington, George Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Doris, W. F. Edrington, W. J. English, Sam. E. Graham, Samuel Mr. HENDRICK. I desire to offer a section in place of the “liberty of con- science” section. The PRESIDENT. That is out of or— der. > Mr. WOOD. We have the honor and pleas- ure of having present with us to-day, as our distinguished guests, two of the surviving members of the Constitutional Convention of 1849. Although a generation has come and gone since the adoption of that price- less Constitution which they gave to us, we are still a happy and prosperous people under its wise provisions, and in order to give each member an opportunity to make the acquaintance of the venerable men who have honored us with their presence to-day, I think it is right and proper for them to have that opportunity now. I, therefore, move a recess of ten minutes. The two Delegates we have with us are Governor Meriwether, of Jefl’erson county, and Col. W. R. Thompson, of Bullitt. Upon a vote being taken, the motion for a recess was carried. ' Mr. McDERMOTT. I offer a resolu- tion. The resolution was read, and is as fol- lows: Resolved, That the following resolution be passed, engrossed on parchment and signed by the President of the Convention, and presented to this day’s guests of the Convention, namely: FRANKFORT, KY., ' November 13, 1890. Be it resolved by the Constitutional Con- vention of K'entucky this day assembled That we are glad to have the pleasure and the honor of having with us the Honorable David Meriwether, and the Honorable W. R. Thompson and the Honorable J oh‘n D. Morris, three worthy members of the Con- stitutional Convention of 1849. and highly venerated citizens of our Commonwealth to-day; that we wish them many more days of health, usefulness and public es- teem. and hope that their honorable lives may be an enduring example of good citi- zenship to their families and to all the com- ing generations of the State. By a standing vote, the resolution was unanimously adopted. The PRESIDENT. Honored Sirs : In behalf of the Convention, I extend to you a most cordial greeting and hearty welcome. We hope that your visit will be a source of great pleasure to you, and, in conclusion, let me say that we feel very much flattered and honored by your presence. HON. DAVID MERIWETHER. As the senior surviving member of the last Constitutional Convention, it devolves upon me to tender to this Convention thanks for the courtesies which have been extended to all of us. There are but a fragment left of the Convention of 1849; I earnestly hope that forty-one years hence there may be a much larger number of the present Dele- gates surviving to be congratulated upon their work. Forty-one years ago we occu- pied the places you now occupy. After the completion of our work it was sub- mitted to a vote of the people, and it re- ceived a majority of the voters of the State of Kentucky of over fifty thousand. We trust that your labors may receive a still larger majority than did ours. We hope that when your labors are ‘concluded you will do as we did—submit your work to a vote of the people of the State. Permit me, Mr. President, to extend to you the thanks of all of us for the courteous man- 16 BILL OF RIGHTS. THOMPSON—WOOD. [November 13 . Thursday,] ner in which you have received us. (Ap- plause). HON. W. R. THOMPSON. It has been forty-one years since the Convention of 1849-50 met in this hall, and of the one hundred men then present, their remnant you see here, or those who are able to get here. I believe there are seven of us still living, but only two have made their ap- pearance. As Governor Meriwether has just said, after our labors were closed we passed aresolution submitting the Consti- tution framed to the people, who are the sovereigns in this country, and they adopted that Constitution by a vote of fifty- one thousand and three hundred and fifty majority. It will be just so with your labors. if you fulfill the wishes of the people they will sanction, your work as they did ours, and probablydby an increased majority. We are governed by the will of the people. The people are sovereigns in this country. ThlS is a gov- ernment of the people. When we met here nearly all the offices of the State were in the gift of the Governor. The people claimed that the bestowal of those offices should be returned to them. We returned them, and the result was they ratified our work. I would suggest to this Convention that, in making the Constitution, keep with- in the limits of the desire of the people. They are the sovereigns in this country If the people want a thing they ask for it, they demand it; and if this Convention will pursue that course,I have no doubt their work will be ratified by as large or larger majority than ratified the Constitu- tion of 1849-50. (Applause) Mr. WOOD. As there have been some letters received from the Delegates of the last Convention, who are now absent, I think it would be proper and right to have them read. I, therefore, motre that the letters which have been received from the Dele- gates to the Convention of 1849 be read. Letters were read, expressing regret at their inability to attend, from Ex-Governor Silas M. Woodson, Col. John B. Morris, Hon. Willis B. Machen and Hon. Richard H. Hanson, surviving members of the Con- vention of 1849. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Lewis county, providing that impris- onment for debt should no longer exist in the State, was again read. The result of theroll-call on the adoption of said amendment was as follows: YEAS—Bfi. Allen, M. K. Miller, .Will Auxier, A. J. Moore, Laban T. Bennett, B. F. Nunn, T. J. Birkhead, B. T. Parsons, Rob’t T. Blackwell, Joseph Petrie, H. G. Brents, J. A. Buchanan, Nathan Cox, H. Farmer, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Harris, Geo. C. James, A. D. Kennedy, . Hanson Knott, J. Proctor Lewis, W. W. May, John S. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, W. Scott West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Mr. President Clay mars—46. Allen, C. T. Amos, D. C. Askew, J. F. Ayres, W. W. Beckham, J. C. Berkele, Wm. Blackburn, James Boles, S. H. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Clardy, John D. DeHaven, S E. Durbin, Charles Elmore, T. J. Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Holloway, J. W. Johnston, P. P. Kirwan, E. E. Lassing, L. W. Mackoy, W. H. Martin, W. H. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J H. O’Hara, R. H. Quicksall, J. E. Sachs, Morris A. Smith, H. H. Straus, F. P. Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. ABSENT—21. Applegate, Leslie T. Graham, Samuel Beckner, W. M. Hines, J. S. BILL ‘OF RIGHTS 17 Monroe in ERY—RAMSEY—HENDRICK. [November 13 . Thursday,] Bourland, H. R. Hines, Thomas H. Buckner, S. B. Hogg, S. P. Carroll, John D. Hopkins, F. A. Chambers, G. D. Jacobs, R. P. Jonson, Jep C. McChord, Wm. C. Muir, J. W. Spalding, I. A. Coke, J. Guthrie Doris, W. F. Edrington, W. J. English, Sam E. Washington, George. So the amendment was rejected. The next amendment was read, and is as follows: Strike out all of subsection 4, section 1. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I desire the in- dulgence of this Convention for the pur- pose of making a personal explanation. On the 24th of last month, in Committee of the Whole. I offered some remarks on this amendment. I would not say any thing further upon the subject, except for the manner in which the printed proceed- ings have these remarks reported. The part of the section that I proposed by the amendment to strike out is subsection 4 of section 1 of the Committee’s report upon Preamble and Bill of Rights, and reads: “The right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions.” That is all that I proposed to strike out by the amendment, and that is all that my remarks related to. But the report of what I did say upon that subject, by some means or other—I do not _know how it happened—show that I had, as the basis of my remarks, section 4 of the report of the Committee on Bill of Rights, which secures liberty of conscience, to which I had no objection. I merely make this correction: that liberty of conscience was not what I referred to, but was en- tirely foreign to what I was talking about, and what I meant by my remarks. I wish to set myself straight upon the record. A vote being being taken on the amend- ment, it was rejected. The next amendment was one proposed by the Delegate from Simpson as a substi- tute for section 2. The PRESIDENT. That amendment is not in order, as a substitute has already been adopted for section 2. Report the next amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Laurel (Mr. Ramsey), as follows: Amend section 15 by inserting after the word “prisoners,” and before the word “shall,” in the first line of said section, the following words, “before conviction,” so that said section will then read: "All pris- oners, before conviction, shall be bailable,” etc. “r. RAMSEY addressed the Chair. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Laurel understands that debate is not in order. The Delegate can only make an explanation by unanimous consent. DELEGATES. Object. Object. A vote being taken on the adoption of the amendment, it was rejected. The next amendment, which was also offered by the Delegate from Laurel, was read, and is as follows: Amend section 10 by inserting in the fourth line thereof, immediately following the word “ witnessess,” and before the word “that,” the following words: “And the as- sistance of counsel for his defense.” A vote being taken on the amendment, it was rejected. The substitute ofi'ered by Mr. Rodes for section 4 was read, and is as follows: No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry against his consent. No human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religion, society, denomination or mode of worship; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed. But the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or afiirmations, or excuse acts of licentiousness. The civil rights, privileges and capacities of any person shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion. Mr. HENDRICK. I will ask that the substitute, as offered by myself for that see- 18 BILL or RIGHTS. Thursday,] BRoNsToN-MoDERMoTT-BULLITT. [November 13 . tion, be read in that connection for infor- mation. The Reading Clerk read the same, as follows: N 0 man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry against his consent, or to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; that no human authority ought in case what- ever to control or interfere with the rights of conscience; that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious society or mode of worship; that the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no citizen shall in nowise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion. The READING CLERK. Section 4, as it now stands, which is the substitute pro- posed by the Committee of the Whole, as amended, reads—- Mr. BRONSTON (interrupting). I beg pardon, it is not the substitute proposed, but the substitute adopted. The PRESIDENT. That is substan- tially the same. The same‘- was read, and is as follows: No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomina- tion, nor to any particular creed, mode of worship, or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend to any place of worship, or to contribute to the erection of or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any Minister of religion, nor shall any man be compelled to send his child or children to any school to which he may be conscien- tiously opposed; and the civil rights, priv- ileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away or in anywise diminished or enlarged on account of his belief or disbe- lief of any religious tenet, dogma or teach- ing. ' A vote being taken on the substitute of the Delegate from Warren, it was re- jected. The PRESIDENT. Report the substi- tute of the Delegate from Fleming. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I think I have one that comes before that. The PRESIDENT. The Chair does not wish to displace your substitute if it was presented first to the Convention. Report the one that is in order. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of Mr. McDermott, being the next in order, as follows : Add to the end of section 4 of the Com- mittee’s report, these words: “ No human authority shall in any case whatever con- trol or interfere with the rights of con- science. Mr. MODERMOTT. That is in the old Constitution. I substitute “ shall ” for “ ought,” and the gentleman from Warren and the gentleman from Marion are both individually willing that my amendment should be incorporated in the section. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment. Mr. STRAUS. I demand the yea-s and nays on that. Mr. BULLITT. I second the call. The section, as amended by the Delegate from Louisville, was read, as follows: And the civil rights, privileges or capaci- ties of no person shall be taken away or in any wise diminished or enlarged on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching, and no human authority shall, in any case whatever, con- trol or interfere with the rights of con- science. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I want to put intothe section, as amended, the two lines in the old Bill of Rights—two lines which the gentleman from Warren, Chairman of the Committee, is willing to accept—two lines which the gentleman from Marion is willing to accept. The amendment simply protects fully the rights of conscience, which has always hitherto been protected in the Commonwealth. If it is extended to them, and is in the old Constitution, it can do nobody any harm. Mr. HEN DRICK. Your amendment simply perfects, in your view, the report of the Committee of the Whole. I will ask you if my substitute is not the old Bill of Rights, with the addition that no man shall be compelled to send his child to a school, etc. BILL OF RIGHTS. 19 Thursday,] McDERMoT'r-HENnmcK. [November 13 , Mr. MCDERMOTT. We have adopted the section as drawn by the Delegate from Marion. There is no use of traveling around in a circle. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll on the amendment, and the result of the vote was as follows: YEAs—7 Allen, C. T. Kirwan, E. E. Amos, D. C. Knott, J. Proctor Askew, J. F. Lassing, L. W. Auxier, A. J. Mackoy, W. H. Ayres, W. W. Martin, W. H. Beckham, J. C. May, John S. Beckner, W. M. McDermott,’?EiJ. Bennett, B. F. McElroy, W. J. Berkele, Wm. MeHenry, H. D. Birkhead, B. T. Miller, Will Blackwell, Joseph Montgomery, J. F. Boles, S. H. Moore, J. H. Brents, J. A. Moore, Laban T. Bronston, C. J. Muir, J. W. ' Brown, J. S. Nunn, T. J. Buchanan, Nathan O’Hara, R H. Buckner, S. B. Pettit, Thos. S. Bullitt, W. G. Phelps, Jon L. Burnam, Curtis F. Phelps, Zack Clardy, John D. Pugh, Sam’l J. Cox, H. Quicksall, J. E. Durbin, Charles Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam E. Smith, H. H. Farmer, H. H, Smith, W. Scott Field, W. W. Straus, F. P. Forgy, J. M. Swango, G. B. Funk, J. T. Trusdell, George Goebel, William Twyman, I. W. Harris, Geo. C. West, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas IL Whitaker, Emery Williams, L P. V. Hogg, S. P. Wood, J. M. Holloway, J. W. Woolfolk, J. F. James. A D. Young, Bennett H. Kennedy, Hanson Mr. President Clay. NAYs—12. Allen, M. K‘. Johnston, P. P. Blackburn, James Lewis, W. W. Brummal, J. M. Miller, W H. Forrester, J. G. Parsons. Robt. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Petrie, H. G. Hanks, Thos. H. Ramsey, W. B. :ABSENT-—-16. Applegate, Leslie T. Graham, Samuel Bourland, H. R. Hines, J. S. Carroll, John D. Hopkins, F. A. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie DeHaven, S. E. Dorris, W. F. Edrington, W. J. So the amendment was adopted. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of the Delegate from Bullitt: Strike out of section 4 the following words: “To which he may be conscientious- ly opposed.” ' Mr. HENDRICK. I would ask that my substitutes be considered in connection with the section, an amendment to which has just been voted down. The PRESIDENT. The Chair calls at- tention to the fact that this substitute was adopted by the Convention, and inserted by a vote of the Convention in lieu of the original proposition, and is no longer sub- ject to amendment. Mr. HENDRICK. This is not a sub- stitute which was adopted by the Commit- tee of the VVhole. The substitute in the form in which I have presented it Was not voted upon in Committee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate does not understand. The Chair was not aware of the fact that the matter had been adopt- ed by the Convention, and allowed the vote upon the last proposition without re- gard to that fact; and if the point had been made, he would have ruled the last amend- ment out of order, and also the previous substitute; and as his attention is now called to the fact, he rules the substitute out of order, as the matter now in the original re- port has been adopted by the Convention. Mr. HENDRICK. Do I understand the Chair to rule my substitute out of order‘? The PRESIDENT. Certainly; because the Convention has already adopted that section as- it’ now stands in the report. Mr. HENDRICK. Then I move to reconsider the vote by which the Conven- ti on passed the section referred to. Mr. STRAUS. I call for the reading of my amendment. if it is in order. 4 The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob. Jacobs, R. P. Jonson, J ep. C. McChord, Wm. C. Spalding, I. A. Washington, George 20 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] H ENDRICK—STRAUS. [November 13_ jection, the Secretary will read the amend- ment of the Delegate from Bullitt. The Reading Clerk read the amendment again. Mr. HENDRICK. I ask leave to ex- plain the attitude, as I understand the ruling of the Chair The PRESIDENT. The Chair will ex- plain the amendment. The amendment of the Committee of the ‘Whole embodies the proposition which is now in the report. That amendment was voted upon by this Convention, and by a vote of this Conven- tion was inserted in lieu of the correspond- ing section, which was first reported by the Committee upon the Preamble and Bill of Rights. Therefore this Convention has perfected that section in the shape in which it now is, and it is not subject to any fur- ther amend by substitute or otherwise. Mr. HENDRICK. My motion is to re- consider the vote by which the Convention passed that section. The PRESIDENT. The motion is in order. Mr. HEN DRICK. I wish to explain, in order that the Convention may vote in- telligently upon it, that the substitute offered by me has never been voted upon, as it is now presented either by the Com- mittee of the Whole or the Convention. The substitute as offered by me is the old section of the Bill of Rights in the present Constitution, with this modification—that it contains the amendment which was offered by the Delegate from Clark, in- serting it as a part of it, and leaves the entire section as it is now in the Constitution, with the amendment of the Delegate from Clark added. The first two lines of the old Bill of Rights are already included in one subsection of the Com- mittee’s report. Leaving that out, my sub- ltitute is simply the old Bill of Rights, with the amendment which was offered by the Delegate from Clark, and both of which were voted upon separately. My mo- tion now is to reconsider. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state upon a reconsideration of what he has said, that he changes his mind as to whether a motion to reconsider is now in order; be- cause he was not then keeping in mind that the previous question had been ordered. The effect of the previous question is to cut off the motion to reconsider. The mo- tion to reconsider cannot be made until the previous question is exhausted. Then the steps will have to be retraced. Mr. HENDRICK. Cannot ‘it be done by unanimous consent? Mr. STRAUS. I object. Mr. HENDRICK. Do I understand that the ruling of the Chair cuts off my amendment? The PRESIDENT. It certainly does. Mr. HENDRICK. Why did it not cut off the amendment of the gentleman from Louisville? The PRESIDENT. Because the point had not been made. The Chair would have ruled it out of order if the point had been made. Mr. STRAUS. Do I understand that the amendment of the Delegate from Louis- ville to the section and just adopted was out of order? The PRESIDENT. If the point had been made, the Chair would have ruled it out of order; but the Convention has adopted it, and it will stand. Mr. STRAUS. N obody has made a point of order against the amendment 1 have offered. The PRESIDENT. The Chair makes it. It is his duty to make points of order when members do not The Chair was not aware of the fact until the Secretary re- minded him, and, as a matter of course, he did not have that point of order then in mind, but when he was made aware of the fact, it is the duty of the Chair to enforce the rules. Report the'next amendment. Mr. HENDRICK. If in order, I move to reconsider the vote by which the previ- ous question was ordered. BILL OF RIG HTS. 21 Thursday,] BRONSTON—TRUSDELL—HENDRICK. [November 13 . The PRESIDENT. The order for the previous question is partly executed, and the motion to reconsider cannot now be made. The motion to reconsider can nly be made immediately after voting upon the previous ‘question. The Reading Clerk was about to read the amendment offered by the Delegate from Covington to section 12, when Mr. BRONSTON. I call attention ot the Chair to the fact that section 12 has been adopted by the Convention. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will rule the amendment out of order. Report the next amendment. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from the county of Campbell moves the following as a substitute for section 24 Mr. BRONSTON. I call attention of the Chair to the fact that section 24 has been adopted by the Convention. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary in- forms the Chair that it has not been adopted. Mr. BRONSTON. I beg the Secretary’s pardon. There was a motion to strike out, and that motion was defeated. The PRESIDENT. Still that allows it to be amended. The Convention never adopted it. It rejected the motion to strike it out, but it did not by that vote declare that it could not afterwards amend it It did not adopt it in the shape in which it is, so the motion is in order. The Secretary reported it, as follows: Involuntary servitude in this State shall not exist, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. Mr. TRUSDELL. One word by way of explanation: As the mention of the word “slavery” in any part of the new Constitution seems to be objectionable to a number of Delegates, and in order to avoid the objectionable word, and at the same time to retain the meaning of the 24th sec— tion of the Committee’s report, this substi- tute is ofrered. I I l I 0 Mr. HENDRICK. I rise to a point of order. I am sure the Chair will relieve the Convention of the dilemma in which it has been placed. If the Chair will turn to Rule 33, he will read the following: “A motion for reconsideration shall be in order at any time;” and when this rule was re- ported, my friend, the Delegate from Henry, offered an amendment that it should not be in order after a certain time. The Chair- man of the Committee on Rules very prop- erly suggested that in a matter of great importance in which we are engaged, the motion for reconsideration should be in order at any time. Under Rule 33, a motion for reconsideration shall be in order at any time; and it seems to me that that rule, as adopted by the Committee on Rules, would obviate the objection which seems to prevail with the Chair, So I rise to the pointlof order, that a motion to'reconsider the vote by which the Convention adopted the section to which I ofi'ered asubltitute, is still in order, or in any event a motion is still in order to reconsider the vote by which the Convention adopted the previous ques- tion. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that that rule is to be taken in con-_- nection with another rule, which is Rule 29: “The previous question being moved and seconded,” &c. “When adopted, the effect of the previous question shall be to put an end to all debate, except the right of the proposer of the measure under con- sideration to close the debate, the length of time to be fixed by the Convention, and bring the Convention to a direct vote upon amendments reported by a Committee, if any; then upon pending amendments, and then upon the main question.” Therefore, the Chair’ decides that no motion can be made, during the pendency of the previous question, until that question is exhausted, except the motion to adjourn. The Reading Clerk read the amendment again. 22 BILL OF RIGHTS. Thursday,] PETTIT—HENDRICK [November 13 . Mr. RAMSEY. I call for the yeas and nays on that. Mr. BERKELE. I second the call. The result of the vote was as follows: YEAS—32. Amos, D. C. Kirwan, E. E. Askew, J. F. Lewis, W. WV. Auxier, A. J. Mackoy, W. H. Blackburn, James Martin, W. H. Blackwell, Joseph Montgomery, J. F. Boles, S. H. Moore, J. H. Bronston, C. J. Muir, J. W. Brown, J. S. Petrie, H. G. Elmore, T. J. Phelps, Zack Forrester, J. G. Sachs, Morris A. Funk, J. T. Smith, H. H. Glenn, Dudley A. Smith, W. Scott Hanks, Thos. H. Swango, G. B, Hines, Thomas H. Trusdell, George Holloway, J. W. Twyman, I. wW. Johnston, P. P. Wood, J. M. NAYS—52. Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Allen, M. K. Kennedy, Hanson Ayres, W. W. Knott, J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. Lassing, L. W. Beckner, W . M. May, John S. Bennett, B. F. McDermott, E. J. Berkele, Wm. McElroy, W. J. Birkhead, B. T. McHenry, H. D. Brents, J. A. Miller, Will Brummal, J. M. Miller, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, Laban T. Buckner, S. B. Nunn, T. J. Bullitt, W. G. Parsons, Rob’t T. Burnam, Curtis F. Clardy, John D. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Cox, H. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Quicksall, J. E. Durbin, Charles Ramsey, W. R. English, Sam E. Rodes, Robert Farmer, H. H. Straus, F. P. Field, W. W. West, J. F. Forgy, J. M. Whitaker, Emery Goebel, William Williams, L. P. V. Harris, Geo. C. Woolfolk, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Young, Bennett H. Hogg, S. P. Mr. President Clay. ~ ABSENT—~16. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, J. S. Bourland, H. R. Hopkins, F. A. Carroll, John D. Jacobs, R. P. Chambers, G. D. Jonson, J ep C. Coke, J. Guthrie McChord, Wm. C. Doris, W. F. O’Hara, R. H. Edrington, W. J. Spalding, I. A. Graham, Samuel Washington, George So the amendment was rejected. M r. PETTIT. I move you that section ‘24 be adopted. The PRESIDENT. That motion is not in order, because we are simply perfecting the report of the Committee. After"-that is perfected, then the substitute offered by the Delegate from Marion is taken up and per- fected; then the vote is upon the substitute as against the original report; then upon all substitutes and pending amendments; then upon a call for division, the vote can be on any part of the original report. Mr. PETTIT. I rise to a question of privilege, affecting the proceedings of the Convention. Yesterday the gentleman from the Fourth District of the city of Louisville requested that his speech, which he delivered just before the close of the session, be omitted from our printed pro- ceedings. Mr. MoHEN RY. Is that in order while we are executing the previous question? The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that under the previous question the gen- tleman has no right to the floor, and he cannot, therefore, rise to a privileged ques- tion, or make any motion whatever, except a motion to adjourn under the rules. Mr. PETTIT. I call the attention of the Chair to the fact that a privileged question, and especially one afl'ecting the proceedings of the Convention, is always in order The PRESIDENT (interrupting). It would be all right, if the gentleman had the floor; but the previous question has the floor. Mr. PETTIT. -———Especially as this may work very great detriment to the proceedings of this Convention. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the gentleman proceeding‘? DELEGATES. Object! Object! Mr. PETTIT. I shall not take three minutes. DELEGATES. Object! Object! Mr. BECKHAM. I move that the Convention do now adjourn. The motion being put, was carried; and the Convention thereupon adjourned... iomoention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1. FRANKFORT, NOVEMBER 14. 1890. N0. 52 Friday,] STRAUS—GOEBEL—FUNK. [November 14. The Convention was called to order by rthe President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Darsie. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings 'was read and approved. Petitions, Etc. M r. STRAUS. The Legislative Committee desires to have the gentleman from Oldham added to that Committee, in view of the fact that the Chairman of that Committee has been sick for some time, and is still sick. I, 'therefore,'move that the gentle man from Oldham be added to the Legisla- tive Committee. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. Mr. GOEBEL. I rise to a point of order on the ruling made by the Chair yesterday. The PRESIDENT. Had not the gen— tleman better wait until that matter is before the Convention? Mr. GOEBEL. Very well. Mr. FUNK. I have a resolution, which I desire to offer, and have immediate action on it. The PRESIDENT. The resolution is not in order. The first thing in order is the reception of petitions. Mr. GRAHAM. I have a petition ask- ing that a clause be inserted in the Consti- tution providing that convicts shall not work outside the walls of the Penitentiary; that they shall be kept within the walls as ordered by the sentence passed upon them. I ask reference to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. The PRESIDENT. The petition will be so referred. Mr. GRAHAM. I also have a report from Marshall and Lyon counties on the fees paid to jailers. The PRESIDENT. That will be re- ferred to the Special Committee of which the Delegate from Anderson is Chairman. Mr. BURNAM. I have a communica- tion from the Clerk of the Madison County Court showing the sums of money paid to J ailers in 1889-90. The PRESIDENT. The same reference will be made. Mr. BRUMMAL. I have a similar re- port from the Clerk of the Fulton County Court. The PRESIDENT. The same reference will be made. Mr. O’HARA. I have a communication from the Clerk of the Grant County Court. The PRESIDENT. The same reference will be made. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have similar communications from Muhlenberg and Grayson counties which I ask to be so re- ferred. The PRESIDENT. The same reference will be made. Mr. NUNN. I have a communication from the Clerks of Crittenden and Living- stcn counties as to the indebtedness of those counties. The PRESIDENT. They will be re- ferred to the same Committee. Mr. BLACKWELL. I have a similar communication from the Clerk of the Owen County (‘ourt. The PRESIDENT. That will be re- ferred to the same Committee. Mr. PETTIT. I rise to a privileged N.‘ PETITION S. Friday,] STRAITS—PETTIT—FUNK. [November 14. question, one which afi'ects the dignity-of its proceedings. Day before yesterday the gentleman from the Fourth District of the city of Louisville requested that his speech delivered just before the close of the Con- vention on that day be omitted from the published Record. Fearing that may be done, I now wish to enter my objection to that request. lt recounted the enterprise and public spirit that made successful one of the grandest undertakings in our State. It places on record the skillful engineering of a bridge-way which is the marvel of this scientific age. It exhibits to mankind what pluck, energy and skill can accomplish in Kentucky‘? , Mr. STRAUS. I make the point of order that there must be some motion made. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman claims he rises to a privileged question. Mr. STRAUS. I want the motion he proposes stated, so that I can judge of the propriety of the remarks. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate will indicate the nature of the motion. Mr. PETTIT. I rise to make objection to the request of the gentleman from the Fourth District, and I am stating the rea- sons why I object. Mr. STRAUS. That is not a privileged question. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from the city of Louisville did not insist upon his request. Mr. PETTIT. I want to indelibly im- press in the history of Kentucky that the gentleman who gave life and vitality to that great public improvement is a native of her soil and an honored Delegate in this Convention; that we appreciate the man for his adventurous spirit, his kindly gen- erosity, his uniform courtesy. Our State would be more progressive, every valley and hill-top would be dotted by a school and a church, and humanity would be ‘ thrice happier,” were it blessed with more men like our colleague, Bennett H. Young, ( Applause.) Mr. FUNK. I offer a resolution. The resolution was read, and is as fol- lows: Resolved, That the Committee on Rules be requested to fix the per diem of the em- ployes of this Convention, and report same to this Convention Tuesday, November 18th. A vote being taken, the resolution was adopted. The CLERK. The Delegate from the- County of Simpson ofl'ers the following: Resolved. That while it has afforded this- Convention great pleasure, heretofore, to- accept the kind and courteous invitations extended to it to visit cities and other places- in this State—especially as the acceptance- heretofore did not materially interfere with. its business—it is now the sense of this- Convention that any invitation that may hereafter be extended, which may tend to» interfere with its business, be most respect-- fully declined. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I think it will be- time enough to decline invitations when they are extended, and further than that, when this question of the removal of the Capital comes to us, it may be necessary for the Convention to visit some localities, Therefore, I hope this resolution will not carry. A vote being taken, the resolution was- rejected. Leaves of Absence. Leave of absence were granted to the‘- Delegates from Morgan and Caldwell. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move we resume the consideration of the report of the Com- mittee on Bill of Rights. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. Preamble and Bill of Rights. Mr. GOEBEL. I rise to a question of‘ order. It is in reference to the ruling of the Chair, yesterday, upon the amendment to the twelfth section of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Bill of Rights. BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 3 Friday,] MACKOY. [November 14. Ordinarily, I should acknowledge that the ruling of the Chair was proper; that a sub- stitute, having been adopted in the Commit- tee of the \Vhole for the original section, I as reported by the Committee, that substi- tute is not now subject to amendment; but that ruling was made by the Chair with- out consideration of the nature of the pend- ing amendment. As I understand it, that ruling would have been correct, if the amendment had attempted to strike out, or to change any language of the substituted section, as it stands, but there is nothing in the amendment of that sort. The amend- ment simply proposes additions to the sub— stituted section, and the point of order is, that it is proper to make that addition, even to substituted sections. The PRESIDENT. The Chair finds some conflict of authority upon the ques- tion. He is disposed to the rule of liberty of action in the Convention. Roberts’ Rules of Order states in reference to this matter, if a paragraph is inserted it should be perfected by its friends previous to voting on it, as when once inserted it can- not be struck out or amended except by an addition. Barclay’s Dlgest does not allow an addition; but as there is a difference of opinion, and the Chair wants to rule in the way of allowing the most liberal action, the Chair will rule that there can be addi- tions. . Mr. MACKOY. I rise to a point of order. It was not only adopted by the Committee of the Whole, but by the Con- vention. The PRESIDENT. Yes, that is not pertinent. The fact that it was adopted in the Committee of the Whole does not bind the Convention. The Committee of the Whole is like any other Committee. The Chair admits this subject was adopted by the Convention; but here is the authority, Roberts’ Rules of Order, which says, even after a substitute has been adopted or para- graph inserted in 'lieu of some other para- graph, although you cannot strike out or change that paragraph, still an amendment . by addition is allowed in that way. The Chair holds the point of order well taken. Mr. MACKOY. The point of order I make is this: I want to call the attention of the Chair to the proceedings that we have had in this Convention. The motion was made that this report should be taken up section by section, and each section has been acted upon and adopted in this man- ner; and the Chair has, upon several other occasions when the question has been made, ruled steadily that the section having been adopted, it was too late to go back and make even an addition to it, for the reason that we were proceeding with this section by section; then, when it was completed, it would be competent to offer a substitute. The PRESIDENT. If the gentleman were right in his premises, he would be right in his conclusions; but the rule of acting on the report section by section ap- plied only in the Committee of the Whole, and there is no rule whatever in the Con- vention to that efl'ect; and in acting upon this matter in Convention we have not been acting upon it section by section, but in the order in which the amendments were offered. The Chair ruled the other day upon Barclay’s Digest as authority, that no fur- ther amendment was allowable to a substi- tute after it had been adopted, not by the Committee of the Whole, but by the Con vention; but he is disposed now, in order to give the greatest liberty of action, as there are conflicting authorities, to modify his ruling to that extent and allow amend- ments by addition. Mr. MACKOY. There is this further thing, that it is too late to make that motion now; that should have been made at the time; and that the other matter having been disposed of, it is incompetent to make that motion now. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds the report is a unit, and until it is disposed of, any question as to the validity of an amendment being ruled out is in order. Mr. MACKOY. The ‘it self. Chair reverses 4 ' BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] MACKOY—PHELPS—DURBIN. [November 14. ‘The PRESIDENT. The Chair modi- fied his opinion to that extent. Mr. MACKOY. I desire to offer an ad- dition to section 2 of the Bill of Rights. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Covington must be unaware that the pre- vious question has been ordered, and these amendments referred to, as offered by the Delegate from the Second District, have already been offered. The Secretary will amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegatelfrom Russell, as a substitute for subsection 7 of section 1 : “ The right to bear arms, subject to the report the next . powers of the General Assembly to pass laws to prevent persons from carrying con- cealed arms. shall not be questioned.” A vote being taken the amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from the county of Logan: Amend section 24 as follows: In line one, section 24, after the word “slavery,” insert the following words, “shall never exist in this State,” and strike out the word “ are” after the word “State,” in the first line, and in- sert the word “is,” so that the section will read: “ Slavery shall never exist in this State, and involuntary servitude in this State is forbidden. except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Cov- ington, Mr. Goebel: Amend section 12 by adding after the word “ him,” in the first line, the following: “Without deduction on account of benefits to any land of the owner.” A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is the one proposed by the Delegate from Henderson : Strike out section 20. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. yeas and nays. Mr. DURBIN. I second it. The result of the roll-call was as follows : YEAS—16. Bennett, B. F. Blackwell, Joseph Buchanan, Nathan Cox, H. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Farmer, H. H. Forgy, J‘. M. Graham, Samuel Lassing, L. W. Lewis, W. W. MeHenry, H. D. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Mr. President Clay. NAYS—G7 . Allen, M. K. Amos, D. C. Askew, J. F. Auxier, A. J. Ayres, W. W. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Boles, S. H. Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Burn am, Curtis F. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie DeHaven, S. E. Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hogg, S. P. Holloway, J. W. Jacobs, R. P. James, A. D. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Kirwan, E. E. Knott, J. Proctor lWIackoy, W. H. Martin, W. H. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, WV. J. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. O’Hara, R. H. Petrie, H. G. Pettit, Thos. S. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Straus, F. P. Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. West, J. F. Whitaker, Err e1 Williams, L. Wood, J. M. -- Y i’ \’ . Woolfolk, J. F. ABSENT—17. Allen, C. T. Jonson, Jep. C. Applegate, Leslie T. McChord, W. C. On that I call the BILL OF RIGHTS. 5 Friday,] GoEBEL—Mxcxov. [November 14. Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. English, Sam. E. Hines, Thomas H. Hines, J. S. Hopkins, F. A. Hendrick, W. J. So the amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. _ The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Hen- derson: Parsons, Robert T. Quicksall, J. E. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Washington, George Young. Bennett H. Amend by adding “no one shall be re- quired to serve any term of apprenticeship, or obtain any diploma or certificate of pro- ciency, in order to engage in or practice any trade or profession in this Common- wealth.” A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. . The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Cov- ington (Mr. Goebel): Amend section ,12 by striking from the third line thereof the words “or applied to,” and inserting in lieu thereof the words “damaged, injured, or destroyed for.” The PRESIDENT. The Chair rules that amendment out of order, as it strikes out part of the substitute adopted by the Convention. Mr. GOE BEL. It seems to me it ought to be divided, and I ask that that be done. The PRESIDENT. You wantto change your amendment‘? Mr. GOEBEL. Yes, sir. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the gentleman can change his amendment. Report the amendment as changed. The CLERK. “Amend section 12, by inserting in the third line thereof the words, ‘damaged, injured or destroyed for.’ ” The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that amendment is not in order. It is an insertion in the substitute already adopted, and it is not in the way of an addition. Mr. GOEBEL. It is an addition to the whole section. The PRESIDENT. It is an insertion in the middle of an amendment already adopted by the Convention, and that is not an addition to it. Mr. GOEBEL. An addition means an addition to the subject matter, not an addi- tion to the end of the section. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that the meaning of the rule is, that it should be an addition at the end of the matter; but insertion is not in order. Mr. GOEBEL. It seems to me an inser- tion that does not strike out any thing is only an addition. An addition ought to be added where it would make sense in its natural position. I think the Chair ought to determine according to the subject-mat— ter, not merely to the order of words. It is a mere matter of arrangement. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds the amendment must be an addition to, and not an insertion in the middle of a substi- tute. Report the next amendment. Amend section 12 by adding after the word “him,” in the fifth line, the follow- ing: “And when property is so taken by or for a municipal subdivision of the Com- monwealth, no taxation other than a tax general to such municipal subdivision shall be levied or collected to reimburse payment made for the property taken. Mr. MACKOY. Is not that an inser- tion? The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds the amendment is not in order. The CLERK. The next amendment is an amendment offered by the Delegate from Covington (Mr. Goebel). Mr. GOEBEL. I withdraw that. The next amendmentpfi'ered by Delegate from Simpson, was read, and is as follows: Amend section 10 by adding: “But the right of the Commonwealth to a change of ' venue shall be limited to those counties in which such a state of lawlessness prevails as will prevent the peaceable holding of Courts.” - 6 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] AUXIER—STRAUS—KNOTT. November 14 , Mr. RODES. On that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. BERKELE. I second it. The section as reported by the Committee was read. > The result of the roll-call was as fol- lows: YEAS—I4. Amos. D. C. Mackoy, W. H. Brents, J. A. May, John S. Brummal, J. M. Miller, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Petrie, H. G. Forgy, J. M. Pugh, Sam’l J. Harris, Geo. C. Rodes, Robert Jacobs, R. P. Smith, W. Scott NAYS—68. Askew, J. F. Johnston, P. P. Auxier, A. J. Kennedy, Hanson Ayres, W. W. Kirwan, E. E. Beckham, J. C. Knott, J. Proctor Beckner, W. M. Lassing, L. W. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Berkele, Wm. Martin, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Boles, S. H. Miller, Will. Bourland, H. R. Montgomery, J. F. Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. Brown, J. S. Moore, Laban T. Buckner, S. B. Muir, J. W Burnam, Curtis F. Nunn, T J Clardy, John D. O’Hara, R. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Parsons, Robert T. Cox, H. Pettit,.Thomas S. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, John L. Doris, W. F. Phelps, Zack Durbin, Charles Ramsey,W. R. Edrington, W. J. Sachs, Morris A. Elmore, T. J. Smith, H. H. ' Field, W. W. Straus, F. P. Forrester, J. G. Swango, G. B. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hanks, Thomas H. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Hogg, S. P. Williams, L. P. V. Holloway, J. W. Woolfolk, J. F. James, A. D. Young, Bennett H. ' Jonson, Jep. C. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT-18. Allen, C. T. Hendrick, W. J. Allen, M. K. Hines, J. S. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, Thomas H. Bullitt, W. G. Hopkins, F. A. McChord, Wm. C. Quicksall, J. E. Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. Farmer, H. H. Washington, George Graham, Samuel Wood, J. M. So the amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. There are no more to the report of the Committee. The PRESIDENT. The amendments offered to the report of the Committee are voted upon and disposed of. The next thing in order is the substitute of the Dele- gate from Marion. Are there any amend- ments offered to it ‘2 The CLERK. There are not. The substitute of the Delegate from Marion was read. Mr. AUXIER. I have the honor of presenting Mr. J. D. Morris, who repre- sented the county of Christian in the Con- vention of 1849. He simply desires to take his seat among us. He wishes no ovation or response to any thing said. Mr. STRAUS. I move that the Con- vention take a recess of five minutes to en- able us to meet the gentleman. The question being taken thereon, it was decided in the affirmative. The Convention, after a short recess, again convened. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the substitute of the Dele- gate from Marion. Mr. KNOTT. And on that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. WOOD. I second it. The vote being taken, the substitute was rejected, the result of the roll-call being as follows: YEAS 9. Bennett, B. F. Straus, F. P. Buckner, S. B. Twyman, I. W. Knott, J. Proctor Wood, J. M. _ Moore, J. H. Woolfolk, J. F. Smith, H. H. NAYS—78. Allen, C. T. Ayres, 'W. W. Allen, M. K. Jacobs, R. P. Amos, D. C. James, A. D. Askew, J. F Jonson, Jep. C. BILL OF RIGHTS. ' 7 Friday,] ASKEW—KNOTT—BLACKBURN. [November 14. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Boles, S. H. Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Forrester. J. G. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. Hogg, S. P. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Kirwan, E. E. Lassing, L. W. Lewis, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. ‘ Martin, W. H. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. Miller, W. H. ' Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. O’Hara, R. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Petrie, H. G. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A.‘ Smith, W. Scott Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—13. Applegate, Leslie T. Holloway, J. W. Auxier, A. J. Hopkins, F. A. Brown, J. S. McChord, W. C. Chambers, G. D. Miller, Will. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. Hines, J. S. Hines, Thomas H. W'ashington, George The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the next amendment. NI r. ASKEW. We are new approach- ing the end of a long, and not an uninterest- ing fight. The party that has been some- times derisively, and sometimes in a praise- worthy spirit, called the “ Old Bill of Rights Party,” has contended for the essential prin- ciples of the old Bill of Rights, and had no pride of opinion. Mr. KNOTT. Is debate in order? The PRESIDENT. It is not in order. Mr. ASKEW. I expect to wind up by moving a resolution, and I want to explain the nature of it. Mr. KNOTT. I call for the regular order. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman from Marion insists upon the regular order, and debate is not in order. Mr. ASKEW I am not debating any thing. I wish somebody would tell me what I am debating. The Committee’s re- port,-as amended by the Convention, con- tains all the essential principles of the old Bill of Rights. Mr. KNOTT. I call for the regular order. Mr. ASKEW. Having gotten into that report essentially those principles, we now move the adoption of said report as amend- ed by this Convention. The PRESIDENT. Debate is not in order, and the adoption of the report does not have to be moved. It comes up as a matter of course. Mr. ASKEW. I withdraw my substi- tute for the reasons stated. _ The PRESIDENT. Is there any ob- jection to the withdrawal of the substitute‘? The Chair hears none, and the substitute is withdrawn. Mr. BLACKBURN. I would like to ask for information: whether that prevents any further amendment to the report of the Committee ‘? The PRESIDENT. It does until the previous question is exhausted. No motion to amend can be made until the previous question is exhausted. It carries the report of the Committee to its passage, and then the only way to amend is to -re- consider the vote by which the original re- port was adopted as amended. Then it is again open to amendment; but it can only be open to amendment by reconsideration of the vote by which it was adopted. The question is on the adoption of the report of the Committee as amended. A vote being taken, the report was adopted. 8 BILL OF RIGHTS. Friday,] M CHENRY—KNOTT—H ENDRICK. November 14 .. Mr. McHEN RY. I move to reconsider the vote by which the report was adopted, and I move to lay that motion on the table. Mr. KNOTT. I hope that motion will not prevail. We do not know at what time (and the gentleman will readily recur to the rule suggested by himself) it may be necessary for us to revise something that may be done, and I hope the motion will not prevail. Mr. HENDRICK. I want to give the Delegate notice that, by a ruling of the Chair, I was postponed until now in order to move a reconsideration of the vote by which a section was adopted, in order that a substitute I desire to ofiler might be of- fered. Mr. MCHENRY. My object is this: We have gotten through this thing now. I want to get clear of this subject, at least for awhile. Mr. STRAUS. I make the point of or- der that the motion is not debatable. The PRESIDENT. Did the gentleman make a motion to lay on the table‘? Mr. McHENRY. I did. I am not de- bating it. It can be taken up at any time by a two-thirds vote, and I insist upon my motion. The motion being put, was lost. The PRESIDENT. The motion to re- consider is now pending. M1. RODES. What is the object of that motion, if I am permitted to inquire? The PRESIDENT. The Chair does not understand the object of the motion. It is a Parliamentary motion he has a right to make. - Mr. HENDRICK. The object of the motion, so far as I am concerned, is simply to offer a substitute for one section. And I desire to say, in addition, I do not desire to debate it at all; that I wish the substitute reported by the Clerk, and voted upon im- mediately. Mr. KNOTT. There are several other amendments on which gentlemen might desire to have the same privilege. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objcc-- tion to having the gentleman’s substitute read‘? If none, the Secretary will report. it for information. Mr. FUNK. I would like to ask a ques-~ tion of the Chair. Does this open up the whole thing again? The PRESIDENT. The motion to re- consider is now pending. If the Conven~~ tion votes to reconsider the vote by which the report was adopted, it is then open to amendment at any point, provided the- amendment is Parliamentary. Mr. FUNK. That just simply takes us back to the beginning of the session. I hope it will not be done. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I demand the yeas- and nays on that motion. The PRESIDENT. In the first place, the Secretary will report the amendment of the Delegate from Fleming for informa-- tion. Mr. HENDRICK. By consent of the- Convention, the Clerk being unable to find my substitute, I can read it. will read as follows: “ That no man shall. be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship or maintain any min-- istry against his consent; nor shall he be compelled to send his child to any school to‘ which he may be conscientiously opposed; that no human‘ authority ought, in any case‘ whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no prefer-- ence shall ever be given by law to any religious societies or mode of worship.” Mr. MCHENRY. Is not that all in there ‘2 Mr. HENDRICK. No, sir. Mr. KNOTT. What is left out? Mr. MOORE. I desire the yeas and. nays. Mr. FUNK. I second it. M r. J. L. PHELPS. I desire to make a motion and state my reasons therefor. It may be that when the reports of the other Committees have been acted upon, that they will so change the Constitution that. My substitute ‘BILL or RIGHTS. 9 Friday,] BECKHAM—BURNAM—BRENTS. N ovember 14 . some change in the Bill of Rights might be necessary in order to harmonize with other parts of the Constitution. Therefore, if in order, I make this motion: that the motion now pending to _reconsider the vote by which the Bill of Rights was adopted shall be postponed until the reports from the other Committees have been acted upon. The PRESIDENT. That motion is in order. ' The motion being put, was carried. Mr. BECKHAM. Would it be in order, after that motion is carried, to move that the report be printed‘? ‘ ThePRESIDENT. It is in the province of the Convention to have any matter printed it pleases. Mr. BECKHAM. I move that 125 copies of the same be printed. The motion being seconded, was put and carried. Mr. BURNAM. The matter that was before the House, until it was overthrown by the demands for the original order, was that part of the report of the Joint Com- mittee on Executive Affairs, in which the House was discussing the proposition whether the right should exist in the Gov- ernor to grant pardons before conviction. That was the point I think that the House was considering. I move that we proceed with that order. Report of Joint Commzitee on Executive A fairs. Mr. BECKHAM. I move that the Con- vention now go into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of considering the Report of the Committee on Executive Affairs. The motion being put, was carried, and “ the Convention resolved itself into COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. The Delegate from Bullitt (Mr. Straus) took the Chair. Mr. BRENTS. When the Convention took a recess I went to my home— I The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will 4 desist until the Clerk reads the state of the business. ' The READING CLERK. The section under consideration, when last the matter was before the Committee of the Whole, was section 10, which reads: “He shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures; to commute sentences; grant reprieves and pardons, except in case of impeachment. In cases of treason he shall have power to grant reprieves until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, in which the power of pardoning shall be vested. But he shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sherifl“ or Common- wealth’s Attorney in penal or criminal cases.” To which section the Delegate from Henry moved the following amendment: Amend by adding after the word “power,” in the first line, the words “after judgment.” The Delegate from Caldwell moved to amend by striking out the words “the Clerk, Sheriff, or Commonwealth’s Attor- ney,” and inserting the words “of any per- )7 son. The Delegate from Fayette moved to amend section 10 by inserting, after the word “impeachment,” in the third line, the words: “And he shall file with each appli- cation a statement of the reasons for his decision thereon, which shall always be open to public inspection.” The Delegate from the city of Lexin'g ton offered the following as a substitute for the said section: The Governor shall have the power to grant reprieves, remissions, pardons and commutations of sentence, after conviction, for all ofi'enses except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions, and with such restrictions and limitations, as he may think proper. Upon conviction for treason, the Governor shall have power to suspend the execution of the sentence until the case shall be reported to the Gen- eral Assembly at its next meeting, when the General Assembly shall either pardon, direct the execution of the sentence, or grant a further reprieve. The Governor 10 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] AUXIER—BRENTS—BURNAM. [November 14 . shall indicate to the General Assembly, at .the beginning of every session, every case of reprieve, remission, pardon, or commu- tation of sentence, stating the name of the person convicted, the crime for which he was convicted, the sentence, its date, the date of pardon, reprieve, remission, or com- mutation, and the reasons for granting the same; but the Governor shall have no power to remit the fees of Clerk, Sheriff, or Commonwealth’s Attorney in penal or criminal cases. The Delegate from Caldwell offered, as an amendment to that substitute, the following : Strike out the words “Clerk, Sheriff, or Commonwealth’s Attorney,” and insert the words “of any officer.” The Delegate from Russell moved to amend said substitute as follows: Strike out the words “after conviction.” The Delegate from Pike moved to amend the substitute as follows: ' To strike from line two the words “ after conviction,” and to insert after the word “ proper,” in the fifth line, the words “but no reprieves, remissions, pardons, or com- mutations of sentence shall be granted until days’ notice of application therefor be given in a newspaper of general circula- tion in the county in which the offense has been committed.” . Mr. AUXIER. I desire to withdraw that amendment. The CHAIRMAN. Clerk gets through. The READING CLERK. The Dele— gate from Caldwell offered the following as .a substitute for section 10: Wait until the He shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, to commute sentence and grant pardons, except in cases of treason and im- peachment. In cases of treason, he may grant reprieves until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, in which department the power of pardoning shall be vested; but he shall have no power to remit the fees of any officer in penal or criminal cases. He shall keep in his office :a record of all remissions of fines and for- feitures, commutations of sentences and ‘grants of pardons, the reasons for, and the petitions for and letters referring to each, ‘ subject to inspection of all citizens of the ‘filtrate and to the call of the General Assem- . y, Mr. BRENTS. When the Convention took a recess I returned to my home, and itwas impossible for me to return to Frank- fort to be present last week when this re- port was under consideration, and I desire, if in order, to move to reconsider the vote by which sections 3 and 4 were adopted, in order that I may introduce an amendment to each. The CHAIRMAN. The motion to re- consider is out of order now. Mr. BRENTS. By unanimous consent it can be taken up. The CHAIRMAN. The motion is out of order, and the question is now on sec- tion 10 and pending amendments. ' Mr. BRENTS. Then I have an amend- ment to offer to section 10. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows: Amend section 10 by adding the follow-— ing: The General Assembly may provide by law for certifying the facts, and that reasonable notice shall be given to the County Attorney that application has been or will be made to the Governor for the ex- ercise of Executive clemency as herein pro- vided. Mr. BURNAM. Is that the only amendment ‘? The READING CLERK. No, sir There are several others. The CHAIRMAN. Read the first ‘ amendment. , The READING CLERK. The first amendment is that proposed by the Dele- gate from Caldwell: Strike out the words “ the Clerk, Sheriff‘ or Commonwealth’s Attorney,” and insert the words “ of any officer.” Mr. MCDERMOTT. I would like to have that question divided. I would like to strike the words out altogether, and give the Governor the right, when he remits any thing, to remit every thing. I do not think it ought to be made the interest of the Commonwealth’s Attorney to prosecute a ' man and get a judgment against him, and i make it absolutely immaterial to the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 11 Friday,] prosecutor whether the convict be par- doned or reprieved, or the judgment en- forced. The CHAIRMAN. Have you offered a motion to that effect‘? Mr. McDERMOTT. My amendment is to strike out the words “ but he shall have no power to remit the fees of Clerk, Sheriff or Commonwealth’s Attorney in penal or ‘criminal cases.” The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman had better put his amendment in writing. _ Mr. MoHENRY. Here is an amend- ment that I have drawn up, which is the same as the gentleman from. Louisville wanted, as I suppose. Mr. MGDERMOTT. I will say this, in addition to what I have said before: I think theGovernor should have the disinterested advice and the fair, impartial opinion of the ofiicers who were present when the trial was had, and who know the circumstances, and in order to get their perfectly disin- terested advice and opinion, I think we should free them from the desire to help on their election friends, perhaps, and at the same time save their fees. Mr. BURNAM. At the time the Con- vention laid aside this report, the matter that was then up was the proposition to take away from the Governor the power to exercise Executive clemency by way of pardon or reprieve before conviction; and there are so many amendments here now that Ido not know the order in which the discussion will proceed. I desire to say something upon that particular case. The CHAIRMAN. It is in order now to discuss the whole matter. The Reading Clerk read the amendment .of Mr. MeHenry, as follows: Amend section 10 by striking out all of said section after the word “ vested,” in the fifth line. Mr. BURNAM. At an early day I in- troduced a resolution asking that the Com- mittee presided over by the distinguished Delegate from Oldham MCDERMOTT—BURNAM. should, after a 1 [November 14 . thorough investigation, report to this body what change, if any, should be made in the Constitution as to the power of the Chief Magistrate in the exercise of re- prieves and pardons. That resolution was reported back to the Convention without any expression of opinion by the Commit- tee as to whether any change should be made, and after some discussion, the resolu- tion was resubmitted to the Committee. The language of the Constitution of the United States on this subject is, that the President is authorized “to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” Why that provision was inserted in that Constitution, by the band of illustrious men who, on the seventeenth day of September,‘ 1 787, submitted it to the American people for ratification has been clearly stated in the Federal- ist by Mr. Hamilton, one of the greatest lawyers and statesmen of that age, or of any age in the world’s history. I read from the 74th number of the Federalist as follows: “ The principal argument for reposing the power of pardoning in this case in the Chief Magistrate is this: In seasons of insurrection or rebellion, there are often critical moments, when a well- timed offer of pardon to the insurgents and rebels may restore the tranquility of the Commonwealth; and which, if suffered to pass unimproved, it may never be possible afterwards to recall. The dilatory process of convening the Legislature, or one of its branches, for the purpose of obtaining its sanction, would frequently be the occasion of letting slip the golden opportunity. The loss of a week, a day, an hour, may some- times be fatal.” Now it will be seen that no limitation is put on the power of the President to grant pardons and reprieves, by requiring that it shall be exercised only after judgment and conviction. What the practice has been it is not in my power absolutely to state; but it may be safely presumed that, both before 12 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BURNAM. [November 14 ,. and after conviction, the power has been exercised; more largely after than before. The Constitution of Kentucky, adopted in‘ 1792, and in 1799, almost literally fol- lowed the language of the Constitution of the United States as to the pardoning power. The Constitution of 1849 added the words that the Governor “shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sheriff or Commonwealth’s Attorney in penal or criminal cases ;” but all three of these Con- stitutions being silent as to whether the pardoning power should precede judgment and conviction. On an appeal taken to the’ Court of Ap- peals of Kentucky by the Commonwealth’s Attorney in the case of the Commonwealth vs. Ashlocke, indicted for gaming, where a pardon had been granted before trial, that Court sustained the power of the Governor to so act, basing largely their opinion upon the contemporaneous expression made by the Convention of 1849, in which the mat- ters now before this House were made the subject of debate in that body over a resolu- tion offered early in the session of the Con- vention by the Delegate from Carter county, Mr. T. J. Hood. On the 30th day of November, 1849, final action was had by the Convention, and by the overwhelming vote of 73 to 8, they refused either to re- strict the exercise of the power to cases after conviction, or to require any commu- nication to be made by the Governor to the succeeding Legislature as to why any re- prieve, commutation or pardon had been granted. .The question now before this body is, shall that action of the Convention of 1849 be adhered to, or shall it be changed, by limiting the power of the Governor to grant Executive clemency to cases only where a conviction has been had, and shall his reasons therefor be communicated to the Legislature ? The Joint Committee on the Executive Department propose that it be eft unchanged. The Delegate from Lex- r ington, by his substitute, wants it changed in both particulars. Mr. Chairman, having an earnest desire to do the very best for the country which I possibly could, I have, since our adjourn- ment on Saturday, been looking to the Con- stitutions of other States in the Union to see what has been their action as to this very important matter—yea, this matter of tremendous importance, if the whole par- doning power be wrong, or if its bestowal ‘on the Chief Magistrate be a blow at the just rights of the Judiciary Department of the State Government. The result of my investigations is this: The States which forbid the power to the Executive to grant reprieves and pardons until after convic- tion, according to Poore‘s Compilation, are these: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Col- orado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, In- diana, Iowa, Louisiana (and then by con- sent of the Senate), Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, NewYork, North Carolina, Oregon, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin—twenty-six in all. _ The States in which the pardoning power may be used, both before and after convic- tion, are Delaware, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi—four. ' According to the same Compiler, the States requiring a report to be made to the succeeding Legislature by the Governor are these: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Mary- land, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, N e- braska, Nevada, New York, North Caro- lina, Oregon, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin—twenty in all. Those not requiring such report are:' Florida, Georgia, Illinois, New Jersey, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas—eight. Now, if the argument drawn from numbers and from precedents be of value, it would seem that the substitute of the Dele- gate from Lexington has that support by a very large preponderance. Has it the sup- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 13 Friday,] BURNAM. [November 14. port of past experience, in the large abuse of the power by those in Kentucky who have filled that great office? By that long line of soldiers, statesmen, jurists, begin- ning with the hero of Kings Mountain and ending with our colleague, the Delegate from Hart county? I. do not think this has been demonstrated by any one who has spoken on this floor, although it must be acknowledged that a widespread sentiment prevails that it has been so abused, especially in the remission of fines and forfeitures ‘incurred by those who have been convicted (of these misdemeanors in the Courts of the State, vastly more than by clemency shown those who have been con- victed of felonies and sentenced to prison or to death. Indeed, to the refusal of Executive clemency in this last class is already attributable the passage of that excellent law which provides for the parole -of certain numbers of prisoners confined in the walls of the Penitentiary. One of my constituents, a very distinguished Min- 'ister of the Gospel, some years ago obtained from the Clerks of the Courts of Madison, Garrard, Lincoln and Fayette counties the statistics showing the number of remis- sions of fines and forfeitures made during one ‘Gubernatorial administration, and pub- lished-the result of his investigations, with severe strictures, which attracted wide and general attention, but without accomplish- ing any change. In my opinion this class of offenses is that wherein the power of pardon works the greatest evil to society. When young bloods, defying law, pack concealed arms; when faro dealers ply ‘thei r nefarious business; when liquor dealers sell their poison to minors; when maraud- ers break the peace on the highway, or' disturb those met for the worship of the living God, and are convicted, the penalties should be exacted and paid, because, from these corrupt beginnings, flow those streams -of crime which afterwards disgrace the Commonwealth; and I should think that, as to_them, there should be a clause in the Constitution providing that the exercise of the pardonin g power should be regulated by law. But should the power to grant apardon before conviction be wholly denied? The argument for this is, that the Governor in so doing invades the domain of the Judi- cial Department; that he usurps power, and acts on ex parte statements made to him by those not even sworn as to the truth of their representations; wrongs the living and the dead, and thereby degrades the State. I think the Delegate from Woodford is right in characterizing this as an attack on the pardoning power itself. That power, if it be recognized at all, must rest somewhere. It is not based on law, but on the eternal foundation of nature, and is the great attribute of the Almighty. How and when it should be employed must at last rest in the judgment and sympathies of its repository. It is the opposite of jus- tice. Standing on that, all must come short. Relying on forgiveness, all have hope. Guizot has recorded, for everlasting praise of the last King of the French, Louis Phillippe, that when one of his subjects had been convicted and sentenced to death, he always read the record of the trial, and regarded it as a great triumph when he could find some reason for granting a par- don, saying that “to send a human being to the guillotine was the worst use to which he could be put.” Mr. Chairman, I agree with the gen- tleman from Pike, that the Executive should not be stripped of the pardoning power or limited in its use wholly to cases after conviction. That office, before the Con- stitution of 1849, had under the pressure of a fierce spirit of revolution, been one of great dignity and power. He nominated to the Senate the Judges, the chief executive ofiicers, and commissioned all the minor officers of the land. By that Constitution all of these were taken from him except to appoint a Secretary of State, and it is now proposed to make that officer elective. I 14’ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BURNA M—MCHENRY—RAMSEY. [Novem ber 14 . remember to have heard one of our distin- guished United States Senators speak of the Governor of Kentucky as now nothing but a “big ’Squire.” Let us not go further in that direction, but leave the Executive at least this pardoning power, as one of the dignities and responsibilities which shall make it worthy of the ambition and the hopes of the rising, gifted spirits of the fu- ture who shall ennoble Kentucky by their talents, achievements and fame. The respon- sibility of the Governor for the use of the power should be kept alive for the same reasons given by Mr. Hamilton as to the use of the powers conferred on the Presie dent of the United States by the like arti- cle in the National Constitution. And as to that part of the substitute which requires a report of the cases in which the pardon- ing power has been exercised to be made to the General Assembly, I can see no rea- sonable objection to it. The making of such a report implies no censure, no degra- dation upon anybody. It could be properly demanded now by a resolution of the Leg- islature, as a matter of information for the people, and in that provision will be found a remedy against misrepresentations made to the Executive by those who shall, if any. in the future, so try to control his action. But whatever the result of the vote may be, let us all hope the Commonwealth will not suffer wrong—“1w quid detriment-um 'rcs- pablica eapiat.” Mr. MCHENRY. If I understand, there is an amendment pending to the tenth section. Is that what is being adopted now‘? The CHAIRMAN. There are quitea number of amendments pending. Mr. MCHENRY. I offered, as did the Delegate from Louisville, an amendment to the latter part of that. My amendment, therefore, is not now under considera- tion. The CHAIRMAN. The whole matter is under consideration, and subject to debate in Committee of the. Whole. Mr. MOHENRY. My amendment will not be voted upon now ‘? The CHAIRMAN. No, sir. Mr. MCHENRY. I shall not say any thing upon my amendment until it is brought up. I shall yield the floor. Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to offer a sub- stitute for section 10. The substitute was read, and is as fol- lows: He may grant reprieves, remissions, par- dons and commutations of sentence after conviction. for all offenses except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions, and withsuch restrictions and limitations as he may think proper. Upon conviction for treason he may sus- pend the execution of the sentence until the case shall be reported to the General Assembly at its next meeting, when the General Assembly shall either pardon, commute the sentence, direct its execution, or grant a further reprieve. He shall com- municate to the General Assembly, at ,the beginning of every regular session, every case of reprieve, remission, pardon or com- mutation of sentence, stating the name of the person convicted, the sentence, its date, the date of pardon, reprieve, remission or com— mutation, and the reasons for granting the same: Provided, however, That the Gener~ al Assembly may, by law, constitute a Council, to be composed of oflicers of the State, without whose advice and consent. the Governor shall not have power to grant pardon in any case, except such as may be left to his sole power. Mr. DEHAVEN. I think we will get along more rapidly in the business before us if we will take up the amendments in the order in which they were presented, and dispose of them as we go along. The CHAIRMAN. The Committee of the Whole can do that. Read the first. amendment. The amendment was read, and is as follows: ' Strike out the words “Clerk, Sheriff, or Commonwealth’s Attorney,” and insert the words, “ of any ofiicer.” Mr. MCHENRY. I offer mine as a substitute for that amendment. . O EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 15 Friday,] BRONSTON. [November 14 , The Reading Clerk read Mr. McHenry’s substitute, as follows : Strike out all of the section after the word “vested,” in the fifth line. Mr. BRONSTON. It is with the great- est reluctance that I ask a further extension of patience from this Convention after they have so kindly extended it to me hereto- fore. I was aware of the fact, when I intro- duced this substitute, that in it was con- tained one of the most important questions relating to citizenship in the Common- wealth of Kentucky. It was not prepared without the most careful consideration both of precedent and principle. It was intro- duced by me through no matter of personal pride, nor was it introduced with a desire that it should be passed by this Convention, except after the most careful consideration by the Delegates. It was a matter of so much importance, brought so often and so closely under my personal supervision, that I desired information and assistance from the wiser heads upon this floor in order that I might vote intelligently upon it. In the first place, I had ascertained that, notwithstanding the provision in the Fed- eral Constitution authorizing the President of the United States to grant pardons be— fore conviction, twenty-six States of the Union, guided by the light of their experi- ence, had inserted provisions taking from their respective Governors the power to pardon before conviction. I found that there were only four States in the Union who found, from their experience, that it was expedient or proper to authorize the Governor to exercise such pardoning power. Whilst I could not ask this Convention to be governed alone by precedents, I felt it would be, at least, no reflection upon our wisdom or judgment to say, that if twenty-six States of the Union have found it important to thus restrict the pardoning power, we might, consider it. Upon prece- dent, then, Mr. Chairman, clearly the sub- stitute is correct. Now, not for the purpose of influencing your judgment, but for the purpose of ask- ing you to reason with me upon this sub- ject, let us consider the principle. I The provision of the present Constitu- tion certainly needs amendment in some particular. In the first place, there is no power given to the Governor of the Com- monwealth to commute a sentence; and whenever the Governor exercises that power, the validity of it rests simply upon the volition of the prisoner as to whether he will accept the commutation or take the original sentence. Certainly we ought, in this enlightened age, to clearly define that power; and in the substitute we say that the Governor shall have the power to com— mute sentences. In the next place, under the provisions of the present Constitution which have been reported by the Joint Executive Commit? tee, the Governor has no right to impose restrictions, conditions or limitations upon the pardon, remission, respite or reprieve. Does not the enlightenment of the present age and its experience suggest to you that the Governor should have the power to grant a conditional pardon; that he should have the power to impose limitations upon his respite or reprieve? The substitute contains that provision. Now, as to the other two changes, the one which requires the Governor to present his reasons, together with the facts upon which he has acted, to the Legislature. Is that correct? Gentlemen have said, why not require the Legislature to give the Gov- ernor reasons for its action‘? Why not leave the papers in his oifice for inspection? Mr. Chairman, I make this assertion with- out fear‘of contradiction, that under the law as it has been, the Executive can refuse to allow either an individual or the Legisla- ture to inspect the papers upon which he grants remissions or pardons. They come within the head of official correspondence. There is no officer designated to take charge of those papers. He may by courtesy 16 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BRONSTON. [November 14 _ & allow their inspection, but if he desires, he can refuse, and there is no power which can compel him. I speak not thus without precedent, because within the history of the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky Executives have refused the inspec- tion of papers upon which pardons and remissions were granted, and never at any time, either through the Legislature or through the press of the country, have the citizens of Kentucky been furnished with light sufi’icient to enable them to determine upon what facts pardons and remissions have been granted. The Secretary of State is not the official custodian of such papers. They belong purely to the Exec- utive. I know it has been the custom that when .such remissions are granted or re- jected, to place the papers in the custody of the Secretary of State, but they are not State papers. I will not argue to you that proposition further, except to ask the ques- tion, should that be the state of law in Kentucky? Have we not a right to see and know when criminals are turned loose; when felons are pardoned; when men who carry concealed weapons, as has been sug- gested, or men who furnish fiery liquors to minors; men striking at the very heart of civilization go unwhipped of justice; when you see the gaudily-dressed street-corner loafing gambler who, at the faro table, is taking from the women and children the money a worthless husband ought to give to them, has ‘wiped from the record the pitiful fine that may have been imposed against him, the facts‘ which influenced the Execu- tive to thus interrupt the course of justice? A gain, Mr. Chairman, there has been upon our statute books a law prohibiting the car- rying of concealed deadly weapons. It was believed that much of the bloodshed which has given Kentucky the unenviable name of “the dark and bloody ground” was attributable to the indiscriminate car- rying of concealed weapons; and yet go to your Court records, and show me one in- stance in twenty where a man who was convicted of carrying concealed weapons ever paid the penalty ,of confinement in jail. And I do not overstate the facts when I assert, that no faro or lottery dealer ever paid the penalty of the law in Ken—' tucky. Shall that go on‘? Have the peo- ple of Kentucky not a right to know these facts? And if they did know them, do you not know that their manhood and their bravery would make them rise en masse, and say you must give us a law, and you must execute that law‘? Once more, Mr. Chairman, is it any reflection upon the Ex- ecutive to be asked that these communica- tions be made public documents? How can you make them public documents? By simply saying you can go into the Execu- tive oifice, as has been suggested here, and inspect them. Can the great mass of the people of Kentucky come to Frankfort and go to that ofiice and inspect those papers? Have they time to leave their business to thus get information ‘? It is only an occasional dropping into Frank- fort on legal business, or business with the ofi‘icials, that brings the citizen here so that he can avail himself of this opportunity. In my judgment, the best way to improve a people is to enlighten that people. The best way to enlighten a people is to put it within the reach of each and every man in the Commonwealth to read at his own fire— side the doings of the ofiicers and the peo- ple of his State. What is the best way to do that ? Is there-any better way than to require that it shall be published with the public documents as you do now at every session of the Legislature‘? Just as you do with the affairs of the Auditor’s ofiice, or the Treasury Department, the Superintend- ent of Public Instruction, the Commis- sioner of the Insurance Bureau, and the Register of the Land Oflice. Let them all go along together; let the people see what the Treasurer has been doing, what the Auditor has been doing, what the Commis- sioner of the Insurance Bureau has been doing, what the Commissioner of Agricul- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 17 ‘shame. Friday,] BRo-xsToN. [November 14 . 7ture and what the Executive has been doing. Is not that the best way‘? .see no better. Ccrtainl y, I can Now, on the subject of granting pardons before conviction, I modestly presented 1that question when first on the floor, and I will endeavor that what I say now shall be characterized by equal modesty. I was deeply moved by the recitation of that beautiful poem by the Delegate from Pike, .and I could have taken him by the hand :and said: “If this is closing the door to the ‘poor man, I shall be the last to aid in do- ing it.” That may have been his expe- rrience; but mine has been different. I would like to know of one instance where ‘the poor man, the humble, however de— :serving, ever received the benefit of a par- don before conviction. What cases have received the exercise of the pardoning power before conviction? I will not refer ‘to the administration of Governor Bram- .lette, which has been lauded so much on ‘this floor. I simply desire to say this: that ‘in so far as he exercised the pardoning {power in cases of prosecutions arising out -of the late war and for political reasons, it was Kentucky’s glory; but the other page .of his record, which shows wherein he .abused it, and pardoned the vilest criminals .and felons and burglars within the Com- monwealth of Kentucky, is Kentucky’s I have examined it with some care and minuteness. But that is not the ques— _tion; it is this: In the exercise of the par- doning power before conviction, first, on what information does the Executive act? Let me give you some practical illustra- tion. The Delegate from Scott, in his earn- estness and zeal, gave, or undertook to give, the particulars of a very noted case— in fact, it has become one of the celebrated criminal cases of Kentucky—wherein he said that a man went into a corn-field and shot another for slapping his wife, and that is why the Governor pardoned him before conviction; and, I have no doubt, it occurred to many of the Delegates on this floor, that the Governor did right. That is the case the Governor thought he was acting upon; but when pre- sented to him, as is always the case, the main facts were suppressed. This man who was shot down was but a boy, possibly sixteen years of age. The woman he was charged with slapping was his sister, a year or two older, and with whom he lived in the same house. They had some child- ish quarrel at the table, and growing out of that quarrel he may have slapped her, al- though that was denied. Supposing it was all over, he went out into his young sister’s corn-field, and there was engaged at the plow, with his coat off—without a suspicion of danger—and‘ in a moment, without warning, he was shot to death, scarcely knowing who did it. I say the great danger of giving the Governor power to pardon before conviction is this: That he is required to act on one side, on unsworn testimony—statements made by persons in- terested-and the other side has no opportu- nity to be heard. There is no investigation,no inquiry. What harm could have resulted in the case cited had a jury been permitted to hear-the sworn testimony of the witnesses, after they had the law from the Judge, had been represented by counsel, and when in that solemn tribunal he was pronounced guilty, why should they not then bring the true facts, the sworn facts of the case, and present them to the Governor, so that he could then have exercised the pardoning power in turning him loose. Would it be taxing humanity too much to say that when a man goes into a corn-field and shoots his victim, unarmed and coatless, he should at least go through the form of an investiga— tion in a court-room? Do you mean to place a premium upon murder? Danger lies just there. Now Mr. Chairman, what was the re- sult of that; what is always the result of just such a case? It went back to the com- munity; the people who have heard the facts, the neighbors who knew what had 18 EXEC UTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] P taken place, were awakened as it were by a thunderbolt, saying that the Executive had said this man should be. entirely acquitted, and that there should not even be an inves- tigation. They :hung their heads in shame. Is such the dignity and majesty of‘ law in Kentucky‘? How can it be that such a criminal was thus to be picked out as a shining mark, when ten or a dozen crimi- nals had at that very term, of the Court, been arraigned, tried, convicted, and sen- tenced to the. Penitentiary, and, I believe, one to the gallows ‘? Is not that the strong- est practical presentation of one reason why, that by taking away from the Gover- nor the pardoning power before conviction, you take away the danger of acting upon a misrepresentation of the facts? Now, let me give you another instance. In one of the counties in my district, there was an open and shameless violation of what is known as the local option law. There were two wealthy distillers who sold liquor in“ discriminately, claiming they were doing it under what is known as the Distillers’ Li- cense, to sell by the quart at their residence. The people in the community had turned oose upon them a band of worthless negroes with a quart bottle of liquor in one pocket, and a gun on their shoulder, prowling around shooting stock, robbing hen-roosts and houses. Then came a Grand Jury, and these two men made their appearance and said that they had been misin- formed as to the law, and asked an extension of leniency, Under my advice it was given. I ‘asked the Grand Jury not to indict, but to wait six months longer; told the men what the law was, and at the end of six months the Grand Jury found that they had been doing worse than before, and indicted each of them sixty times. Be- fore the next term of Court those gentle- men came to the Executive and represented that they had been misinformed as to the law, and all that they had done had been done simply by misapprehension of the law on their part, and, under such misrepresen- Baoxsrox. _l [November 14 . tations they obtained forty or fifty pardons, and stepped into the Court at the next term, and arose and said the Executive of the- Commonwealth feels that these gentlemen- ought not to be tried by a jury of the land for these offenses. Why was that done?‘ Simply because the Governor acted upon the representation and facts stated by reputable gentlemen, which suppressed the- most important fact, and that was that six months before, in the presence of a Grand Jury, these men had been warned of the- law and not to violate it, and had promised that they would not do so. Let me give you another instance: There is running, close to this beautiful city of Frankfort, a stream as Elkhorn. Near its head waters, and near the city of Lexington, there are five or six large distilleries. For six months of the year they were in the- habit of emptying still slops into the stream, and running, as it did, through some of the prettiest farms in Kentucky, by the stench and foulness that arose therefrom, the hap- piness and the homes of the owners of such lands were destroyed, and the value of the land depreciated nearly one-half. They‘ appealed to the Grand Jury, and in- dictments were had. These gentlemen came and presented such a strong case- to the Executive that for six consecutive’ terms the action of six consecutive Grand Juries were set aside, and they were told by the Executive that those cases did not de- mand an investigation by a Court of the- Why was that done? because of the confidence the Executive- had in the representations made, and be- cause in those representations the facts were- suppressed. Upon principle, let me ask, would it not have been better, would it kn own land. It was done- have been at all unjust, to say that in those- cases you ought to have had the jury to in- quire into the facts, let the witnesses swear, and after you have the sworn testimony, if“ you desire to present it to the Governor for- the Executive clemency, let him exercise it.. I want to take the case stated by a distin-- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. I 19 Friday,] BRONSTON—BUCKNER. [November 14 _ guished Delegate the other day, wherein he said the Governor pardoned‘ some little negro boy for climbing into a store-house and stealing a dollar and a half, and that it would have been a great hardship to have had that little fellow brought into Court for trial. I do not know how small that little fellow was, but my experience has been, when they come to me and ask for clemency, they say he is a little bit of a boy about three feet high; and when I ask to see him, he grows very rapidly into nearly a full grown man. But assuming that he was a very small boy. In the first place, the Court of Appeals have so construed the law that a jury and Court, in looking at the boy must hear proof‘, and the burden of proof is on the Commonwealth to show that he is of sufficient age, not ply to know that the act is wrong, but ‘ to know his civil responsibility for acting. Now, I submit, that if he was too young to know the consequences of his act—too young to be punished—would not the jury of the county or vicinage, seeing him and hearing the facts, determine whether or not he should be relieved of the punishment? Why, in one of the adjoin- ing counties from here—the county of Scott -—I remember that for two years, at each term of the Court, there were two or three little boys brought in there charged with breaking into storehouses. We would let them off because of their youth and inex- perience, and the next Court the' same thing happened again. Finally, after we had endured it as long as possible, we sub- mitted the question to a jury, as to whether they were of age of discretion, and they were convicted and confined in jail. How easy would it have been to have come to the Executive at Frankfort, and represent- ed that those little fellows were so small that they did not know what they were do- ing, and failed to tell him that for six or eight terms they had been reproved and turned loose, for doing the same thing. I ubmit, Mr. Chairman, is it not just to the si in— Executive, instead of degrading the high office—do you not elevate it—when you say he shall not be embarrassed by these one-sided appeals for Executive clemency, and to say that it shall be the law of Ken- tucky, whenever a man is charged with crime, there shall be a judicial investiga- tion of it? Do you not invade the J udi- ciary otherwise? Now, let me take the other instance cited by the distinguished Delegate from Hart, when he said in some counties of the State . there were differences to such an extent that they felt that peace could be restored and the welfare of the community best subserved by the Executive interfering. How did he get that information‘? Who told him that the peace of the community could be best subserved? Possibly he received it from a dozen or maybe twenty of the best citizens of the community. 'Hr. BUCKNER. If the gentleman will permit me to interrupt him, 1 stated my information was derived from an inves- tigation made by a Committee of the Leg- islature, and my action was upon the unan- imous recommendation of the' Committee. Mr. BRONSTON. I knew very well His Excellency had good information, or he would not have acted. I know that from personal experience. That was the result of a Legislative Investigating Committee. They may have had full information; they may have had the witnesses before them; but I submit, would it not have been less dangerous and much more satisfactory to have had the investigation by the oflicers of the Court, by the Judges, by the Prose- cuting Attorneys, by the Grand Jury, and then, after that investigation, if they thought best, let the Judge and the Com- monwealth’s Attorney dismiss the case, let the parties go free, and let the records of the Court show that they were dismissed by the Courts and its officers. That has been done and that can be done. It is done in my district time and again, and in the county of Rowan it was done in order to 2() EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] McDEnMoT'r—BRoNs'roN—MooRE. [November 14 , settle the celebrated conflict up there. There can be then no suppression of the facts. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Will the gentle- man allow me to ask him a question‘? Mr. BRONSTON. Certainly. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Did I rightly un- derstand the gentleman to say that some- times it is possible for a Commonwealth Attorney to pardon before conviction ? Mr. BRONSTON. You did not under- stand me to say that the Commonwealth’s Attorney could pardon, but I did say that a Commonwealth’s Attorney could tell the Court why a case should be dismissed, and on his statement cases are frequently dis- missed. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Does practically amount to a pardon? Mr. BRONSTON. Yes, sir. Mr. L. T. MOORE. But I would like to ask the gentleman if the records in such cases are not open to the public? Mr. BRONSTCN. Yes, sir. Mr. MCDERMOTT. And I should also like to ask if the Commonwealth’s Attorneys do not substantially exercise that power before an indictment in many cases? Mr. BRONSTON. The Commonwealth’s Attorney has no power to do any thing whatever before an indictment. Mr. "WASHINGTON. I would like to ask the gentleman if he is accustomed to dismiss cases where the defendant pleads guilty, as he virtually does when he applies for a pardon? Mr. BRONSTON. I am pleased that the gentleman has asked the question. Mr. WASHINGTON. I am on the same side of the question the gentleman is, and I merely ask it as a sort of counter- irritant to the suggestion of the Delegate from Louisville, ‘Mr. BRONSTON. It rarely is ever done where there is a plea of guilty, though I have known it to be done in some in- stances where the defendant desired to en- ter a plea of guilty, and the Common- Wealth’s Attorney suggested to the Court not that that it ought not to be done. In other words, the power is ample; that is where it rests. Let the Legislative Department of the Government do the making of laws; let the Judicial Department of the Govern- ment attend to the enforcement and con- struction of the law. I say again, that if you place the most prudent and powerful man in the State in the Executive office, it will be impossible for him, located here at the seat of government at Frankfort, to cor- rectly pass upon questions occurring in the city of Lexington, or in the county of Pike, from which the gentleman comes. He can not do it, and whenever he makes amis- take, then there is in the minds of the peo- ple a disrespect for the law and its oflicers. Those are the reasons that actuated myself and my associates on the Committee to present this substitute and these matters for the consideration of the Convention. and I ask the Delegates to pause and not let themseves be carried away by the mod-- ern sentimental feeling which seems always to be throwing shields around persons charged with crime. Mr. BECKHAM. Will the gentleman permit me a question? Mr. BRONSTON. Yes, sir. Mr. BECKHAM. You refer to the modern sentimental feeling. I will ask you if the matter reported by the Committee here has not been in all the Constitutions of this State? Mr. BRONSTON. I grant you that. When I referred to the modern senti- mental feeling, I was not referring to the provision of the law, but to some sugges- tions which have been made on the floor. It seems to me that gentlemen only want to consider the poor unfortunate criminal. I would have them stop and think that the law-abiding citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky—those who love their homes and their firesides—feel that they can lie down in safety, and that they can go out from their homes without fearing the dag- ger of the assassin or the stealthy step of the robber and burglar. Let them unde EXECU TIVE DEPARTMENT. 21 . trammel it in the least. Friday,] BULLITT—BURNAM. ____-____4 [November 14 . stand the laws of the Commonwealth are for the protection of the law-abiding, and not simply to shield the guilty; and in thinking of that, answer this question. Are you oppressive to the one or unjust to the other, by saying that no man who com- mits a public offense shall escape an inves- tigation of it by a judicial tribunal of the land? There is no hardship. After an investigation is had—after he has been pronounced guilty under the law—let mercy take its course; and I would not I thank the Con— vention for the attention with which they have listened to me. Mr. BULLITT. Gentlemen of the Com mittee, I have listened with great interest and admiration to the speech of the Dele- gate from Lexington. I understand the very object and foundation of criminal and penal law is to preserve the tranquility of society. Now, if we will start and con- sider the subject with the idea that the object of the penal law is to secure the tranquility of society, I think we shall have but little difliculty in dispos- ing of this question. Who of our Gover- nors have ever abused this power of par- doning before conviction‘? Can any gentleman say it has been abused‘? On the contrary, are there not many gentlemen on this floor who know that it has been used in the di- rection of restoring the tranquility of soci- ety? Look back at the pardons that were granted by His Excellency, Governor Bramlette. He granted pardons before conviction for the purpose of settling dis- putes between soldiers who had been in the Federal army and those who had been in the Confederate army. Soldiers, doubtless, ‘on both sides committed depredations, and wherever the facts were made known to the Governor that there were difficulties likely to grow out of those matters, if prosecutions were had, he invariably, with- out hesitation, pardoned the party, and we had a remarkable condition of affairs in Kentucky by reason of the exercise of that power. You could see the soldiers. imme- diately after the bloody conflict, associating themselves together, knowing that they would be pardoned and protected by the government of the State; and the State of Kentucky, instead of being left in the con- dition of Missouri and several other States, was immediately restored to tranquility, and the State of Missouri had at last to re- sort to it. After the State of Missouri had resorted to pardoning before conviction then it was that peace was restored, and tranquility again reigned. The exercise of this power is a necessary power. Mr. BURNAM. Will the gentleman allow me to makea suggestion ? The clock is now within five minutes of the time at which we take a recess, and if we will rise and report now the . gentleman will be entitled to the floor when we convene-again this afternoon. Mr. BULLITT. If that is so I will be perfectly willing to yield. Mr. BURNAM. I, therefore, move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again this afternoon. The President thereupon resumed the chair, and Mr. Straus, the Chairman of the Whole, reported that the Committee had, according to order, had under consideration the report of the Joint Committee on Executive Affairs, had made some progress therein, and asked leave to sit again. Upon a vote the report was adopted. The Committee then, upon motion, took a recess. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention was called to order by Mr. President Clay. Mr. BURNAM. resolve itself into I move the House COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. For the further consideration of the report of the Joint Committee on Executive De- partment. Executive Department. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried, and the President designated the Dele- 22 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday, _| a gate from Oldham Chairman of the Whole. Mr. BULLITT. I was about present- ing the idea not only of the importance, but the absolute necessity of the power of pardon resting somewhere in the govern- ment by which it could be exercised before conviction? Many of you, doubtless, .re- member that by virtue of the position taken by our then Governor Bramlette, tranquil- ity in Kentucky was restored after the bloodiest war that ever waged on the face of of the globe. You could see all over the State the soldiers who had been engaged in the Confederate army and the soldiers engaged in the Federal army asso- ciating together. You could see that the hostilities which had arisen by reason of this bloody strife quieted down and the people having as high degree of tranquility as had existed even before the war. It is true there were some heart-rending and bit- ter feelings existing even after the war, and whilst this tranquility was being had. But how was it in Missouri‘? Missouri had the very provision which the honorable Delegate from Fayette desires to be placed in our Constitution. The Governor could not extend pardon before conviction. He was forced to let the lawlessness go on in hopes that the arms of the government would be able to suppress it; and ,without exercising pardon before conviction, after an experiment of seven or eight years, he finally assumed a power which did not exist in the Governor, and extended pardon before conviction. Here was a trial with the strong arm of the great Common wealth of Missouri exerting every nerve in the power of the Government to suppress lawlessness; but it utterly failed until the Governor took the responsibility of exercising the power which we have reposed in the Gov- ernors of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. How long lawlessness would have continued wtihout the exercise of that power nobody knows. It lasted for years and years in that (Mr. DeHaven) as Committee of the BULLITT. [November 14 . proud Commonwealth until the Governor took the responsibility of exercising the power which the Constitution withheld from him. What did the State do? Did the State censure him ? Was be condemned by his people for the exercise of that power, which brought peace and order to the No. The Legislature in- dorsed his action, and the people indorsed community ? it. Tranquility was restored, and the peo- ple are enjoying order in society. Now, I do not care whether you give the Governor That power is bound to be exercised by some department of the Government. But the gentleman from the power or not. 'Lexington says let it be exercised by the Commonwealth’s Attorney and by the Court. Are the Commonwealth’s At- torney and the Judge of the Court entitled to any higher credit or con- fidence from the people than the Executive of your Commonwealth‘? Aye, gentlemen, in this Commonwealth that power has been abused by the Judiciary and by the Com- wealth’s Attorneys. But has it been abused by the Executive? No man will say so, except where the Commonwealth’s Attor- ney fails to inform the Governor of the condition of afi'airs connected with the ap- plication for the pardon. The Executive of your Commonwealth, shortly after his in- stallation in office, asked the Legislature to put it in his power to compel the Common- wealth’s Attorney to answer his questions in regard to those applications for pardons. The Legislature has failed to do so, upon the hypothesis that they did not have the constitutional power. Now, if the Com- monwealth’s Attorneys are compelled to answer the questions put by the Executive, ' where is the danger of the misrepresenta- tions in behalf of the applicant for pardon going before the Executive to obtain the pardon ‘? But, I would go still further, and as the Chairman of the Committee remem- bers, doubtless, I advocated that we should compel the filing away of petitions for par EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 23 Friday,] BULLITT. - [November 14 , don, so that everybody could go and examine and see whose names are signed to that petition, just as he can go and ascertain and trace his title to prop- erty in the County Court. I do know hat it is customary for gentlemen to sign petitions without reflection or without knowing anything about the case; and the‘, very men who sign petitions in that way, if they were accused of it by a competitor in some election at some future day, would, in all probability, deny it; and if he were to denyit, under the law 'as it now stands, the Executive could refuse to let the paper he examined. I think if you put it in a shape that every peti- tion which is sent to the Governor asking a pardon for any individual shall be subject to inspection of whomsoever desires to inspect it, that gentlemen will decline to sign applications for pardons, unless there is some merit in the case. But the honor- able Delegate from Lexington has made a very pathetic appeal on the ground of what? Every single, solitary instance that he presents shows a failure upon the part of the Judiciary and the Commonwealth and County Attorneys in that district to inform the Governor of the condition of _ affairs in regard to the merits of the appli- cation for Executive interference. In each of the six different times those persons were indicted for throwing slop into that stream, and the six times they were pardoned, how easy would it have been for the Com- monwealth or County Attorney to have in- formed the Governor of the exact status of affairs. _It is seldom that an application is made or a petition gotten up for a pardon that the Commonwealth’s or County Attorney does not know something about it. He may not have been applied to in the cases cited, but it is usual for the-parties who seek to get a pardon, to first sound the Commonwealth’s Attorney, and then the County Attorney and the jury that tried the case. If they fail to get the co-operation of these oflicials, then they will apply to other people entirely and keep it quiet and away from the Common- wealth’s Attorney; but if the provision asked for by your present incumbent in that office was carried out, forcing the Commonwealth and County Attorneys to answer his questions, whenever apetition is presented to him upon which he may en- tertain the slightest doubt, how easy is it for him to confer with the Commonwealth’s Attorney and County Attorney, and get the information which would pre- vent these improper pardons There is no greater danger of improper par- dons before conviction than' after convic tion. Pardons that the people have com- plained of in this Commonwealth-in my part of the country, at least—are the par- dons which have been granted after con- viction. I know of no single instance of a pardon having been granted before convic- tion that any single individual complained of ; but I do know of a large number of par- dons which have been granted after convic- tion that the people of my county have complained of. I know that there are some people who complained of Governor Bramlette’s pardons—not pardons before conviction, but pardons be‘ rendered after conviction; and the people desired to stop that indiscriminate abuse of the Executive power—not before conviction, but the exer- cise of it after conviction; and they made that an issue in the gubernatorial election. Now, if you start out on the hypothesis, as I remarked before dinner, with the idea that all criminal and penal law is for the protection of society, that vengeance be- longs not to the government or to the law, but all we have to do is to punish people who commit crime for the purpose of teaching others that if they commit similar crimes they will be punished. With this idea in view, there are cases that ought to be par- doned before conviction; that ought not to be forced to trial ; ought not to be forced to exposure or publication. Young people may have committed mistakes in the ex- 24 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BULLITT. November 14' . uberance of their animal existence, and where they are willing to repair those errors and live lives of morality and be- come exemplary citizens, they should be pardoned. If you expose them, you defeat the very purpose and resolution that they may form; but by giving to them pardons, by keeping it out of the court-house, by suppressing publication of the facts, they may become the most useful citizens in the whole community. Ought we to do that which is to destroy the opportunity of these young people to retrace their steps and re- pair the injury that they may have done, and become good, peaceable and exemplary citizens in the community? To take away from the Executive the power to stop such prosecutions, you take away from the com- munity the right, the ability of these young people who may have made a mistake, from retracing their steps and become good and useful citizens. Now, although mistakes may have been made by Executives, ought we to make a graver mistake and destroy the power of the people to retrace and re- pent and live exemplary lives‘? No two wrongs ever made a right. But I defy the gentleman to point out a single, solitary instance since, the existence of the Com- monwealth of Kentucky, where the pardoning power has been exercised improperly before conviction. I grant that it has been exercised improperly after conviction, but I know of no single in- stance where it has been exercised before conviction improperly. It is essentially necessary that it shall rest somewhere, as shown in the case of the State of Missouri. The power must rest somewhere in the Government. There must be some power somewhere to aid in the restoration of tran- quility to society, and without the ability of promising to that class of people who have been ostracized by laws, to permit them to go home, and live in a peaceable way. So long as you refuse to do so, just so long will they continue to be law-breakers. An article appeared a few days ago in the Century treating of people. It speaks of‘ the people of Kentucky particularly. It says that the soil and atmosphere of Ken- tucky make soldiers and make brave men, and whenever a war has existed in which Kentuckians have taken part, they have- taken the lead; and it will ever be so; and likewise whenever Kentuckians take part against the law, it will require triple or quadruple the force to suppress them that it will to suppress a people less' brave. reso- lute and intellectual. So that the fact that those other Constitutions have stripped their Governors of that power is no reason why we should say we shall strip our Gov- ernor of that power. The power is a neces- sary power to restore tranquility, and to keep good order and peace in society amongst people of the character of the peo- ple of Kentucky. Whether they are thus brave and thus intellectual, and thus out- strip their neighbors in wars and in state- craft is because of the soil and atmosphere, or ‘because of the heritage that they may boast of from their ancestors, is immaterial. There is the element of that characteristic, and whenever you undertake to resist the laws it will require more force to suppress them than it will a people of less courage and less intellect. you will consider this question dispassion- ately and calmly, not as advocates of any particular measure; not that you feel that you ought to take any particular side, but consider it just as you would if you were partners in a transaction, or as you would if you were directors in a corporation, con- sidering a business question. This is a busi- ness question which we have to consider. It is a question of the tranquility of society. It is a question of justice and humanity. Shall we transfer this power the gentleman virtu- ally admits ought to. exist somewhere, so- far as the humanity part of it is concerned‘? But he proposes to transfer it to the J udici- ary Department, or to the Commonwealth’s Attorney, and Judiciary Department. Now, the first article in our Constitution declares I hope that ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25' Friday,] BULLITT—BLACKWELL. [November 14, that the powers of the government shall be divided into three co-ordina-te branches- Legislative, Judiciary and Executive; or, I believe it goes the other way, Legislative, Executive and Judiciary. Now, when we transfer to the Courts that power do we not virtually deny the principle announced in the division of powers between those co- ordinate branches of the government‘? Ought we to transfer to the Courts; ought We to transfer to the Commonwealth’s Attorney, or County Attorneys? I have no doubt but that the gentleman has acted discreetly, and I have heard that of him wherever I have heard him spoken of, that he has acted discreetly and humanely, and whilst it might be safe to repose that power in him,’ how many Commonwealth’s Attor- neys are there in this State, or who may come hereafter in whom it would be safe to repose such power? At one time it was fashionable for lawyers to play cards, to buck at the tiger. Who knows whether- when he was bucking at the tiger he/would not bargain with the dealer to pardon him? How could you detect it‘? _ If he did so, what power is there to prevent him from saying. “Judge this case ought not to be prosecuted. He is tied hand and foot; he is in debt to the game, and cannot get out except by the grace of the man who owns the game.” Would if be safe for us to re- pose in such a department of the govern- ment such a power‘? Could we ever break up the system of gambling? I tell you the gamblers are shrewd fellows. They would enwrap a weak Commonwealth’s Attorney directly into their net, and tie him hand and foot, worse than the spider entangles the fly in his web. Now, if it goes anywhere, let it stay with the Governor, where it has never been betrayed or misused, and never abused. I think that is where it ought to be; but for the sake of humanity; for the sake of society; for the sake of all that we hold dear to ourselves, do not put it in the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s power. Gen- tlemen, I thank you. ' are these. Commonwealth’s Attorney or Circuit Judge Mr. BLACKWELL. I do not rise a»- make a speech, because that is something that I cannot do. I cannot, however, let this debate close without giving my views on what I think is a most important ques- tion. I am opposed to giving to the Gov- ernor the power to pardon before convic- tion, because it opens the door so wide for- fraud upon him. Mr.- A. is charged with crime. He does not want the expense and disgrace of a trial. He goes to the Governor and makes to him certain representations. How is that Governor to know whether those statements are true or not? No wit- ness is sworn; it is entirely ex parte; no one can be sworn. Governor receives are those from friends of the accused, without the sanction of an oath. Suppose, on the contrary, there was- a trial and an investigation had. Suppose the accused is required to get ready and submit his case to a jury; he has his wit-v nesses there, his lawyers, and there is a full and fair investigation, and the facts will be brought out. If there be any thing in the case that commends it to Executive clem- ency, it will be developed on the trial. Then when Mr. A. is indicted and put upon his trial whatever facts there are in his case that may commend him to Executive clemency, will, as a matter of course, if they exist, be pro- duced, and then the Governor can have the benefit of them. Else how can the Gover- nor with any certainty know. Mr. A. hav— ing been tried and convicted, goes to the Governor and says I want to be pardoned, there are facts in my favor and the facts The Governor can write to the and get all the facts. Otherwise, how is the Governor to know ? tigation. When twelve men have pre- sented an indictment I want twelve other men to try. Mr. BULLITT. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him a question ‘? Mr. BLACKWELL. Yes, sir. All the statements the‘ I want an inves-- 26 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BULLITT—BLACKWELL. November 14 . Mr. BULLITT. What law is there authorizing the Governor to get informa- tion from Commonwealth’s Attorneys ‘.7 Mr. BLACKWELL. He can ask for it. Mr. BULLITT. Did not our Governor state that he lacked that authority and that he wanted it? Mr. BLACKWELL. I suppose if the Governor asked the Commonwealth’s At- torney who prosecuted a man who had been ,guilty— Mr. BULLITT. Did not the Governor inform the people, through a message to the Legislature, that the Attorneys for the "Commonwealth would notgive him the in- formation ? Mr. BUCKNER._ Not in those words, 'but that the authority did not exist in the 'Governor to call for that, nor did it impose upon the Commonwealth’s Attorney the duty or the responsibility to furnish it. It is my habit to ask it of the Common- wealth’s Attorneys. . Mr. BLAOKWELL. We all \of us know, or, at least, all the lawyers know, that the Governor has no power to coerce ‘the Commonwealth’s Attorney. I have known that for a long time. What I was going to say was, can it be presumed when a Governor applies to a Commonwealth’s Attorney that the information would not be furhished‘? I'venture the assertion that ‘the Governor never called on a Common- wealth’s Attorney, but what he answered the truth. I presume‘v he has not. He is here to answer for himself. When such information is given the Governor is in position to know, otherwise he is in the dark. It is my jugment that when twelve men out of sixteen have made a present- ment, twelve other unbiased and unpreju- diced men on their oaths, after a full in- vestigation, say the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the trial Judge approves of that finding, I say, when the Governor of the Commonwealth :annuls that verdict and judgment he vought to have reasons for it and the people have a right to know those reasons. I understand it is a habit of the present Governor to make investigations on applications made to him for'pardon, and if he grants or refuses the request to endorse the reason on the petition, but that is because he sees fit to do so. There is no law requiring him to do it. I say that the verdict of the jury and approval of it by the trial Judge has great weight with me, and the Governor ought to'have good reasons,which thepeople are entitled to know for annulling that judg ment and verdict. I think that our pres- ent Governor has exercised the pardoning power with a great deal of caution. If it has ever been abused in his hands, I am not aware of it. But I do know that in the county of Owen a man was shot down, a simple, weak-minded man, it is true, but his life was as dear to him as ours. I know a Grand Jury indicted the man who shot him, and atrial jury promptly convicted the accused and the trial Judge approved the verdict of the jury, and he was brought to Frankfort and the Governor promptly pardoned him, but for what reason nobody ever knew. I know that. Ihad forgot- ten to mention, in reference to pardons be- fore conviction, that there was right here in this city of Frankfort the case of the Commonwealth vs. Ashlock, referred to this morning. The accused ran a faro bank, the Grand Jury indicted him, and the Governor as promptly pardoned him before conviction. That is one case. I am not going to charge any Governor with doing wrong willfully. I suppose the Gov- ernors act with the best light they have before them, but it does seem to me that a Governor who would pardon a faro bank dealer before conviction has been most egregiously imposed upon. I will not charge him with doing wrong intention- ally. I say he has been badly imposed upon, and if you can impose upon the Governor in the matter of a crime com- mitted in Frankfort, what cannot be done EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 27 Friday,] STRAUS—BRONSTON. [November 14 , when the offense is committed in remote parts of the State‘? For these reasons I shall vote against the pardoning power before conviction, but shall _vote for the substitute. Mr. STRAUS. It will be conceded by all the Delegates that the pardoning power must be lodged somewhere. It will also be conceded that in this State we desire to lodge it in the hands of our Chief Execu- tiye. I do not believe that there is any sentiment in this State in favor of a Board of Pardons. The question now under dis- ‘cussion is this: How much of that power will lodge in the hands of our Chief Exec- utive? The gentleman from Lexington maintained that that is an infringement _ upon the Judicial Department to pardon before conviction. I do not believe that he can show a single work upon civil law that lays down any such proposition. I have never heard before that the exercise er the pardoning power was an infringe- ment upon the judicial power of the gov- ernment. It is strictly an executive power. The Governor does not propose to swear witnesses and try cases in his oflice. The ‘exercise of the pardoning power contem- plates no such procedure. Now, upon the first proposition in this substitute. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to in- terrupt the gentleman for a moment. Mr. STRAUS. Certainly. Mr. BRONSTON. Before the gentle- man passes upon that proposition, I would like to answer the proposition laid down. The Governor, in the exercise of the par- doning power before conviction, must first, upon the presentation of facts to him, de— termine either that a man is not guilty and .should be relieved, or that he is guilty, .and, by the exercise of mercy, should be pardoned. Mr. STRAUS. It is not necessarily a question of innocence or guilt before the Governor. His power dods not rest upon that idea. He may come to the conclusion that the man is not guilty, or he may come i to the conclusion that he is technically guilty, yet find abundant room to exercise the pardoning power. P It is not a judicial proceeding, and no text-book has ever laid it down as such. It is conceded that this power must be lodged somewhere in all civilized government, and the only trouble the people have had with itis in selecting the proper tribunal; but it has never been contended or intimated that it should be lodged with the Courts, and, certainly, the gentleman would not contend for such a proposition as that. The best thought of the age upon that question is that it ought to be lodged with the Chief Executive of the State. The experience of the several States of the Union with pardoning boards, clearly demonstrates the necessity of put- ting it in the hands of the Executive. Now, the main question is: How great shall the power be“? Abuse of the power is no argument against it; and I have heard no argument upon this floor that .would not abolish the whole power as well as a part. Every argument advanced would abolish trial by jury, Every gen- tleman here well knows that there is more complaint of verdicts in criminal and penal cases than of the exercise of the pardoning power. The gentleman from Lexington knows that the verdicts of juries in criminal and penal cases have done more to destroy. confidence in the administration of the criminal law than the exercise of the pardoning power has. Therefore, let us take away from the jury the power to try cases, and lodge it some- where where it will suit the idea of the Commonwealth’s Attorneys of the State. New, in all kindness to the gentleman from Lexington, I ~say that a man who has served in the capacity of Commonwealth’s Attorney for years is hardly in a position to speak calmly and coolly about the exer- cise of the pardoning power. His mind hasbeen running in one channel too long. I will not say he is blood-thirsty or fero- cious, but I do say it is hardly proper for 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] STRAUs—BRoNsToN ___.___. _a [November 14 _ c,_ .__., .___‘.__. us to take all the statements he has made in reference to cases without a great deal of allowance. He has stated some cases in which, if all the facts stated are true, there was an abuse of the power; but I am not willing to take his statement of the facts altogether, not that he would intentionally distort facts, but I would like to hear the Governors side of that question. I would like to see the other side of the case before I could conclude from his speech that the power has been abused even in those cases. Now, a very remarkable statement was made by him, viz: That some gentlemen had been indicted six consecutive times, and that they had been pardoned as many times for the same offense, and yet he says the Governor was imposed upon in each case. That is a very remarkable statement, that a Governor in six cases could not find out the facts on both sides. There must be some mistake about that. It does not stand to reason that gentlemen in this Common- wealth should be indicted by six consecutive Grand Juries, and the Governor should every time pardon them, unless there was a powerful array of facts, and that both sides had been heard. I have seen it neces- sary for the Governor to interpose and prevent Commonwealth Attorneys in this State from persecuting good citizens in order to make money. I do not mean to say that that ever happened in the district of the gentleman from Lexington, but I do know that this power to pardon has been a great protection to some of the best citizens of the Commonwealth, stand- ing between the Commonwealth’s Attor- ney and the citizens. In how many cases it has been exercised wisely and justly, they do not tell us. If We could have the records here and sum up the cases upon the one side and the other, and strike a balance, then we might determine whether or not there has been an abuse of this power, but is it fair for this great Convention to stand here and take a few isolated cases from the ‘ long practice of the gentleman from Lex- . ures, about the gambling cases. ington, and conclude that the power has been abused? I would like to know how many cases in the gentleman’s district have beendismissed upon his own motion before conviction. I dare say numerous cases wisely and justly; no trial, not a witness sworn, nothing in the world but an indict- ment of the Grand Jury in the Court and. the bare statement of the Commonwealth’s Attorney in writing. Many cases in his. district, as well as all over the States, have- been dismissed. That is precisely the same- power the Governor has before conviction, upon the same kind of testimony, and just. as reliable men and statements. Now, his. argument would abolish that power to the Court and Commonwealth’s Attorney. Are we willing to say in this State that neither the Governor, the Commonwealth’s Attor- ney, nor the Judge shall have the power to dismiss any case until after a verdict. That is the proposition. His logic tends to that; Mr. BRONSTON. suggestion. Mr. STRAUS. Yes, sir. Mr BRONSTON. That is not my propo- sition. Mr. STRAUS. I say the logic of your- proposition leads to that? Mr. BRCNSTCN. The proposition I made was this: That the Court and Com- monwealth’s Attorney, being on the ground and in the midst of all the occurrences,- could ascertain the facts on both sides, and determine the course of justice that should be adopted better than the Governor at a distance, who could only hear one side. Mr. STRAUS. You assume that the Governor only hears one side. I do not grant that. You have nobody sworn before you dismiss a case. You take the era part6 statements not sworn to, and frequently you are imposed upon, I expect. There is the same chance of abuse with the Com- monwealth’s Attorney and the Judges that there is with the Governor. Let us see about these fines and forfeit- Where Will you permit a. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 29 Friday,] STRAUS—BRONSTON. [November 14 , has been the trouble? Not that the Gover- nor of the Commonwealth has pardoned parties before conviction. I have given some thought and study to that. But a pardon, as a rule, is given after conviction :and after the Commonwealth’s Attorneys ' have gotten their per cent. of the fine, and upon the recommendation of the Common- wealth’s Attorney. There has been abuse in that way in my end of the State, .at least. After the Commonwealth’s Attor- ney had gotten their per cent. of the fines, here comes a petition to the Governor, :signed by the jury and Commonwealth’s Attorney, asking him to remit the State’s portion. If there has been any abuse in this State, it has been along that line and nowhere else. What does that prove? "Take away from the Governor the power to pardon before conviction, leave it in the hands of the Commonwealth’s Attorney .and the Judges, and then you have the re- sponsibility on twenty-five, thirty or fifty men instead of one man having it; and then, how are you going to locate the re- sponsibility. You divide responsibility among forty or fifty men and take it from :a man who ought to be responsible to the people for the exercise of this great power. -Go around the circuit and see if you can find out and place any responsibility. No, .sir; if you place that great power in the hands of forty or fifty men, among them will doubtless be some bad men. Mr. BRONSTON. It is not a question of the transfer of the power from the Gov- ernor to the Judges of the Commonwealth. Even if you take it away from the Gover- ‘nor, it would still rest with the Judges. Mr. STRAUS. And it will rest no- where else, and thus you see what a power you place in the hands of the Common- wealth’s Attorneys and Judges of this State. I say there is ten times as much danger of abuse when placed there than if you leave it in the hands of the Governor. Now, the whole argument is this: They say ‘that the chances of finding out the facts after conviction are very much greater than be- fore. In one sense of the word, that is true; in another sense of the word, it is untrue. The Governor exercises the power after conviction upon substantially the same testimony as before, unless there has been a record of the testimony in the lower Court and it has come to the Court of Ap- peals. It is exercised upon ex parte state- ments, unless the record has been made up below, and it has come to the Court of Ap- peals, and he can get the record to look at. It is conceded by all the gentlemen that there may be cases in which the power can be justly and wisely exercised before con- viction, and when you concede that, you concede the whole argument, unless you can prove that the power of pardoning be- fore conviction has been so greatly abused in this State as to demand its abolition. We all know that there is more complaint in this State to-day against the Executive of- fice for the use of pardon after convic- tion than before, and I think the com- plaint amounts to nothing. You hear people complaining of verdicts of acquittal. You hear them complaining of decisions of the Court of Appeals in reversing crim- inal cases upon technicalities, and the press engages in the same cry frequently. At one time in this Commonwealth the right of appeal was not given to criminals. Now, I can say this, that every man who has observed the temper of the people. will recognize the truth of it, that there is more complaint against our Court of Appeals for their decisions in reversing criminal cases on technicalities than ever was made against the Governor for the exercise of the pardon- ing power. Therefore, take away that right of appeal which is the cause of so much complaint. Who desires that? Of course the Commonwealth’s Attorneys of the State would like it. I say this argu- ment of abuse goes all along the line, and it would abolish trial by jury. gTake away from the Court of Appeals the right to revise and reverse cases, and it would take 3O EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] STRAUS—RAMSEY. [November 14. away the pardoning power after conviction as well as before. Now, let us look at the other propositiop involved. Compel the Governor to report to the Legislature his reasons for pardoning a man. The gentle- man from Lexington said, do you not com" pel the Auditor and the Treasurer, the Superintendent of Public Instruction to make reports to the Legislature? Yes, but for what purpose‘? For the purpose of getting data upon which to legis- late for those departments and for the people. Why, what would you do with the reports about pardon ? Could the Legislature do any thing about it? Could they pass an act diminishing or in- creasing the power of the Governor? All that they could do would be, in the early days of the session, to stand upon this floor and abuse and denounce a co-ordinate branch of the government, abuse and de- nounce citizens of the Commonwealth because they had recommended pardon, and thereby destroy the confidence which should exist between the Executive and the Legislature. You might as well compel the President of the United States to re- port to Congress the number of pardons he grants. What would Congress do with it when made? These gentlemen wish to give to one co—ordinate department of the government the power to censure another‘? Is that your idea‘? illustration that happened in 1885-6. “The act of 1884, which authorized the Commis- sioners of the Sinking Fund to lease out the convicts and to remove a Warden, also required those- gentlemen to report to the Legislature the reasons why they removed him. Nobody could ever tell whyvthat was done; nobody could ever discover the intelligence underlying such an act. What was the result? For thirty days of the session the most disgraceful episode‘that ever hap- pened in the history of Kentucky took place in this hall. Demagogues stood here and denounced the Governor of the State and the Commissioners of the Sinking I can give you an- Fund for thirty days, for no pur— pose whatever, because they had exercised their power to remove an in efl‘icient 'Warden. It divided the Legislature into bitter fac- tions and destroyed confidence between the Executive and the Legislative departments‘ for the whole session. That is all you will accomplish by this; you will give narrow- minded and vindictive men, demagogues, a chance to stand on this floor and denounce the Governor and everybody else in the State who recommends the pardon and ac- complish nothing else. I do not object to having a record in his ofiice and apublic- record open to the inspection of every offi- eer and citizen in the State, but I do object to forcing him to give to the Legislature- any fact upon which they cannot legislate at all. I think he should only be required to give them information necessary for them to exercise their duties as legislators. I believe this matter of reporting to the Legislature will produce harm because ‘of the great opportunity it will give to me to stand on this floor and denounce the citi- zens of the Commonwealth who may re-- commend the Governor to pardon Your- substitute will do that. Let us have a pub- lic record, let everybody inspect it, but let. us keep the two great departments of the- Government upon an equal footing so that one will respect the other. Mr. RAMSEY. After so many excel- lent speeches on this question, I hesitate to say any thing further. But I hope it will not seem presumptuous in me to offer a few suggestions upon this, inasmuch as I have offered a substitute for this section. I want to say I indorse the very able speech of the Delegate from Lexington, and as a member of the Committee on Crimes, Pun- ishments and Criminal Procedure, of which he is the distinguished Chairman, I am very heartily in favor of the substitute he has offered as far as it goes. The substitute offered by me does not differ from the sub- stitute proposed by the Delegate from Lex- ington, except in one or two particulars. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 31 Friday ] RAMSEY. [November 14. In the first place, the language is changed so as to make the section, if adopted, con- form to the report of the Committee on Executive Department. As it was offered, it was intended to be a section of the report of the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure. In other words, instead of saying in the first line of said section “ the Governor shall have the pew- er,” I striketthat out, and say “he may,” as all the other sections in the report of the Committee on Executive Department, in mentioning the powers of the Governor, begin each section with “he,” “he may,” instead of “the Governor shall have pow- er ”--that is in the first line—and in the fifth line of said substitute I strike out the word “Governor” and insert. “ he.” Also in the ninth line some change is made in the language, though not in substance. Also in the fifteenth line. These are the first changes. The only other change I make is that I provided in my substitute: that hereafter, if the Legislature should see proper to do so, a Council or Board of Pardons may be established, prescribing what their duties shall be, and what powers the Governor shall have, and upon that I desire to offer a few suggestions. In the first place, in this country the sovereign power is with the Legislature—— it lies with the people. In the English Government it is with the Crown, claimed as a matter of Divine right; and, therefore, it was peculiarly within the province of the Crown to dispense the pardoning power; but in this country it is not so. The sov- ereign power is lodged in the people, and it does not necessarily belong to the Execu- tive as a function of that office. The people may lodge it anywhere they please. They may place it in the Legislative Department, in the Judicial Department, or in the Exec- utive Department. In some States it has been lodged in the legislative bodies; in oth- ers with a Board of Pardons; but in a ma- jority of cases it has been lodged in the 4 Executive Department, for the reason that it has been considered more convenient to be lodged with that department, or with the Executive himself. Now, I desire to ask a question. First, what is a pardon? Bouvier, in his law dictionary, says :: “Pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power intrusted with the execu- tion of the laws, which exempts the indi- vidual on whom it is bestowed from the- punishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed.” He further says, in con-- nection with that subject: “ Every pardon‘ granted to the guilty is in derogation of the law; if the pardon be equitable, the law is bad; for when legislation and the admin- istration of the law are perfect, pardons must be a violation of the law; but as human actions are necessarily imperfect, the pardoning power must be vested some- where, in order to prevent injustice when it is ascertained that an error has been com- mitted.” Mr. Frederick Howard Wines, Secretary of the Board of State Commissioners of Public Charities for the State of Illinois, upon'that subject says: “ The theory of the pardoning power is simply this: that Courts, may err in the application of legal penalties to individuals, for the want of evidence not forthcoming at the time of trial, or for other reasons, either by mistak- ing an innocent for a guilty person, or by imposing penalties disproportionate to guilt, and therefore excessive; and, in that event, the power to correct such error must be lodged somewhere. It is, in fact. usually lodged in the Executive, for convenience sake, and because it is the special function for the Executive to enforce the law; but it is not necessarily vested in this branch of government, nor is it always lodged there. The Constitution might empower Courts to correct their own errors; or it might allow Legislatures to correct them by spe- cial Statutes in individual cases. the jurisdiction of the Legislature over crimes and criminals is not expressly lim- 'Where I 32 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] RAMSEY. [November 14 , ited by the Constitution it is unlimited. And the grant to the Executive by the Constitution of the right of pardon and the commutation of sentence is not, in the nature of it, intended to prevent or forbid certain other modifications or abridgments of sentences formally pro- nounced by the Courts.” It will be seen that the power of pardon is not, as the Delegate from Bullitt said, strictly an Executive power. I claim it is not. The power is in the people, and ‘they can lodge it in such department as they see proper; but for convenience it has been lodged with the Executive. Now, with reference to the power of the Ex- ecutive to pardon, either before or after conviction, I desire to quote from the ex- cellent message of our present Governor to the Legislature upon its meeting in 1887. He says: “Applications for clemency are al~ most universally em part0 statements, sel- dom giving the facts which were proved in the case, and very often are misrepresenta- tions. Investigation shows that a vast ma- jority of them are devoid of merit, yet their consideration occupies a very large proportion of the time of the Executive.” This is from the message of our present Governor to the Legislature in 1887.- Marquis Beccaria, in his work on Crimes, speaking on this subject, says : “ Clemency is a virtue which belongs to the Legislator, and not to the executor of the laws; a vir- tue which ought to shine in the Code and not in private judgment. To show man- kind that crimes are sometimes pardoned and that punishment is not the necessary consequence, is to nourish the flattering hope of impunity, and is the cause of their considering every punishment inflicted as an act of injustice and oppression. The Prince, in pardoning, gives up the public security in favor of an individual, and by his ill-judged benevolence proclaims a pub- lic act of impunity. Let, then, the execu- tor of the laws be inexorable, but let the Legislator be tender, indulgent and hu- mane.” Gentlemen have said on the floor of this House that no instance can be shown where the pardoning power has been abused before conviction. One rea- son why a great many instances cannot be given is, that we have no knowledge on that subject. I introduced a resolution the other day which was rejected, seeking to know from the Executive Department what pardons had been issued during the last ten years, and to‘ know in what in- stances pardons had been issued before and after conviction. We do not know in how many cases this power has been exercised, but we do know this much, that there have been cases of the exercise of that power which a great many people of this State be- lieve have been an abuse. I do not care to cite any particular instances; some have al- ready been cited; nor do I desire to cast any reflection upon any individual who has oc- cupied the Executive chair; but gentlemen have continually asked in what instances has there been an abuse of that power. I do not know in the cases which I shall cite whether or not there was an abuse of that power, because I am not familiar with all the facts, but I think I can cite an instance in a certain county which, at the time, cre- ated considerable sensation and comment throughout the State; and justly so, if I understand the facts correctly. I do not say it was done intentionally. No doubt it was done with the best motives and from the best light at hand; but if I am correctly informed, it was shown that one of the most outrageous crimes had been perpe- trated, not only on the people in that county, but on all the_ good people in this Commonwealth, concerning the purity of elections and the protection of the ballot- box. The poll-books had been falsified, names had been forged, the ballot-boxes had been stolen from the county, and a man ran off with one of them; and we find that when the power of the law was brought to bear upon the guilty parties, they were re- lieved by the Executive; and some eight or EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 33 Friday,] RAMSEY—MCDERMOTT. [November 14, ten persons indicted by a Grand Jury for ofi'enscs of that kind were pardoned before conviction. Not only that, I was not able to secure the adoption of my resolution, and find out the facts in relation to pardons before and after conviction, but I did find out something about it in the Documents of 1882, volume 2, which is part of the Official Documents of this State, and is in answer to a resolution adopted by the Legislature of that year. That book contains a list of pardons granted from the 3d day of De- cember, 1879, until the 23d day of March, 1881, and shows that there were 845 pardons granted by the Chief Executive. What were the reasons for the granting of those pardons? We find 129 were granted without (my reason being given. We find on page 540 that from Nos. 431 to 821, be- ing 390 cases, the reason is given in these few words: “ Pardons were granted in cases 431 to 821, inclusive, to persons convicted of kukluxing in Lawrence county, upon the request of the Judge of that district. The pardons granted above have never been delivered to the parties, but are now in the oflice.” They had tobe paid for, and were not taken out. Mr. McDERMOTT. You think the Judge ought to have been allowed to par- don instead of the Governor? Mr. RAMSEY. No, sir. Mr. McDERMOTT. Might he not have the power, under the law as you leave it now? Might he and the Commonwealth’s Attorney not dismiss those cases? Mr. RAMSEY. This shows those par- dons were granted upon the request alone of the Judge. Mr. McDERMOTT. Then could not the Commonwealth’s Attorney and the Judge of the district have dismissed those cases? Mr. RAMSEY. As I said, in 129 cases out of 845, which were granted in eighteen months, no reasons whatever were given, and there was nothing to show whether ‘be- fore or after conviction. I find, in com- parison with other States, from an official report made in the State of Michigan dur- ing a period of seventeen years, that there were only 447 pardons granted, so that you can see from that the extent to which this power has been used in the State of Ken- tucky. ‘We find the people over the State complaining of the administration of our criminal laws. It seems to me it is all the more reason if, as stated by the Delegate from Bullitt, juries acquit men, if the Court of Appeals reverses cases and sends them back for the slighest technicalities, then when we do finally secure a conviction from a jury and from the Court, that the Ex- ecutive should stand as executor and en- forcer of the law, instead of doing away with what has been done. I claim that the trial of cases is properly a judicial function, and why? Because Courts have been pro- vided in which every man is guaranteed a speedy and impartial trial, for the reason that there it is that the facts can be more certainly and. correctly ascertained and justice administered; and after that power has once acted, it seems to me it should appear to the Executive that there has been some grievous error, that the punishment. was too severe, that new evidence has been discovered, or that some other good reason exists why he should undo the work of all the machinery provided by the State for the conviction of criminals, before he sanc- tions a pardon for that individual. We find that twenty-six of the States of this Union have adopted similar provisions in their Constitutions, by which they limit this power of pardoning to “after convic- tion.” Has there been any grievous wrong _ growing out of the adoption of this provis- ion in their Constitutions where it has been enforced for many years? If so, we have never heard of it. In Indiana they have a similar provision‘ to the one I have of- fered, and I am free to say that is where I obtained the idea. It seems to me it is a good provision for this rea- son, that whenever you pass that sec- 34 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' two or three other officials. Friday,] RAMSEY. [November 14. tion you are putting the Executive have an opportunity to remedy this thing, on his guard, because he knows it and I hope we shall provide that there leaves it in the power of the Legislature to create a Board of Pardons, if there should be a demand for it. That will be an in- ducement to the Executive to be as careful as he can in granting pardons, knowing that to the Legislature belongs the power at some future time to come to the conclu- sion to take that power out of his hands and vest it in a board of Pardons. It does not create any additional expense, because it provides that the Council shall be com- posed of officers of the State, perhaps the Attorney-General, Secretary of State, or It seems to me it would not be unwise to provide that hereafter, if that power should be desired to be taken away by the Legislature, that opportunity might be granted. That is what my substitute provides. In other re- spects it is the same as the one offered by the Delegate from Lexington, except a little difference in the wording of it. The sub- stance is the same, and l heartily approve of his amendment, because I am a member of the Committee which framed the provis- ion he offered. I believe the people of this State, from the manner in which it was dis- cussed during the election prior to this Convention, and from the discussion that has taken place in the newspapers, that we cannot be too careful in regard to this ex- traordinary power that is vested in the Governor. I do not pretend to cast any reflections upon our former Gov- ernors, but I would like to add my tribute to the excellent Governor we now have for the disposition he has shown in reference to the granting of pardons; but we are making provisions’ now‘ for future Governors, and we should make such provisions that, no matter who may be our Chief Executive, the rights of the people will be protected. The people of the State believe there have been abuses of their rights in this respect. They have discussed them in the papers and on the stump. We shall, at least, be no pardon before convic- tion, and only after conviction for good reason, and those reasons to be given to the Legislature. One gentleman has said that this idea of excluding pardons before con- viction was favorable to the wealthy and influential, and not in the interest of the poor. I differ with him. We all know it is not the poor man who succeeds in get- ting friends enlisted in his behalf to come here and intercede before the Executive and get a pardon before conviction. We know it is a rare case. It is where influential parties, parties said to be respectable in the' community, parties of good family who‘v have their friends make appeals in order to save them from the disgrace which would result from conviction. That very thing has a worse effect than any thing else which could be done in the community. Why? Because people in the community do not know the reasons why pardons are granted before conviction. They know that the man has been indicted, but that he has not been tried; they know he has been pardoned by the Governor without any reason being given, and the effect on the poor man is bad, because he thinks the pardon was on account of the respectability and standing of the defendant, and that the poor have no such privilege. .That is the way they reason about it. The effect _of a pardon of that sort is bad, for itv teaches the young men of respectability that they can go ahead and commit crimes and then go to' the Governor and, through influential connections, obtain pardon. I am opposed to the pardoning power before conviction, and think it ought to be limited, .- as it has been in twenty-six States, to cases after conviction; and, in addition to that, we should provide for some means of get- ting a Board of Pardons if it should become necessary. I do not desire to detain the Convention longer. I have undertaken, in my feeble manner, to present my views as ExEeUTIvE DEPARTMENT. ' 35 Friday,] best I can, having an‘ earnest conviction that there is a demand on the part of the people of the State that when they have, at considerable expense, provided machin- ery for the punishment of criminals, when to-day Kentucky is looked upon by the people of other States in the Union and by our own people as a State where punish- ment for crime is not sufficiently enforced, we should at least put some check on this power to interfere with the execution and enforcement of the law. Mr. FARMER. I offer a resolution to amend the resolution offered by the Dele- gate from Lexington. The Reading Clerk read the amendment as follows: In case. of rebellion and armed opposi- tion to the law by large bodies of men, the Governor may, by ‘proclamation, state that he may pardon such as may lay down their arms and surrender to the civil au— thorities in a speclfied time, and may then pardon such persons without trial. a Mr. FAR MER. I think the amendment that I have offered obviates all the objec- tions which have been made against the measure, so ably advocated by the gentle- man from Lexington. I have listened at- tentively to the argument pro and con on this question, and with that exception, I think that I endorse the opinions of the gentleman from Lexington ; but experience has shown us that there are times when the Governor should exercise this great power, both in the case of rebellion and in case large bands of armed men are impeding the course of the law. We find that there are times that this has been a very powerful lever in putting down such rebellions and violations of the law; and the Governor’s proclamation that all who will peaceably return to their homes, and surrender them- selves to the civil authorities in a specified time, has a tendency very frequently to break the backbone of the rebellion; that people begin, here and there! to leave the cause and come home, and accept Execu- FARMER. [November 14 , .‘w _,..‘x -i_—_, vim—_— tive clemency. I think this should be put in our Constitution; but at the same time, I think, that in ordinary civil cases, if we will look at our experience, we will find that there is no occasion for the Governor ever to pardon before conviction. In the case of innocent persons, we find the tendency is that people look with leniency upon such cases. Persons when deserving of pardon have no difficulty to obtain bail; if they are technically guilty, they can throw themselves on the mercy of the jury and Governor, and if innocent they will have a chance to vindicate themselves and go free. For these reasons I favor the resolution of the gentleman from.’ Lexing- ton. But I shall make no argument against the gentleman who has advocated a Board of Pardons. I think that the experience of many States has been against it; and I think there is but little sentiment in this House advocating any such measure as that. I oppose it; and would deduce an argument confirmatory to what has been said by the gentleman from Lexington, in the time of James II. That monarch granted a sus- pension of the laws. James II. was a Catho- lic. England was generally Protestant at that time, and the Episcopal was the estab- lished religion; but there were a great many Protestant dissenters. James II. favored the Catholics. He wished to favor the Catholic party in England and make them supreme, and in order to favor his Catholic subjects he had to make a general suspension of the laws. In suspending the laws, he said that no man should be convicted of any violation of the religious laws there- after. In that way he suspended the laws, that they should be inoperative, as acting upon dissenters for proclaiming their doctrines, or Catholics for saying Mass. He proclaimed that and then sus- pended the laws, and for this, as much as any thing else, he lost his Crown, and he claimed that it logically came from the par- doning power; as he could pardon in one thing, he claimed the right that it gave the 36 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMEN T. Friday,] ' MCELROY— MILLER—DEHAVEN. [November 14. right to pardon in another. If he could pardon one individual'before trial, he could pardon all individuals before trial, and this was the argument that he used; and the abuse of that power, I think more than any thing else, cost James II. his Crown. And this you can very readily see is a thing that might be very much abused, although no Governor would go to the extent of James II. But if we grant him that power, I do not see why he should not, if so disposed, go to the length of James IL Mr. MCELROY. I move the Commit- tee do now rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again to-morrow. M r. W. H. MILLER. I second the mo- tion. The motion being put, was carried. The Committee thereupon rose, and the President, Mr. Clay, resumed the Chair. Mr. DEHAVEN. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the Committee of Executive Ofiicers for the State at Large They have made some progress therein, and ask leave to sit again. The report of the Committee was adopt- ed, and, upon motion, the Convention ad- journed. {causation Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V0]. 1.] Saturday,] FRANKFQRT, NOVEMBER 15, 1890. BoLEs—JoNsox. [Na 53 [November 15 . The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Darsie. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. Petitions and Communications. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. Mr. BOLES. I have a petition from the President and Secretary of the Farmers and Laborers’ Union protesting against the enlargement of woman’s rights in regard to property rights, I wish it referred to the Committee on Woman’s Rights without being read. The PRESIDENT. The petition will be so referred. Mr. JONSON. I have a communica- tion in the shape of a petition from D. W. Young, of Cynthiana, Ky., asking for the protection of property rights of married women in the State of Kentucky, and would like to have it referred to the appro- priate Committee. The PRESIDENT. The petition will be referred to the Committee on VVoman’s Rights. Mr. JONSON. I havea communication from Mrs. James Bennett, asking the mem- bers of the Constitutional Convention to resist, to the extent of their ability, the encroachment of the Federal Government, as manifested in, concerning certain rights of citizenship upon a certain class of people in the State of Kentucky, and depriving other people in Kentucky of similar privi- leges. I would like to have it referred appropriately. _ The PRESIDENT. What reference does the gentleman desire ‘? Mr. JONSON. If we had a Committee on Federal Relations it should go to them; but as we have none, I guess it should go to the Legislative Department. ThePRESIDENT. The communication will be so referred. Mr. JONSON. I have a communication from certain ladies in Bloomfield, Mrs. Davis, Mrs. Grant, and Mrs. Thurman, asking for the protection, and the securing by this Convention the property rights of married women in Kentucky. The PRESIDENT. It will be referred to the Committee on VV'oman’s Rights. The Chair will lay before the Convention the following communication. The communication was a letter from the surviving members of the Constitutional Convention of 1849, which was read. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest, out of respect to these gentlemen, the letter should be printed in the debates and proceedings, but it will require a motion to that effect. Mr. J ONSON. I make the motion that it be spread on' the minutes, and printed in the debates and proceedings of the Con ven- tion. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. ‘ The letter is as follows : FRANKFORT, KY., Nov. 15, 1890. To the Delegates of the Constitutional Con- vention of Kentucky of 1890 : We cannot express to you in language our high appreciation of the many kind- nesses and attentions you have shown us in Frankfort since our arrival here, in ac cordance with your resolution passed in 2 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] BURNAM—MONTGOMERY—BECKNER. [N ovember 15' .. Convention assembled, by a unanimous vote. Of the Constitutional Convention of Kentucky, held in 1849-50, there are only seven survivors: Silas M. Woodson, of Missouri; Gov. David Meriwether, of J eiferson county; Wm. R. Thomp- son, of Bullitt county; J. D. Morris, of Christian county; Larkin J. Proctor, Fof Edmonson county; v R. H. Hanson, of Bourbon county; Willis B. Mache'ln, of Lyon county; but three of us have been able to accept your kind invitation. There are in the Convention of 1890 the sons and grandsonsof many of the illustri- ous men of the Convention of 1849-50, who have long since crossed the narrow bound- ary that separates time from eternity, and we will soon follow in their footsteps. We leave this last farewell, because there are many of you whom we could not see in person, and because we shall never meet again. You are now clothed with the most stu- pendous power with which men in a Re- public can be invested; there is nothing can hold in check that power except the Constitution of the United States. Make only such amendments to the Constitution as the people have clearly demanded. When you lay down the tremendous power with which the people have clothed you, you will receive the pleasing plaudits of a grateful people, which is the sweetest music that ever greeted the ears of atrue and faithful public servant, by a majority ratify- ing your work equal to that given by the peo- ple of 51,356 in favor of the Constitution 1849-50; and a half century will probably elapse before there will be any necessity to amend your work. Your old friends of the Convention of 1849-50. D. MERIWETHER, WM. R. THOMPSON, J. D. MORRIS. Mr. BECKHAM. I present a commu- nication from D. N. Sharpe, a citizen of Shelby county, and ask that it be referred; to the Committee on Corporations. The PRESIDENT. It will be so re- ferred. Leave of Absence. Leave ‘of absence was granted to the» Delegate from Bullitt. Mr. BURNAM. As there is nothing else before the House, I move the House: again resolve itself into the COMMITTEE OF THE "WHOLE for further’ consideration of the report of ' the Committee 011 Executive Department. Executive Department. A vote being taken, the motion was car-- ried, and the President designated the Dele— gate from Logan county (Mr. Coke) as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I have an amend-- ment which I wish to offer to the substitute; as proposed by the Delegate from Lexing- ton. . The amendment was read, and is as fol-- lows: ' . Amend the substitute of the Delegate-- from Lexington by striking out all that part thereof after the word “reprieve,” in the ninth line, and to and including the- word “ same,” in the fifteenth line, and in- sert in lieu thereof the following: "The- Governor shall, in each case of reprieve, re~ mission, pardon or commutation of sen-- tence, cause to be prepared a written state-- ment of the reasons ‘for granting the same, a record of which shall be kept by the Sec-- retary of State in a book to be kept for that purpose as a public record, and a copy of ' said written statement shall be transmitted to the Court in which the prosecution is- pending or judgment was rendered, which shall be filed and noted of record in said Court. Mr. BECKNER. I did not intend to' say any thing further on this subject; but so much has been urged against what I consider 'to be the abuse of a power, and not the power itself, that I ask the privi- lege of the House for a few moments while I draw attention to that distinction. I have been so faithfully following the flag of.‘ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 3 Saturday,] BECKNER. the old Constitution, carried so ably by the Delegate from Lexington, . that I confess I was no little disturbed the other-day to find that bright oriflamme going off at a tangent from the line on which he had theretofore been carrying it so closely. My rule in this body has been to stick to the old Constitution unless something better is suggested. If there is some preferable pro- vision in reference to any department of government presented, I propose to sup- port it; but the burden is upon the Delegate who proposes it to show that it is better, and until convinced, I shall adhere to what has been sanctioned by usage and approved by the fathers, believing that to be the safer course. We have had this Constitutional provision in Kentucky since the State came into the Union, and we have had gentle- men of as much ability as any upon this floor inveighing against it for some three or four days—gentlemen who have evidently informed themselves and, who do not usual- ly talkloosely. They have paraded every in- stance that could be found in order to fortify their position that there should be a change in the present condition of things. Nearly every instance they have presented has been an instance where there has been, perhaps, taking their statement of the case, an abuse of power; but the trouble about it is, that from their statements we cannot know all the facts. We do not know what moved the Governor in many of these. cases. The record is not filed. There is no Bill of Exceptions, no presentation of proof or testimony in the cases cited. Some of them are from hearsay, presented at the instance of those who perhaps had griev- ances growing out of them, presented, per- haps, from loose talk or careless statements of a newspaper. That is not the kind of evidence on which we should try this great question. As I said the other day, and as has been urged strongly and ably here, if we are to do any thing about this power, if it should be abridged in any way, we should begin at the other end of the line‘. If a man has had a chance to be acquitted before an examining Court, before a Grand Jury, before a Petit Jury, before a Judge of a lower Court, on a motion for a new trial, and in the Court of Appeals, and yet, after hearing the whole ease, every Court has been of opinion, and the Grand and Petit Juries have been of opinion that he- was guilty of the offense charged, it seems to me there might be some logic and force in the reasoning that the power to pardon such a man should be abridged; but it is: being urged at the other end of the line. I cannot see the logic or force of saying that the Representative of the Sovereignty of the Commonwealth, the one person pre- sumed above all others to be the first citi- zen, who is chosen by the whole- body of the people,’ selected for his. wisdom and patriotism, for his- knowledge of public affairs, should‘ be deprived of this power, or, rather, that the power should be taken from him, be- cause it is not a deprivation. It‘ seems to- me it would be a great relief for any man to» have taken from him this responsibility. It cannot add to his influence ‘or power; it can be a source of great irritation to those who may apply to him for the exercise of the power. It is an opportunity for him to make a great many people angry, and to 7 give offense to hundreds in the Common- wealth where he cannot please more than a few. In other words, the retention of this power is not to be desired by the Executive, but it is to be desired by the people of the Commonwealth, because when it should be exercised the need for it is great. On each occasion, when the exercise has been called for, it has been in order to secure peace to the public and tobring about a prompt settlement of difiiculties which, otherwise, might have led to bloodshed and trouble of a serious character. I do not believe in settling questions like this by reference to- the abuse of some power or provision. The general working of the power is the thing we are to look at. There is no single pro- [November 15 ., 4 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] 'B ECKNER. -~ _‘_. __._.______—_._.._ -_._____nn.___.__. .____-_‘ [November 15 . i “— vision in that Constitution that somebody with knowledge of the facts sufficient could not charge against it that it had been abused, that the power had been wrongfully exercised. Take the Court of Appeals: ‘There have been constant complaints against the Court of Appeals. There have been decisions rendered by that body which were wrong, and admitted by the Court ' afterwards to be wrong, because overruled, and the opinions there expressed taken back. The Circuit Courts of the Common- wealth have rendered decisions and given opinions that have brought dissatisfaction, and that were criticised by the people; but we do not propose to abolish the Courts on that account. The Executive and Minis— terial Officers of the Commonwealth have made mistakes. We do not propose to abolish them on that account; and so it is with every single function of Government and every single power granted to any ofiicer. It may be criticised and objected to, but that is not the question. The ques- tion is, shall the power he denied; is it a wise power to place in the hands of any- body‘? In some States it has been taken from the Governor and put in the hands of a Board of Pardons. This has not worked satisfactorily. There have been complaints against the Board of Pardons. That Board may be composed of eminent citizens, or it may not; but all the time these powers are exercised by human beings, who are weak and erring, and who make mistakes. On this question the mistakes are paraded here. I.do not care, in discussing this mat- ter, whether mistakes have been made or not. lknow mistakes will necessarily be made by those who exercise this power, because they are men and not perfect. We cannot get angels to come here and dis- ‘charge the duties of this high oflice; but this matter of grace to those who have, through mistake, inadvertence or ignorance ‘violated a law should be exercised by some- body in the Commonwealth. We cannot say thatthe Court of Appeals should do it. It is not in the line of their duty. We can- not say that the Judges of the Circuit Court shall do it, although they have the power to do it to a great extent in dismiss- ing indictments. The Commonwealth’s Attorney can do it to a limited extent. in ' the same way. Somebody should have this power, and the man who is the first citizen of the Commonwealth—who is chosen by all the people—I say is the safest reposi- tory for it, and the burden is upon those against the proposition to show where it has been abused. The gentleman from Laurel, yesterday afternoon, spoke of the cases from Lawrence county, where men, during the Ku-klux period, had banded themselves together to do what they thought ought to be done. They undertook to enforce the penalties of the law, which, in their opinion, had not been properly or efi‘lciently enforced by the Court or - the ofiicers having that matter in charge. After they had done what they originally proposed, they went, as always happens in such cases, beyond what the movers de- signed; they committed violations of law themselves, which made them subject to indictment and prosecution. They were a strong body of men in the county, includ- ing many who had been heretofore its best citizens; but they were not willing to sur- render or subject themselves to the process of the law for what had been done in the heat of excitement, until they were given the assurance that they would not be sent to the Penitentiary, and it was thought best by the Judge of the Circuit Court there, as they were willing to return home and be good citizens, to relieve them from prosecu- tion. It worked well for that community. It was a wise and judicious exercise of Executive clemency, and it is an instance showing that that power should be held by somebody, so as to relieve the community under cir- cumstances of that kind. Numerous cases of the exercise of this power by Governors Bramlette and Blackburn have been cited, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 5 Saturday,] BECKNER—BRONS'I‘ON. [November 15 .. but I say I have heard no instance cited that should induce us to take from the repre- sentative of the Commonwealth this power, which has in general been so wisely and beneficently exercised. I have never had any trouble about getting to see papers in the Governor’s office, and I have had occa- sion several times to see the papers lodged there by those applying for pardons. I dropped over yesterday afternoon to see what had been done during the term of the 3 present Executive, and I found that twenty- nine pardons have been granted before con- viction during three years and two months of his administration. This is the admin- istration with which the people are best ac- quainted; it is the one about which the facts could be best ascertained, because they are fresher, and there are people living who know the circumstances surrounding each case presented for Executive clemency. I find that in twenty-nine applications the parties have been pardoned before convic- tion. There are hundreds of papers on file indorsed by all kinds of citizens, Judges, Commonwealth’s Attorneys and other gen- tlemen in high positions, some backed by men of the greatest influence in the Com- monwealth, which have been rejected, and the applications refused, because the Gov- ernor, in his wisdom and sense of jus- tic-e and right, felt that they ought not to be granted. I find he pardoned two men before conviction for not list- ing their lands.’ The men lived out of the State. They had an agent in the county, but the agent had neglected to list their land, and they were indicted under the law requiring the lands to be listed. When it was shown to the Governor that the violation of law was not intentional, he pardoned the men from the penalty of the law. They paid their taxes, the Common- wealth got its tax, and everybody was satisfied. The Governor relieved them from g a penalty which he felt they ought not to pay. There were several cases following of men violating the license law, not intention- Q ally, but inadvertently, and when satisfiedv of this fact His Excellency granted the pardon. Mr. BRONSTON. What cases were those? Mr. BECKN ER. Fleming. Mr. BRONSTON. names. Mr. BECKNER. There were other cases of the same kind where parties thought they could at any time pay the license, and as they were good citizens, the Governor pardoned them. They paid their taxes, and he relieved them from the penalties of the charge. There was another case where a man had not given a description of his land in 1888. There were two or three cases where a Legislative Committee, investigating the Rowan county affairs, reported that certain parties ought not to be required to stand trial, and the Governor pardoned them—~ two men charged with murder and one- with grand larceny. Another case was- from Rockcastle county—a woman charged with selling liquor. She showed that it was a case of extreme poverty that made her sell the whisky, and his Excellency granted her a pardon rather than have her subjected to thepenalty. There was an- other case where a party was indicted for‘ gaming, and his Excellency, feeling that as he had been led into it and had been a good boy previously, it would be in the interest of public morals that he should be par-- doned, and therefore granted him a pardon. without trial. Here are two cases where a- man occupying a quasi official position had carried concealed weapons, and on presen- tation of the facts His Excellency pardoned him. There are three cases where the- Courier-Journal was indicted in Warren county for publishing a lottery advertise-- ment. There were three indictments in that county on the same charge, based on- three different issues of the paper. On pre- S. P. Graham, of I do not want the , sentation of the ‘facts, His Excellency re-- 6 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT Saturday,] fused to pardon all of them, but said he would let the question he tested on one in- dictment. He pardoned two and allowed it to be tested on the other. The defend- ant was acquitted on the indictment which was left for trial, justifying the action of the Governor. Here is another case in which a man had sold a pistol to a boy—that is. a young man under age—without knowing the law, and His Excellency, being satisfied of the fact, granted a pardon. Here is another case in Henry county, where the ‘directors of a fair company, in the conduct of the fair, had allowed a man to set up what was charged to be a gaming contriv- ance. All the directors were indicted, not the company, but the individual members of the board, and the Governor pardoned all except one. He allowed them to select one member of the board who should stand the brunt of the fight, and there was a trial before Judge DeHaven and an acquittal in that case. Here was a man indicted‘for unlawfully practicing dentistry. He did not know there was any law with reference to the matter, and in one case practiced what would have been called dentistry, and was indicted. The Governor relieved him. Here are two cases in Bell county: Roger Williams, an oflicer, killed a man in the dis- charge of his duty. There was a trial in the Circuit Court, and a conviction under .an hostile state of public sentiment. The case came to the Court of Appeals and was reversed. The Governor, after reading the testimony, and satisfying himself that the public interest would be better subservcd by so doing, granted him a pardon. These are cases found in the Governor’s office during this administration. I say none of the cases that have been cited should induce ‘us to make this great change in the prerog- atives of the Governor, but that ‘ somebody should be left to exercise this great power. Our Savior said it was better that ninety and nine guilty‘ men should escape than that one innocent man should be punished. BECKNER.—~BRONSTON—COX. [November 15 . They may say that is not applicable here; but I say it is, because this is one means of providing for not subjecting to punish- ment men who are not guilty in intent, but who may be technically guilty of a viola- tion of the law without‘ intending any thing wrong. Mr. BRONSTON. Will you please tell me where and when the Saviormade that statement. Mr. BECKNER. I maybe mistaken about that. I am not eminent as a theolo- gian like the Delegate from Lexington; but if the Savior did not say it he would have said it if it had been brought to his attention. I know that because of his great love of humanity and tenderness of heart. It is good enough for him to have said. I would suggest that it is the people who have hearts that live in the history of the world, and serve the world best. It was this which made Abraham Lincoln immortal. The fact that he loved human- ity ; that he loved the people among whom he lived and from whom he came. One of our Governors endeared himself to the peo- ple of the Commonwealth to a degree that has never been surpassed, and which will hand his name down forever, because he had a great big heart. I say if we err at all, we should be sure that it is on the side of mercy and of giving humanity a chance. I say it is absolutely necessary to lodge this power with somebody, and there nobody to whom it can be so safely intrusted as to the Governor of the Commonwealth. It is not to be considered under the light of the law. If it is to be law, then there is no more grace. The glory of the pardoning power is that it is not law, but grace exer- cised in feeble imitation of Divinity. The Son of God died to secure pardon, not only for those who had not been convicted, but for those who had not been born. Mr. COX. I have been wonderfully pleased since the discussion of this great question was called up in this Committee. I know the county of Owen; I know it is a EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 7 Saturday,] Cox. [November 15 . grand county, but no grander than the gentleman who represents that county in this Convention. Yesterday, for the first time in the discussion of the great question before this Convention, that gentleman came forth. He seemed to have been .retired, to have been unwilling to let his .light shine; but he came forth, and it grati- fied me wonderfully, because he came forth in that purity ofspirit which has character- ized that man from the earliestdays of my acquaintance with him. He came forth in favor of that which is right; in favor of taking from the Governor of the Common- wealth the right to pardon before convic- tion. He came forth declaring that it was improper; that it was illogical for the Gov- ernor to pardon a man who was presumed .to be innocent; for the law presumes every man to be innocent until the contrary is proven. And I was gratified, not only that that gentleman had addressed this Committee, but that he addressed this Committee in vindication of a great, a wonderfully great, principle—a principle, that, although it has not existed in Ken- tucky heretofore, this Convention should beyond question sustain. What are we here for but to amend, alter or change the Constitution of Kentucky‘? That is the law under which we are convened, and being convened here, we have the right to _go back and act upon that which was done by those distinguished gentlemen who filled ‘this hall in former Conventions; and we are now stepping forward for the purpose of doing that. From the experience of forty years; yea, the experience that we have had from the establishment of the State Government in the dark and bloody ground, we surely have learned something; and these great truths that we have learned were to bring those who are guilty of crime before the Courts to determine as to their guilt or innocence. That is the great forum in which they should be heard, and the law throws shield after shield, as the distinguished gentleman from Boyd has told us, around every one charged with violation of law. And now, here is an- other shield thrown around him, and that is the power of the Governor to remit fines or grant pardons before conviction. Is it wisdom in the people of Kentucky to thus protect those who are guilty of crime, when those who suffer receive no protection‘? We have been told of murders of the foul- est and most loathsome character, and yet the murderer was not brought before a Court, because the Governor of Kentucky had the power to grant a pardon, and thus relieve the individual from the punishment and the trial for the crime which he had committed. This crime had been investi- gated by the Grand Jury. Twelve of that Grand Jury must declare that there is probable cause for him to be brought before the Court below, and that Grand Jury charge him with the offense, and he goes before that Court; but before this can be done, before this Grand Jury has the right or power to investigate that subject, the Governor steps forward and relieves him of that investigation. I insist that our sympathies should go forth to those who are the sufferers by crime rather than to those who are the perpetra— tors of the crime. I was astonished yester- day afternoon, and most seriously regret now that the distinguished Delegate from Bullitt is not here. I was astonished to hear his attack upon Prosecuting Attbrneys and upon Judges. I wondered that that dis- tinguished gentleman would make an onslaught upon that class of oflicers; when ' he told this Committee that the Prosecuting Attorney would go before the Court, when an individual had been in- dicted, and say to the Court that it is best that the case should be dismissed, to enter a nolle prosequ‘i. This was a charge against the Prosecuting Attorney and Judge if that motion prevailed, and by the manner in which it [was presented by that distinguished gentleman, it was an implica- tion of wrong and corruption in what‘? In 8 EXEC UTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] Cox. [N ovember l5 .. the Judiciary of Kentucky and in the prosecutors chosen from the mass of the bar to represent the Commonwealth in all those cases. That was an implication upon those gentlemen thus clothed by our Con- stitution and law with the power to protect us. I certainly think that the gentleman, in his earnest zeal to keep the Governor from being a great political swell for four years, got too far. He wandered in his imagination from that which experience, no doubt, has taught him was true in Ken- tucky. I turned to the Auditor’s Report for the purpose of finding what district- Judicial District—Bullitt county was in. I found it was in the Seventeenth District, and I insist that he was mistaken in that position, for the reason that I have had the pleasure of making the acquaintance of many distinguished gentlemen from that district on this floor. Had it been true that corrupt men were elected to the ofiice of Judge, had it been true that corrupt men were elected to the office of Prosecuting Attorney in that d is- trict, might it not, upon the same parity of reasoning, be true that in this Convention we have corrupt men representing the counties constituting that District‘? But far from it. That District is as well repre- sented in this Convention, perhaps, as any other Judicial District in the Common- wealth. I have let my mind wander from the shores. of the Mississippi to Virginia, and I find no Judicial District in this State which is more ably represented than the Seventeenth Judicial District; and that is evidence that the gentleman was mistaken when he brought this broad charge against the Prosecuting Attorneys and the Judges. And when I go further and reflect, I hap- pen to know very well the reputation and character of the Prosecuting Attorney, Mr. Morris, in that district, and I will say here that his character is pure. He stands out fairly before the people of Kentucky as an able, honest and earnest prosecutor, as a valuable and an efficient ofiicer. And, kn ow- ing the gentleman, I was almost made to blush when the gentleman was speaking yesterday afternoon, because I knew that the distinguished gentleman on this floor from Oldhani county was the Circuit Judge in that district. Is not that conclusive that the gentleman was mistaken in that on- slaught on Prosecuting Attorneys and Circuit Court J udges? But when I turn my thoughts to my own district, the Eleventh- We have vindicated the character of Pros- ecuting Attorneys as thoroughly, perhaps, as they could be vindicated in any way they could be determined in this country. We have had two Circuit Judges who- served us as Prosecuting Attorneys for six years. The people took them up and. elected them Circuit Judges of the districts which they had represented as Prosecuting Attorneys. Here is a vindication of those gentlemen who have filled those two great. oflices. I think it was only the zeal of the- distinguished Delegate from Bullitt to de- feat the substitute offered by the Delegate- from Lexington that caused him to make this attack on our bar. I prefer talking about a man to his face rather than behind his back, and am sorry the Delegate from Bul- litt is not here. We have been told by the distinguished Delegate from Clark that there are a few isolated cases in which the Executive has pardoned before conviction, and these were very moderate affairs, things that attracted very little attention, and the guished gentleman from McCracken said yesterday evening that he knew nothing of ' the sort, after the gentleman from Lexing- ton had presented a large number of cases in which the Executive had exercised that power, and in which evidently there were great errors. I was thinking, while the- gentleman from McCracken was thus speak- ing, of an occurrence with which I was per- sonally acquainted. In 1863 the Branch of the Southern Bank of Kentucky was. robbed in Carrollton. Out of that bank there was over one hundred thousand dol~ (lintin-- ’ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 9 ‘to special depositors. Saturday,] Cox. [N ovember 15 . lars in gold taken, and that gold belonged Therefore, the loss must fall on ‘individuals and not upon the bank. That one hundred thousand dollars, I think it was one hundred and seven thousand dollars, was worth two hundred and fifty thousand dollars in currency at that time. It was taken out in the night. It was removed, and an excitement arose within the whole country, such as I have never witnessed before or since. Here were persons, some of them ladies, robbed of their estates, robbed of what they had put there, as they believed, to be safe within the vaults of that bank; but in a very short time the perpetrators of that crime were brought to the bar of justice, and a Grand Jury indicted them. I cannot state from per- sonal experience as to all of those who were pardoned by the Executive of Kentucky, but I know I was preparing to come to Frankfort on business, and when preparing to come here an attorney came to me and handed me an envelope, and asked me to hand it to the Governor while I was here. ‘After I concluded my business here I walked to the Governor’s ofiice and handed him the envelope. He read it and handed it to his Private Secretary and said to him, “Prepare a pardon for that man.” That man thus pardoned was guilty posi- tively, for the reason that he had escaped from Kentucky, but in his concealment he had friends with whom he kept corre- spondence, and through that correspondence he found out what the great excitement was. He became alarmed as to his condi- tion and he believed it would be better to deliver up the funds he had taken, and he wrote back to the officers of the bank that they would find the money buried at the head of a grave, and when it was resur- rected it was found to contain four or five thousand dollars in gold. This was in fact a positive proof of his guilt, yet the Gov- ernor pardoned him, and would not allow that man to be brought before the Court, and the charges investigated That man went free; He has never returned to Ken- tucky, and I suppose it will be no loss to Kentucky if he never should. That is one- case showing clearly and unmistakably the errors and wrongs that have been com-~. vmitted by the exercise of that power. That. I will- not speak of that which I have read in the- is within my personal knowledge. newspapers. I do most earnestly protest against continuing to give the Governor- power to pardon a wonderful. of Kentucky the before conviction. It is power resting upon are always misrepresented. I will just say that the Governor, when he granted that petition, said to me: “I intend to put my foot upon every thing connected with this. war.” Now, how was the robbing of that bank connected with the war? was deceived. As long as we retain this provision, such influences will be brought to bear on the Governor, and he will be deceived time after time, and exercise his . clemency, when, if he knew all the facts, he-v would have refused.‘ Those are facts which stand out boldly before the people of Ken- tucky; which stand out so clearly in the- minds of all that I feel it is rather strange - that gentlemen will rise on this floor and urge that the exercise of this power is against the poor. We have heard it said on this floor that the poor would be affected by it, and that they will be brought to trial‘ in cases where they ought not, and when they are not able to procure able counsel, when they are not in a condition to protect them- selves, and that the Governor may right-. fully pardon them and save them from the penalty. What are the facts before the country? that seek that clemency; it is not the man who dwells in the humble cottage, and is clad in tattered garments, but it is the- wealthy, the influential; those who are able to pay for counsel, and to present their case‘- I insist that all. before the Governor. him. He is. sought, time after time, by those who are- interested in getting pardons, and the facts. I say he - They are, that it is not the poor - "IO EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Z'SaturdayJ , tiary. Cox. [November 15 . should be placed on an equality; that the _poor and the rich, the colored and the white, ‘shall be brought to trial when indicted before a Court, in a county in which they have committed an offense, or in the county *to which their case has been removed. I insist this is but just and right. Let us ‘place all on an equality, and do not confer upon the’ Governor the power to exercise a ‘power which would relieve one class of men from trial. while another, who are poor and unable to employ attorneys, must go in and be tried before the Courts. The distinguished Delegate from Clark referred to a number of cases in which the present Executive has exercised that clemency. I listened with all the attention that I am. ‘capable of giving, and he admitted the guilt of those parties. Was it right that they should be shielded and others should r-not‘? I have no doubt the Governor was ‘worried to determine his duty, how he should discharge that duty, and in that condition if the power were taken from him he would be greatly relieved. I know 1there is no man in the Commonwealth 'who has a greater opinion of the character of *the Executive than I have. Perhaps twelve months ago I was at the depot here, and :a lady came in dressed in black and took -:her seat. She was sobbing. I supposed :some dear friend had been taken from her,’ that death had invaded her home; but I learned at the depot that she had been to :see" the Governor, and he had refused to pardon her son, who was in the Peniten- I felt a sympathy for her, and, in the deepest recesses of my heart, I said I would 'not accept the oflice of Governor under any -~consideration on earth, for I know when a- woman got to crying before me I would grant a pardon whether it ought to be granted or not. I want to relieve theChief Executive of this Commonwealth in the future of this “terrible responsibility. I want to take it from him I that all may be placed upon an Kequality. Now, there is another subject to which I desire for a few moments to call the atten- tion of the Committee, and that is the sub- ject of remitting the fees and commissions I insist that the Governor should have no such power. I insist that when an oflieer has discharged his duty it is an absolute injustice to him for the Gov- ernor to have the power to wipe out his fees. It is directly antagonistic to all prin- ciples of right and justice. When an officer of officers. has discharged a duty devolving upon him , and an individual has been found guilty of a misdemeanor and fined, the officer is en- titled to his fees in that case. The Govern- or’s right to wipe out those fees is contra- dictory' of all principles of right. And if he were allowed to remit those fees, what would be the result of it? The Clerk and the Sheriff and the County Attorney and all the officers of the Court would come up to the Legislature and say: “We are doing a very large amount of work annually for the Commonwealth which is wiped out by remissions of the Governor. We cannot discharge‘those duties without compensation. We must have our reward, and you must in- crease our fees in every case.” From whom will that increase come‘? It will come out of the pockets of the people. They will have to pay it. It matters not whether that increase comes out of the County Treasury or the State Treasury, the people pay it. That would be opening a wonderfulv avenue for increasing the fees of the officers. I know this Convention desires to adopt a Constitution by which the burden of taxation on the people will be lightened. I do not believe there is a gentleman on this floor who does not earnest- ly and heartily desire that the burden of taxation shall be reduced, that the Government shall rest upon us more lightly, and here is one step that would in- crease that burdena I say, give the Gover- nor the power to pardon, but only after conviction. I agree most heartily with the Delegate from Laurel when he speaks of the place where sovereignty resides. I say EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 11 ‘- Saturday,] -> ereignty. satisfied they will take some interest. BRONSTON—-—ASKEW. [November 15 . the sovereignty in our form of Government resides alone in the people. In- a monarch- ical form of Government it rests with the Monarch, but in a republic, like ours, it re— sides in the people, and the officers are the agents of the people and they are only car- rying out and putting into force that sov- Then let that sovereignty oc— cupy the place it should occupy, and we will give to the people of the Common- _ ‘wealth a Constitution which. they will ac- cept, and we will receive when our labors are completed the plaudit, “Well done thou _ good and faithful servant.” Mr. BRONSTON. I have a statement to make to the Convention in which I am not believe there is any institution in the State that is nearer to our hearts than the common school system. We have in the city of Lexington three thousand six hun- dred pupils who are enjoying the benefits of free education in the common schools of the city. It is my great pleasure to say that both the children and teachers of those schools have manifested great interest in the work of this Convention, and the teach- ers of the schools have done, in my judg— ment, the highest possible honor to this Convention in presenting themselves to-day to look on your work and encourage you with their presence. They are now in the lobby. (Applause) Mr. ASKEW. Mr. Chairman ‘and gentlemen of the Committee: I would not trouble this Committee with a single word more, except for the personal allu- sion made to me by ‘the Delegate from the city of Lexington on yesterday. In his first argument on this question he referred to a case which, I believed, to have hap- pened in the county of Scott. I asked him about it, and he told me he did have reference to that case. In the few remarks, I had the honor to submit the other day, I ' referred to it in very guarded terms. At least I thought everything I said was very guarded. I think if one man knows any Ido‘ thing about the actions of another, the Delegate from the city, of Lexington knows I had nothing on earth to do with procur- It was in fact against my advice. The attorneys retained by that gentleman, so far as I know, had nothing to do with obtaining the pardon. And in that connection, not for the purpose of fighting the battles of the Executive or making a defense for him, I did make a statement of the facts as I understood them. In his subsequent speech before this Committee he has given his version of those facts. After hearing him, I still adhere to the first statement. While I had nothing to do with the pardon, and neither justified nor attempted to justify the Executive in granting it, yet the facts were that the accused did shoot a man who had slapped his wife’s jaws, and that the Executive of this State, in granting that pardon, did it upon the almost unani- mous petition of the Senate of the State of Kentucky. In his argument the Delegate from Lexington overshot entirely the point I thought I had made in my speech. If you will notice his skillfully drawn substitute, it requires that the Execu- tive shall give the reasons for his actions to the Legislature; Of course, he must mean something by that, and that meaning must be, that it is to be a basis for legislative action. _ What I wanted to call the attention ing that pardon. - of the Committee to was, that there was nothing in his substitute; that in the very instance which he brought forward as an abuse of the pardoning power the Gover- nor had been induced to grant the pardon by the very body by whom he would have been tried if articles of impeachment had ever been brought against him. He would have you believe, in his substitute, that there wasgreat virtue in legislative knowl- edge; that they ought to have the facts before them,‘ and the Executive being com- pelled to give them the facts, that then you would have the curative power of the Legis- lature over the'Governor. I say, and it is " 12 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. \ judgment by a consideration of the case 9° Saturday,] AsKEw-BRoNsToN—ELMoRE. [November 15 . a fact, that that pardon was granted on the almost unanimous petition of the Kentucky Senate. In his speech he did not choose to refer to that; it did not suit his purpose. He came before you with a speech which I have heard for years. It is always able. You, gentlemen, have had but a taste of his powers of oratory in the previous discus- sions. He is at home in prosecution. He can say with the Scotchman: “ His b -ck against a rock, he bore, And firmly placed his foot before, Come one, come all! this rock shall fly From its firm be so, as soon as I.” As soon as you get him to prosecuting any- body he is at home. He gave you but a slight taste of his ability in his attack on the report of the Committee on Bill of tights. He is a prosecutor by nature, and an able one. I can state that, for I have been at his side for years. He is a good ofiicer and my friend, and he can be Com- monwealth’s Attorney as long as he wants to in his district; butlet us not be swept from the moorings of good judgment by his impassioned appeal. cases and gives his version of them, and asks you upon that statement and his ver- sion to change the whole structureof our laws. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to ask you if it is not true that, in the Scott coun- ty case, this woman who was slapped was a sister of the deceased ? Mr. ASKEW. She was a sister, but she had formed other connections since becom- ing his sister. She was the wife of another man, and the man told me—and I have every reason to believe his statement—that that woman was in the most distressing condition a woman can be, and when he went home and found her jaws had been slapped, and her whole nervous system shocked, he was beside himself, and it was under those circumstances that he committed that deed. It subserves no good purpose to bring up this unhappy recollection, but I want to admonish and beg of you not to lose your U3 He selects a few, put by him. I have heard of many prize morsels of fruits, vegetables, meats and things which would decay or go to destruction unless preserved by chemicals, but I never heard a man preserve a pros— ecuting speech for twelve years, and not have a chance to get it off. That is the speech he would have delivered at first .if he had had the opportunity. After‘ you wipe the froth and blood off the speech he deliveredv yesterday, there is not much difference between him and the balance of the Convention on the pardoning power. He is willing to leave that in the hands of' the Executive after conviction. We agree- on that. We only disagree 011 the power of the Executive to pardon before convic- tion, and if any of you listened to the ora- tion of the Delegate from Madison, I think you heard a sufficient answer to any thing that could be said by the Delegate from Lexington. Mr. EL M ORE. Mr. Chairman, being on the Committee of Executive Officers for the State at Large, I opposed the report on this particular section, and promised to make my objections when in Committee of ' the Whole. I must state that I heartily endorse the substitute offered by the gentleman from Fayettev I recollect very well that the Convention of 1792 invested the Governor with both appointing and pardoning power. The Convention of 1799 continued the same till 1849; but that Convention pulled down the appointing power from the hands- of the Governor and placed it in the hands‘ of the people, where . it so justly and so righteously belongs, thereby making our State Government a Republic in reality as well as in name, and it discussed at length the propriety of restricting the pardoning power, but it was left for the Convention of ' '1890 to restrict that power. Now, that the most flagrant abuses of ‘ this power often occur, and the most serious causes of complaint come up from all over‘ this Commonwealth, no Delegate in this EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 13 Saturday,] Convention can afford to deny, save the gentleman from McCracken; and now, I want right here to exonerate the present incumbent from any reflection, because he doeth all things well. Now, I do not deny that Executive clemency is not only proper but absolutely necessary, but I do say there should be a Constitutional restriction on that power. I recollect during my term in the Legislature of 1881-82 that this wholesale abuse of power went on to such an alarming and unprecedented extent that a Committee was raised by the Legislature to investigate the records of the Governor, and ascertain the amount of revenue cut oil‘ from the State Treasury by the remission of fines and forfeitures. That Committee never reported, but, I was informed by two of the members, that _the amount would reach seventy-five thousand dollars under that administration, that should have gone into the State Treasury and lessened the taxation of the people. I recollect very well that while this investigation was pending quite a number of gamblers were pardoned from McCraeken county, and yet the gentleman asks to point out a single instance. I recollect of some pardons from the city of Louisville on account of gam- bling; and I further recollect the Scott county murder that was so well recited by the Delegate from Fayette. On account of a friendly quarrel between him and his sister, which is a daily occurrence in many fami- lies throughout the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky, he was shot down at, his plough handles while at honest toil. N ow, I do think this is one of the most outrageous murders ever committed in Kentucky save one, and that one was when Judge Elliott was shot down like a gazelle in the forest, for an honest judicial decision. And yet he was pardoned without a trial, and without hearing‘ the evidence on the other side, and I deny the statement that a ma- jority of the Senate signed that petition; my recollection is that it was less than one- third. Where was the Lieutenant-Gov- ELMORE—AL'XIER. [November 15 . ernor and Speaker Owens‘? Both from the county of Scott, where this outrage oc- eured, both in the Legislature, and ‘yet their names were not-to that petition. Now, Mr. Chairman, I could state a mul- tiplicity of cases where this power has been abused, but this speaks enough. My main object was to cite this Convention to the re— mission of fines and forfeitures that appear to have been overlooked. Because some Governors are wonderfully susceptible to all the appeals of mercy, and yet blind to the requirements of justice. I am satisfied that thousands and thou- sands of dollars that ought to go into our State Treasury annually, and increase the revenue of the State, and thereby lessen our taxation, are absolutely bestowed aslbeneé factions upon these perpetrators of crime. Therefore, ‘I am in favor of the substitute and hope it will be adopted by this Conven- tion. Mr. AUXIER. I have been heard once on this subject and I shall detain this Con- vention but a. very few minutes, but with all the persuasive argument and eloquence we have heard on this floor I am not dis- posed to think this is a coekatrice or a basi- lisk that we have hugged to our bosom. The egg that was laid over a. hundred years ago by the formation of Kentucky has not produced a serpent that stings us as we go. The pardoning power has not been so abused in this State as that our liberties are in danger. Our Executives have been ex- ceedingly conservative, as a general rule. Wherever they have exercised this clem- ency it has been right and proper to do so. Gentlemen have not cited instances calcus lated to arouse the indignation of the peo- ple of the State against the exercise of this power. There have been some thrusts and stabs - directed at our Execu- tives, but they have only stated one side of the case. I am sorry to say there has been a tendency to disparage, at least, one'of our Chief Executives, who lives 14 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday] - AUXIER—FUNK—MCDERMOTT. [November 15.. among us no more; a man who, when he was candidate for Governor of the Com- monwealth announced in every speech, in every declaration before the election that if the Legislature of Kentucky did not im- prove the Penitentiary system, he would pardon the convicts. Every man voted for him with the full knowledge of his declaration, with the full understanding of his purpose, and when he came to be clothed with that Executive power and the Legislature refused to improve the convict system, he did pardon numbers of them out of the Penitentiary. This was an exercise of the pardoning power after con- viction and not before. No man has a right to reflect upon that Governor, be- cause he simply did what he declared he would do before his election. I do not see the danger the gentleman alluded to. It is no innovation on the principles of State Government to repose where it is the par- doning power. No gentleman on the other side of this question has suggested any other repository to exercise this power. No man has proposed a Board of Pardons or any other department of this Government to exercise this pardoning power. No man has gainsaid, perhaps, that the pardoning power ought to exist somewhere. 1t 1s a principle as old as time itself; from the very time we are wrapped in our swaddlin g clothes, to the seventh age of the lean and slippered pantaloon, we are each day ask- ing' pardon of a Higher Power. of Him Above who has that power, and exercises this benign principle. There is no government whose rule is so inflexible that there should not be invested somewhere the pardoning power. The cold, hard rules of the law, when strictly and rigidly enforced, sometimes would do injustice to the people, under some particular circumstances._ Men may go too far. and do something which makes them technically guilty, yet the pardoning power ought.~ to intercede in their behalf. Every argument by gentlemen, in this case, against the exercise of the pardoning power, applies as well after conviction as before. We do not wish to changejthis fundamental doctrine—that is a question long settled. with us, from the earliest form of human government to the present day. gentleman had proposed any other remedy or any other department where this power- could be safely lodged, then there might be‘ some consistency in the argument, or in the position ; but you may take every depart- ment of our State government and you can find no safer place to ‘leave this power than with the Governor. amendment of the Delegate from Lexington will not be adopted, and I do not believe’ that this Convention, with the experience of one hundred years, will now step in and make such an innovation upon this ancient. principle of our government as to do away with the power to eircumscribe or limit it in any way. Mr. FUNK. I desire to offer an amends ment to the substitute of the Delegate from Lexington. The amendment offered by Mr. Funk was read, and is as follows: Amend the substitute‘offered by the Del--~ egate from Lexington as follows: Pro- vided, further, that the General Assembly, at the close of each regular or called session thereof, shall report in writing to the Gov- ernor the number of acts passed, the titles of the same and the reasons for their passage. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I would like to offer another amendment. Mr. McDermott’s amendment was read, and is as follows: Amend section 24, by striking out the words “ Secretary, of State,” and inserting in the report these words: “The Governor shall nominate and by and with the con- sent of the Senate appoint a Secretary of' State, who shall be commissioned for the term for which the Governor was elected if ‘ he, the Secretary of State, shall so long behave himself well. He shall keep a fair register and attest the ofiicial acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouchers- If the I do hope that the- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 15» Saturday,] MCHENRY—TWYMAN—MILLER. [November 15., relative thereto before either House of the General Assembly, and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law.” Add to the end of the report of the Committee on the Executive Department the words: On any bill or question presented to the Governor in the discharge of his duties, he may ask for the written opinion of the Attorney-General and the Governor may in writing call the attention of the Attorney- General to any violations of law calling for action in the Courts. All Common- wealth’s Attorneys shall be subject to the direction of the Attorney-General in the discharge of their official duties. Mr. MCHENRY. I desire to offer an amendment. I do not desire it read. It is an amendment to section 24. I will not have it read until the proper time. Mr. TWYMAN. I desire to offer a sub- stitute. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a substi- tute for section 17, also an amendment to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisville, by adding " the Secretary of State may appoint his own Clerk.” The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Twyman, as follows: Insert after the word “same,” in the fifteenth line thereof the following ‘ words: The Legislature shall take no action on said report,except to have the same read and pub- lished with the acts of the General Assem- bly. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. ing of said amendment ) of order. The CHAIRMAN. State the point. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I think we are considering the report by sections. Section 10 is thev only one_ under consideration. The gentleman need nit be alarmed about the previous question, it can not be moved (During the read- I rise to a point _ until all the amendments are in. Mr. TWYMAN. This is an amend- ment 'or substitute for section 10. Mr. MONTGOMERY. While I have listened with great pleasure and interest to the speeches that have been made on both _ of murder. sides of this question, I regard them as-_ having presented the question from ex» treme stand-points. The forcible manner- in which these matters have been pre--. sented by these gentlemen convinces my.- mind of the great disadvantages under- which the Executive has to labor in 'per* ‘forming his duties in regard to Executive‘ clemency. They teach me another thing,_ and that is that we cannot judge our ofii- cials correctly by ea: _pa'rte statements of ' facts, and that a great many of the com- plaints we hear of the Governor and other ' officials are without a good foundation; that while the officials may in many in-- stances act in a manner in which they- ought not to act if they knew all the facts,. yet most generally they act correctly from the information they have. A great many complaints have been made in the State of‘ Kentucky in the last few years about the- abuse of the Executive power in granting pardons. A great many complaints have- been made of the Courts on account of the‘ manner in which the law is administered. I remember an instance myself where I‘ happened to know a great many facts of the case—a man was accused of the crime He was tried and had, as I know myself, a perfectly fair and impartial’ trial, and was convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for life. The case was carried by his attorneys to the Court of ' Appeals, and that Court reversed the judg- ment. Upon the news coming into the- county that the Court of Appeals had re-- versed the judgment of the lower Court, there was great indignation expressed and’ complaint made against the Court of Ap-. peals. I could not myself imagine how,. under the circumstances, the Court of Ap-- peals could reverse the judgment of the lower' Court. But as I had a very high regard for the Judge who delivered the opinion,‘ and while I had no personal interest in the case,. was not engaged in it in any way, my re-> gard for the Judge who delivered the opin- ion, and because I had heard the trial,knew' 16 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMEN T. ‘ ISaturday,] -ed by Executive clemency. the facts of the case, the manner in which the ‘trial was conducted, and knowing the state of feeling in regard to the case, caused me to take the pains to hunt up the record in the ‘Court of Appeals, upon which the (‘ourt ~ acted, and when I did so I found that from the record presented to the Judge did exact- ly right and what any other man would have done having the record before him which he had. The Court of Appeals had been imposed on by a false and fraudulent Bill of Exceptions, by misrepresentations ‘of the actions of the lower Court. And that is the way a great many complaints we have to make against our officials occur, We cannot undertake to condemn _the Gov- Iernor or any other oflicial because mistakes have been made. We have learned from the discussion we have heard if we are to believe ‘the statements of facts adduced by gentlemen on that side of the question, that great good has frequently been accomplish- And, on the other hand, great harm has been done in some instances by the abuse of that power, that the Governor has pardoned many peo- ple he ought not to have pardoned. I take it for granted that this is true; but I take it to be further true that he acted upon what he had before him and acted correctly. There is not a man in this house who wants to rob the Governor of the power of pardoning offenses. There is no man that I know of who wants to abridge that :power in the least I do not think it would be good policy to abridge that power; but what we want to arrive at is some way to protect the Governor—some means by which he will be enabled to act intelligent- ly and correctly upon all such questions as may come before him. The manner in which that is undertaken to be reached in the substitute by the Delegate from Lex- ington is to require him to make a report to the Legislative Department of the State as to whom he has pardoned, the reasons that actuated him and the amount of fines, etc. I object to that. We have a theory in our MONTGOMERY. [November 15. ‘Government that the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Departments shall each be independent of the other. I do not want to bring the Governor under subjection to the Legislative Department in any way. What we want to do is to give the Gov- ernor information. We want to arrive at a system which will prevent misrepresen- tations of cases being made to him. Sup- pose a Governor does make his report to the Legislature, as proposed by this substi- tute, what will the Legislature do? Can they overrule his action ‘? If you give them that power, you have destroyed the balance of power between the Legislative and Executive. Shall they censure him ‘? If they do, what good would that do ‘? It would only bring about animosity and strife, which ought not to exist between the Legislative and Executive Departments. I do not know that my amendment will ac- complish the end desired, and if any one else has any thing better I would like to hear it. I want to arrive at some means by which we can protect the Governor-not trammel him byinterfering with his powers in the least, but protect him from misrepre- sentations. Every one knows how these par- ' dons are obtained upon en: part0 statements. We cannot undertake to avoid that by requir- ing testimony on both sides to be given to the Governor; that would interfere with the Judicial Department. That would make him a trier of the facts instead of a dis- penser of clemency. We do not want any system that will make the Governor a trier of the law and facts of the case, be- cause that belongs to the Judicial Depart- ment. What we want to arrive at i is to get a fair representation. of the facts of the case before him, so that he may act intelli- gently. I propose to do that by my amend- ment in this way: The Governor shall cause to be made a written statement of the reasons upon which he bases his action when he grants a pardon, and that that shall be made a matter of public record, in a book to be kept by the Secretary of State EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 17 “Saturday,] M ONTGOMERY—BRENTS. [November 15, for that purpose; and further, that a copy of such record shall be transmitted to the county where the offense occurred, and filed and noted of record in the Court where the prosecution is pending or where “the judgment was rendered. What I expect ‘to arrive at by that is this: That the ~Governor will state, and it will be made a *matter of public record at the seat of Gov- rernment, the reasons that actuated him. In addition to this the same will be made a imatter of public record right in the com- munity where the offense occurred; so that .-.any man who has any interest in the mat— ter, whether he be a resident of the county where the thing occurred, or a resident of :any other portion of the State, has a full op- portunity to find out the representa- tions that had been made “to the Gov- ernor. This is not for the purpose \of trammeling or interfering with the *Governor, but for the purpose of purifying 1the evidence that may be brought before :him. These applications and representa- tions are obtained by the friends of the par- ties who are accused, or who have been ~-convicted, appealing to their friends, and to other men who desire to ingratiate them- .selves into their favor, and most generally . .if it can be done, the services of the most influential man that resides in the com- 'munity where the party lives who desires :the pardon, are sought and obtained; and ‘if we have such a rule as will make those applications public, so that everybody may know what actuated the Executive, and what influences and representations were brought to bear upon him, men who through carelessness, or through motives of political favor, or things of thatkind, lend themselves to obtain these pardons, and thereby impose upon the Executive, would be more careful, and these petitions and farce representations could not be procured. ‘The statements are often presented to the ‘Governor of men of character and influence, who are personally known to him, and who are appealed to on account of their influence and their position, and they yield on account of their desire to curry favor with the person who makes the application; but if such a proceeding was required as would make public what they have done and said on that subject, they would forbear to put themselves upon record, asking a pardon where it ought not to be grantpd. Mr. BRENTS. I desire to submit a few remarks. Before I proceed I desire the Secretary to read the amendment that I offered to section 10. Amendment of the Delegate from Clin- ton was read, and is as follows: Amend section 10 by adding: “The General Assembly may provide by law for certifying the facts, and that reasonable notice shall be given to the County Attor- ney that application has been or will be made to the Governor for the exercise of Executive clemency as herein provided.” Mr. BRENTS. It is agreed that the pardoning power shall exist. It is not necessary for me to discuss that proposition. It is agreed that the pardoning power should be vested in the Governor or the Executive Department of the State; and it is not necessary to discuss that proposi- tion. The earnest speeches upon this floor prove that there is an evil. An evil exist- ing, it ought to be our duty to discover the remedy. The substitute of the gentleman from Lexington, I understand, is to pro- hibit the Governor from exercising the pardoning power before conviction. On yesterday he gave some reasons why that proposition should be accepted by this Con vention; but the reasons which he gave apply after conviction as well as before con- viction, because nine-tenths of the cases in which the pardoning power has been abused as pointed out upon this floor were cases ~ where the pardoning power was exercised after conviction. Therefore, that is not the proper remedy. Suppose the Governor is prohibited from exercising the pardon- ing power before conviction. It does not reach the abuses that have been pointed out by the Delegates upon this floor. It does 18 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] BRENTS. * [November 15 r not prevent the abuse of that power after The question is, What is the I for one, believe that one of the conviction. remedy? evils that existed was giving the Common- wealth’s Attorneys a per cent. or an inter- est in fines and forfeitures. The Legisla- ture at its last session took from him that per cent., and placed him upon a salary. That takes from him that special interest in particular cases or the case under trial. It makes him a more impartial ofiieer than he was before. Under that system giving Commonwealth’s Attorneys a per cent. and the Governor being prohibited from remit- ting the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s per cent., we had this state of case: The Com- monwealth’s Attorney would prosecute vigorously and secure a conviction. After he secured his conviction, the accused would pay him thirty per cent., or agree to pay it to him, and the Commonwealth’s Attorney would sign a petition of recom- mendation to the Governor to remit. He lost nothing by this remission; he secured the collection of his thirty per cent., and the pardon or remission of the Governor only went to the part that ought to have been paid into the Treasury of the State. I believe the very fact that the Common- wealth’s Attorney is placed upon a salary, and that he is deprived of this thirty per cent. will, to some extent, cure this evil that is being complained of by Delegates upon this floor. Another remedy, it seems to me. and at the proper time, I intend to propose it, is to make the Governor eligible to rc-election, and there- by make him responsible to the‘people. Give him some hope of receiving an en— dorsement from the people at the end of his ‘term. What incentive is there that is more apt to prompt an otfieer of this Govern- ment to faithfully discharge his duties than to know that at the end of his term. the people can endorse him and say to him, “W'ell done, good and faithful servant.” I believe in holding all oflieers responsible to the people; and I believe the only way to hold an ofiicer responsible to the people is: to make him eligible for a second term- Give the people the right, if he has made a good and faithful oflicer, to re-elect him. The President of the United States is eligible to a re-election, and no evil has ever come from it. Nearly all of the States of this Union make their Governors eligible to re-election; and no harm has come of it in any State that I am aware of. If the Governor is made ineligible to re-election, as soon as he obtains a seat in the Execu- tive Chair, will look around and may con- clude to be a candidate for United States Senator, having aspirations, as nearly all men have aspirations; and I say it is commendable in any man to have ambi-- tion and aspirations, to be considered worthy of notice by the people, and to be- selected by them for some otfice— and being deprived of any aspirations for the office which he already fills, he naturally aspires, to ‘some higher ofiice. Having his mind on a seat in the United States Senate, he desires the good will and support of a few and not all the people, because a United States Senator is selected by the Senators and Representa- tives of the State, and it is to that class of‘ people to whom he looks for the oflice for which he aspires. Instead of loolcin g to the whole people, he is looking to a part of the people to promote him, and I believe tha‘v to make the Governor eligible to re-eleetion, and in that way responsible to the people, will, to some extent, remedv the evil that is now complained of. Now, Mr. Chairman, what is the real evil disclosed by the discussion upon this- fioor? I desire at this point to call the at- tention of Delegates to this, and ask the question again: What is the real evil as disclosed by the speeches made upon this floor ‘? It seems to me to be this: That the Governor acts upon the statements coming from one side; that it is an (1.1; pm'z‘e proceeding. The accused or the convicted presents his side of the case, and, of eourse.,. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 19 Saturday,] BRENTS. [November 15 . he and his friends will present it as strong as they possibly can, and the other side is not heard. Now, I have listened very at- tentively to the discussion on yesterday and this morning, and there is. not a single Delegate who has intimated that any Gov- ernor in the State of Kentucky has acted corruptly in exercising the pardoning pow- er. Not that, but they say there is an evil; that there must be a remedy, and that evil they point out is’ that the facts are not presented to the Governor; that only one side is presented, and that side is presented as strongly as it can be possibly presented by the accused and his friends; and the other side is not heard; and that the Governor very fre- quently makes mistakes and pardons when the pardoning power ought not to be exercised, as all the facts have not been presented to him. This is the real evil. Now, how are ‘we going to remedy it‘? My proposition is, that the Legislature may enact a law providing that the facts shall be certified to the Governor, and notice given to the County Attorney. Some plan ought to be adopted by this Convention that will provide and secure a certification of the facts to the Governor, so that when he acts it will be upon the facts, and in my opinion there will be very few mistakes and very few persons pardoned when they ought not to be. Is it not right and proper to provide some plan by which the facts may be certified to the Governor‘? When a person is convicted and he desires a pardon from the Governor, he or some of his friends have a petition prepared in as strong language and terms as can be done; they then start around to secure signatures to that petition. You all know how easy it is to obtain signatures of respectable men and of good citizens to a petition, if there is no responsibility attached to that signa- ture. The person that is approached for his signature does not wish to offend the accused or his friends, and knowing that there is no responsibility for sign- ing his name to the petition, he readily signs it without ever reading it. In nine cases out of ten persons will sign a petition for a pardon or remission without ever reading it, but will accept the word of the applicant as to the facts stated in the petition. I repeat that where there is no responsibility for a signature good men can be induced. and have been induced, to to sign petitions to the Governor asking for the pardon of some person who has been convicted. I propose that the Legislature may provide by law that the County Attor- ney shall be notified that the application has been made, or will be made. This is notice to the public, because the County Attorney is the representative of the peo- ple of that county. If it is a case that de- serves Executive clemency it may be that the County Attorney and good citizens will join 1n the petition; but if it is a person who ought not to be pardoned or remission granted by the Governor, there is an oppor- tunity given the County Attorney to pre- sent the other side of the case; and‘ then both sides come to the Governor of the State, and he then acts, knowing the facts, but not limited or restricted in the exercise of the pardoning power. Now, Mr. Chairman, I repeat that the evil complained of, as we discover from the speeches made upon this floor, is that the facts are not presented to the Governor, or only one side of the case is presented to him, and that the Governor is not informed, and that the Governor is imposed upon ; not that the Governor is abad man or a corrupt man, not that theGovernor is susceptible to undue influences any more than any other men in the State. Nobody says that; no- body complasns of that; but they do com- plain and say that the Governor acts upon one side of the case, acts upon an en: parie case, and that he does not act upon all the facts in the case. I do not care whether my amendment is adopted or not. I think that the wisdom of this Convention ought to suggest the true remedy. I believe the 20 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] BREN'rs—BUiNAM—BECKHAM. [November 15 . true remedy is to secure a certification of the facts to the Governor before he acts. When the Legislature of Kentucky is de- prived of the power to pass local laws and private acts, and are limited to the consid- eration and the enactment of general laws, I look forward to great improvement in the State in many respects. It will im- prove the Judiciary system and proceedings in the Court. Under our present system the Legislature, having the power to enact and pass private acts and special laws, we find at this time that there are, perhaps, twenty-five or probably as high as fifty local laws with penalties attached for viola- tions of those laws in each Judicial District in this State. I know that in the Judicial District in which I reside there are a great number of these local laws or local enact- ments with penalties attached, and in some counties there are two, three or more of these local acts that contradict and are in- consistent with each other, one applying to a certain neighborhood, and another ap- plying to another neighborhood. To a great extent this is a check upon the J udiciary,and brings about confusion, and sometimes a person is improperly convicted under this state of ease, and applications made to the Governor for relief, and relief very often properly granted in such a state of case as that, the people not knowing the law, there being so many enactments. Now, let us have a general system of laws. Then Commonwealth’s Attorneys will know, the Judges upon the Bench will know, the people will know. and everybody will know what the penal statutes are. Then there will be a more healthful admin- istration of the laws, and a more satisfactory administration in the Executive Depart- ment, and a great improvement all along the line, and to some extent it will remedy many of the evils now complained of by the people. Mr. Chairman, I am not fond of speak- ing, and do not wish to consume time unnecessarily. It is embarrassing to me to say anything at all; but as I listened to gentlemen upon this floor, who pointed out the evil, it occurred to me that the evil was in the presentation of an en; parts case to the Governor, and that the true remedy would be to provide that the ‘facts shall be certified to the Governor before he acts, and notice given to the County Attorney. I have taken the precaution to use the word “ may," in order that the Legislature may enact such a law as that, if it chooses to do so, and if it proves wholesome, and improves the condition of affairs in the State, it will remain on the statute books, but if it proves to be a failure, and not the true remedy, the Leg- islature may repeal it. It is not a rigid or fixed rule. If it proves a failure, the peo- ple of the State can get rid of it. I thought it better to present it in that shape, so that if the Legislature enacts such a law, and experience proves it not a good one, it can be repealed. N ot desiring to unnecessarily consume the time of this Committee, I will not add any thing more. Mr. BURNAM. I move that the Com- mittee rise and report back to the House. I do so in order that we may arrive at a point where the matter can be sent back to the Committee of the Whole with a view to limiting the speeches to five minutes. I think it is to be done before the House, and in the Convention proper, and not in Com- mittee of the Whole. In order that that may be accomplished under the rule, I move that the Committee rise and report back to the House for their action, with a recommendation that general debate be closed. Mr. BECKHAM. Before that motion is put, I desire to offer an amendment, and ask the Secretary to report it. The CHAIRMAN. That can be done. Mr. BEEN TS. Before that motion is put, I have an amendment that I desire to offer. Mr. BLACKBURN. I desire to ask whether the motion is that general debate ’ EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. - 21 Saturday,] BURNAM—FUNK—MCHENRY. ' [November 15 . be closed upon the whole report or upon this section‘? Mr. BURNA M. On this section. Mr. FUNK. I am as willing as any one to have debate cut off to ‘a reasonable length; but there are two or three of us who have not had an opportunity to explain our amendments, and we would like to have a few minutes to do that. Mr. MoHENRY. The motion is to put it under the five minute rule. Any gentle- man will have five minutes if this motion is carried to explain his amendment. Mr. DEHAVEN. Personally I have no objection to the motion made by the Dele- gate from Madison; but I very patiently waited until all the rest of the gentlemen got through with what they had to say on this subject, and as the Chairman of the Committee—of the Committee from which this report comes, I would like to close on the subject; and I was going to suggest to the Delegate from Madison that he with- draw his motion for that purpose; but I shall not insist upon it, as I have no per- sonal objection to the motion. . Mr. BURNAM. Iregard it as my duty to say that the Chairman of the Committee on the Executive Department should be heard if he desires; and in order to give him an opportunity to speak, I will, for the time being, withdraw my motion. Mr. BRONSTON. I understand, of course, that the Delegate from Oldham, as the Chairman of the Executive Committee, would have a right to close this debate. Mr. BURNAM. If it comes back from the House, I would be entirely willing to exempt him from the operation of the rule. Mr. BRONSTON. At the same time I would like myself to have about five min- utes to close on my substitute. Mr. BURNAM. You would have that under the rules. ‘ Mr. BRONSTON. There might be others who would want to speak. I desire to give the Chairman of the Committee an opportunity to close his remarks after I have concluded. Mr. BURNAM. I renew the motion as made. . Mr. L. T. MOORE. I second the mo- tion. Mr. BECKHAM. I do not know wheth- er it is the intention of the Chairman to address himself to a consideration of the whole report, or simply this section. At any rate, I ask leave to have my amend- ment reported. The CHAIRMAN. Report the amend- ment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Strike out all of section 24 relating to the Secretary of State, and add one new section, namely: Section 21 of article 3 of the present Constitution. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire also be- fore a vote is taken on the motion to send up an amendment. Mr. MCHENRY.v Amendments can be offered under the five-minute rule, and this motion applies simply to the tenth section. It is to put that section under a five minutes’ debate, and it does not cut off any amend- ments to this section, and certainly does not cut off amendments to any other sec- tion. _ Mr. FUNK. It occurs to me it is in very bad taste for these gentlemen to at- tempt to enforce a “ gag law” upon the mem- bers who have not had an opportunity of explaining themselves, after the gentlemen themselves have explained their own views so fully and so frequently. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I hope that every Delegate on thisv floor may have a fair chance to send up his amendment and ex- plain why he sent up the amendment. I hope the Delegates of this Convention will vote down this motion. Mr. J ONSON . I do not think I shall want to make a speech in this matter, but I concur with the gentleman from the Seventh District of Louisville, that after a 22 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. . Saturday,] - good many long winded gentlemen have aired themselves here, it is in bad taste to say to these other scrub fellows you shall not. I hope it will be voted down. The motion being put, was lost. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire to send up an amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment as follows: Amend report of the Committee as fol- lows: Provided further, That a copy of the petition and the names of all the petition- ers shall be filed in the Clerk’s office of the Court having jurisdiction "of the case, not less than thirty days before pardon shall be granted, and the Clerk of said Court shall notify the County Attorney of the filing of said papers. - Mr. FUNK. Mr. Chairman, it is my in- tention to detain the Committee but a short time. Upon entering the hall this morning, I believed we should take away the pardon- ing power from the Governor; but after hearing and studying over the most eloquent speech, made by the distinguished Delegate from Lexington, my mind has undergone a change. Ihave investigated this matter, and have gone into it as deeply as possible for a man understanding so little about law as I do. I believe we should strike low and go high—not strike high and go low. That is precisely what this substitute of the Delegate from Lexington does. It strikes high, and will let the Court officials have their own way more than they have had heretofore. I desire, above all things, to see the lower Courts purified. The Gov- ernor and his power will do very well. I will simply take the Circuit Court of the county of Jefferson. What do we see there? We see two of the wealthiest men or, supposed to be the wealthiest, in the city of Louisville guilty of a crime and indicted in the Court. In the meantime, they go to Canada where the laws of this country cannot reach them. They are fugitives from justice for a num- ber of years. A petition is circulated in their behalf, numerously signed and filed PHELPS—FUNK. with the Commonwealth’s Attorney of that (‘ourt. He files away the indictments. They return home, go free, and walk the streets of Louisville, and go through the State of Kentucky the same as a man who never committed a crime in his life. There is not a man in this hall who does not know to whom I refer. If they had been poor men, would that ever have occurred? I say no; but being men of wealth and influence, they manipulated the thing in such a way that they were brought back honored citizens. It is true the amount was not very great, something less than a half million dollars. ' Then, hereis a tobacco man who swindles, and is indicted for embezzlement. He goes to the same country and, perhaps, in the same company. Was he treated likewise? He was; but how‘? Repeated efi'orts had been made in his behalf, but no attention was paid to them, until after these other men were allowed to come back; and then he only had those indictments filed away against him on the ground that the wealthy men, and probably the guiltier, had gone free; and almost every man of any promi- nence in the city of Louisville, after find- ing out that these wealthy men had been relieved of their embarrassment, signed the petition which was gotten up and sent in for the other man, and they could not do otherwise. Now then, which is the safer policy? Leave this in the hands of the Governor, where it belongs, or take it away and lodge it in the hands.of the Com- monwealth’s Attorneys of our State. That is the question for this Convention to con- sider. Mr. BRONSTON. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a. question? The CHAIR \l AN. Does the gentle- man yield for a question? Mr. FUNK. I do. Mr. BRONSTON. Is it the gentle- man’s understanding that it is proposed to lodge it in the hands of the Common- [N ovembe; EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 23 l ‘Saturday,] ‘ upon it; and why is this‘? 1 the people opposed to it may have an op- ‘ dred years. .- around the exercise of the pardoning power FUNK—PHELPs. [November 15. wealth’s Attorney‘? Is that the result of his studies‘? Mr. FUNK. No, sir; but I want to get : at the root of the matter before we attack . the Governor. _ That is what I want to do. I say, without fear of successful contradic- ‘ tion, that as this matter is now presented, ' it is placed before the good thinking peo- ple of this State ‘in the light of a farce; nothing more, nothing less. If we are to‘ -- do any thing towards the reformation of our Courts, let us begin with the lower Courts and go down into the Circuit Courts, - into the County Courts, into the Magis- trates’ Courts, into all the Courts, and then it will be time to reach the Governor. I ' do not know that one Governor is any bet- : ter than any other Governor. I have con- fidence in all the Governors we have - ever had; but I do say that the State of Kentucky has been deprived of a vast amount of money through the pardoning .power vested in the Governor. I believe that when a petition for a remission of fines I or forfeitures is sent up, the petition should - be posted at the court-house, for at least ten“ days before the Governor acts In order that portunity of presenting their remonstrance before the Governor acts upon the peti- tion. If you do this, I am confident that there will be very few mistakes made by the Governor. The Commonwealth of Kentucky will not be the sufferer, as it is now, and has been for the last one hun- Let us throw every safeguard we possibly can; ‘but the power must be .exercised by some one, or it must be lodged . in some place. It has been suggested . that the Court of Appeals should (be recognized as a Board of Pardons; ‘ and in criminal ' cases, especially ~ petitions for pardons, should be referred or lodged with this Commission. I believe that I would just as soon trust ‘the Gov- .’ ernor of Kentucky as the Court of Appeals. .The more men that you have mixed up in this matter of pardons, the greater will be the danger of loss to the Common- wealth, because the ofiicers must all get their fees, and by the time the re- mainder reaches the Public Treasury, if . it ever does‘, there will be nothing left of it. What is the history of these fines and for- feitures? A man is fined five hundred dollars, say, for running a gambling house. The Commonwealth’s Attorney, or attaches of the Court, find out that they can get money enough out of him to pay the‘costs, and then they immediately suggest (I do not say all, but many of them do) that a petition be signed and sent to the Gov- ernor to remit the State’s portion. The State sufi'ers to the extent of forty-five per cent; but the attaches of the Court always get their share. If the Governor is allowed to remit forfeitures and fines, let him remit the entire amount, and then the laws will be more fully carried out than they are now. That is all I desire to say on this question; but Ido believe that the good sense of this Convention will prevail, that the substitute as ofi'ered by the Dele- gate from Lexington will be defeated, and that we will go to work on the other busi- ness that will, from time to time, occupy the attention of this Convention. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I want to say but a few words on this subject, and I will ad- dress myself to the amendment offered by me a few minutes ago. I offered that amendment with a view to obviating the objections that have been made to the one- sided presentation of cases coming before the Governor in the way of applications for pardon. It is merely an addition to the tenth section of the Committee’s re- port, and is to the effect that the petitioner :Shald file his petition in the Clerk’s office of the Court having jurisdiction to try the case. Whether it ‘be before or after trial does not cut any figure in the case; and not only shall he file his petition there, but he shall file the names of all persons who have signed that petition, and not only that, but, as a further precaution, that the 24 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] PHELPs—MooRE. .1‘ i [November 15 . Circuit Clerk or Clerk filing that petition shall notify the County Attorney immedi- ately. Then there is a chance for every one to be heard. There is a chance for the friends of the prosecution to go and see what is stated in that petition, and there is a chance for them to go there and see the names of those who have recommended that petition to the Governor by their signatures. Then there is an opportunity for the Prosecuting Attorney to know just what influence is being brought to bear upon the mind of the Governor, and to know what is said in the petition. and whether it is true or untrue; and the friends of the prosecution who may feel a deeper interest and may be more active and ener- getic about this matter than the County Attorney would be, because he may him- self be favorable to the pardon of a certain party, where the community would be against it; he may take no action in the matter, and I want it spread upon the record in the Clerk’s office so that the citi- zens, the friends of the prosecution, can know whether the truth has been sent to the Governor or not. Then men will be careful about signing those petitions. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to ask a question of the gentleman, if he will permit me. Mr. PHELPS. Certainly. Mr. L. T. MOORE. You say the County Attorney would be in favor- of the pardon? Mr. PHELPS. I say he might be in favor of the pardon. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Suppose they onl give notice to the County Attorney? Do you suppose if he is in favor of the pardon that he would give notice to the friends of the deceased at all? Mr. J. L. PHELPS. That is exactly what I am trying to provide against. The petition is to be filed with the Clerk of the Court having jurisdiction of the case; not only the petition, but everything connected with the matter shall be filed there, and then the Clerk of that Court having that petition shall give notice to the County Attorney, and all persons will have a chance to investigate it. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Suppose the pardon is granted before anybody gets to see that petition? You only know the men who are in favor of the pardon. What good does that do? Mr. J. L. PHELPS. My amendment provides the pardon shall not be granted for thirty days after that petition is filed, and the notice given to the County Attorney; that gives the people of the county and the friends of the prosecution thirty days in which to get a remonstrance before the Governor. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Will the people of ' the county know when a petition is filed in the County Clerk’s office unless they get notice of it, and if the County Attorney does not give them notice how are they to - get it‘? Mr. HcHENRY. The Court has a right to sentence a man to be hung within twenty days. Your amendment goes to ‘the extent that he cannot be pardoned before thirty days. He will be hung before you can get apardon. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I remember the law differently from the gentleman from Ohio. He cannot be sentenced under thirty days. I have this idea about it: That there ought to be notice to the people of the county; and I know of no better way of giving notice than to file the petition and the names of those who sign it with the Circuit Court, of the Clerk of the Court having jurisdiction, then giving notice to the County Attorney. If that does not give notice to the public, especial- ly in the counties that do not publish news- papers, I do not know how to do it; but if “ any Delegate would suggest a plan that will more fully notify the people, I will accept that in place of my amendment. There are two of the county officials noti- fied; the Circuit Court Clerk is notified EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25 Saturday,] PHELPS. [November 15 , He is presumed to be an honest man. He is presumed to be in favor of law and or- der. There is the County Attorney, who is notified. He is sworn to be in favor of law and order; and if they do not give notice to their people, I do not know how we can give notice, unless we run a special paper for that purpose. I am in earnest about this matter. I want to give you one case, as so many Delegates have given cases bearing upon this question: In my county, some years ago, when I happened to be the Prosecut- ing Attorney of that county, there were some parties there selling stoves. They had with them the decision of the Superior Court of Kentucky saying that they had the right to sell these stoves without pay- ing a license to the State of Kentucky. They sold stoves in my county and in the county of Wayne, and with that decision of the Superior Court in their pockets showing it to the County Attorneys and County Judges where they went. But that decision of the Superior Court was overruled by the Court of Appeals. They were down there forty miles from a railroad. The mails came to that sec- tion of the country slowly, and from the time that the Court of Appeals overruled the decision of the Superior Court, and the time that they were given notice of it they had made sales both in Wayne county and in Russell county. One of the parties came to me and confessed that he had, and that twenty-five per cent. of the fines was mine if I proposed to prosecute them. I studied the matter for a moment, for 1 always want to be just, and I gave him a letter of recom- mendation to the County Judge, who hap- pened at the time to be away from the county seat. I told him to deliver that to the County Judge, and that I was satisfied the County Judge would grant him a license covering the whole time, thereby granting him an opportunity to escape without going to the Governor. But in Wayne county it was diiferent. The Coun- ty Attorney presumably had a little more desire to get the twenty-five per cent. fees than I did, and he prosecuted them. As- to whether they paid the State or not, I do not know; but the County Attorney got his pay. That was not the fault of those men, who were peddling stoves, but was the fault of your Court system. You allow one Court to render a decision, and then men go on in their honest work with that decision in their pockets, and before they know that the decision has been overruled they innocently violate the law, and then you want to take away from them any relief. I say with all my heart, that I believe it was wrong to punish those men; they were honest men; they were engaged in a legitimate business, and they ought to have protection. Men forty miles from a railroad and one hundred and thirty miles from where the decision was rendered- could not know it. They could not anticipate such a thing. You caught them in a trap, and there ought to be some way to turn an honest man out from any trap in which he is caught. Then I want to say further, that there has not been as much abuse of the pardon- ing power as has gone abroad to the coun- try. Newspapers are fond of sensational- ism. It makes the paper sell. People love to complain of those who are in authority. Stump-speakers and politicians think it an honor to them if they can find some fault with the Governor, and I say there has not been that great abuse of au- thority by the Governors of Kentucky that is complained of ; and even though there should be, I had rather that every Gover- nor, who is elected in the State of Kentucky under this Constitution, should at some time abuse that power, than for some poor, innocent man to have to suffer from want of that power being lodged somewhere. Some gentleman have undertaken to preju- dice our minds by saying that the poor do not get the benefit of the pardoning power, but the rich. I want to say that my obser- 26 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] PHELPs. [November 15 . vation has not led me to that conclusion. I want to say that, even if a rich man needs a pardon, let him have it. Others have undertaken to prejudice this Convention and scare them with the idea that pardoning is a loss to the State and in- creases our taxation. I know that men are ordinarily afraid of taxation; but I want to say that if it taxes me twice as high as I am taxed to-day in order to do justice, let it come. I am willing to pay it in order to have justice. If we havea government that is so penurious, so saving on the tax question that it is willing for hardships and cruelties to be imposed upon the humblest citizen of Kentucky to save taxes, I spurn the idea. I want the State to be economi- ical. I want light taxation, if I can have it, but never will I consent to have my taxes light if it imposes aburden upon inno- cent people. There are ten mistakes made by your juries where there is one made by your Governor. You hear that complaint all over the State; you hear it in every county in the State; but not a Delegate upon this floor proposes to take the trial power from the juries of the country. If you undertake to take the power from them because it can be abused, you will take all power from every man in any position whatever. You will take from the physi- cian of your county the power to adminis- ter medicine; you will take from the surgeon the power to amputate a limb, be- cause those powers have been abused, and deaths have resulted from it. But they do more good than harm. Let them have it. If the power to pardon, as it is. does more good than harm, let it remain where it is. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I sincerely regret on my own account, and especially on ac- count of members present, that the remarks of my friend from the Seventh District of Louisville have made it necessary for me to say a few words upon this matter. I came here this morning intending to speak upon the subject to be next reached, and not in- ,. tending to say any thing upon this subject. I am unwilling to believe that my friend from the Seventh District intended to re- flect against the late lamented, much honored and clearly beloved Judge of the Jefferson Circuit Court who entered the order about which he complained. I am inclined to believe that the gentleman, in common with all the citizens of that county, loved, revered and honored that man ; and yet, as that Judge was my preceptor and my dearest friend, Icannot allow the gentle- man’s words to go upon the record without some explanation or correction, The cases of Buchanan and Mason referred to were in fact cases where these men wereindicted, and before trial the indictments were filed away. They, together with two other gentlemen, Payne and Viley, were indicted under what is known as “the Warehouse Law,”astatute law applying to Jefferson county only. This law provided that where certain species of warehouse receipts were falsely pledged or credit obtained upon them, the party should be, upon indictment, subjected to the penalties of a felon. These four men were indicted under this statute, a new statute, a statute comparatively un- known; in fact, one with which but few lawyers had acquaintance. After the in- dictment. the Governor of the State, as I recollect the facts, pardoned two of these gentlemen, Payne and Viley, properly, I think, upon the ground that they were not aware of the existence of the Warehouse law and that at best it was a strained felony. After the Governor had given this pardon, before conviction; after these pardons had been filed and made a part of the record of the Jefferson Circuit Court, the citizens peti- tioned the Commonwealth Attorney—they first petitioned the Governor, and upon refusal petitioned the Commonwealth’s Attorney—to file away the indictments against the other two, who were exactly in the same boat with the two the Governor had pardoned; who were, however, finan- I EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 27 Saturday,] rcially broke, men without any means what- ever, and without any influence at that .time in the community. Mr. BUCKNER. I would like to ask ‘the gentleman’s permission to ask a ques- tion? Mr. PHELPS. Certainly. Mr. BUCKNER. Is is a fact that these gentlemen were pardoned by Executive authority? Mr. PHELPS. I so understand it, and I think that is the understanding of the community. I never saw the pardons. Mr. BUCKN ER. I only desire to say that I have understood it was not done by my predecessor. The Journals, however, will show. Mr. PHELPS. Either the gentleman or myself is mistaken. Mr. FUNK. May I ask the gentleman’s permission to make a correction? Mr. PHELPS. I will be glad to hear it. Mr. FUNK. I went this morning and investigated this matter, and found that the Governor had not done it. Mr. PHELPS. I learn from the Com- monwealth’s Attorney of my District that the pardons are on record in that Court. I have not examined the records here, because, as I say, I had no idea this matter would come up. At all events, after Payne and Viley had thus been relieved of the charge under which they were standing, the good people of the community, almost to a man, petitioned the Commonwealth’s Attorney to file away these indictments. These peti- tions were signed by every creditor who was ‘involved in the matter. Thereupon, on motion of the Commonwealth’s Attorney, the indictments were simply filed away as .a part of the records of the Court. Mr. McHENRY. Permit me to ask a question._ If these men were pardoned as felons, why the necessity of a petition to file away the indictments‘? Of course the indictments were dead, and would neces- sarily be filed away after they had been pardoned by the Governor. PHELPS—~BUCKNER—F I'NK. [November 15 . Mr. PHELPS. Because the Governor had deemed it wise, in his judgment, to file away by his action the indictments against two, and had left standing the two indict- ments against two others, who were in the same boat exactly. For this reason the community, to a man, approved the action of the Commonwealth’s Attorney, as did also the press. But I desire to deplore the fact that it be- comes necessary to cite a case here and there, a mistake of some ofiicial or the ac- tion of some lawyer in the endeavor to de- feat or sustain a pet measure in this Con- vention. When it comes to the considera- tion of so serious or important a matter as an amendment to the Constitution, is it not true, I ask, that we should address ourselves solely and exclusively to the reasons in- volved in the matter, and not allow our- selves to be led away by any buncombe, di- rect or indirect‘? Why, sir, one Delegate said to me last night, “ I was inclined to support the substitute of the gentleman from Lexington, but I heard to-day it was an effort on the part of you lawyers to get more law business. IVhy.” said he. “ you lawyers want this provision taken out of the Constitution so that the Governor can- not pardon until after conviction in order that you may get an opportunity to get a fee out of the man in his defense.” Can it be that any man upon this ‘floor would al- low himself to be used for such purposes as that? For myself, I am not engaged in the practice of the criminal law. In the twelve years of my practice I do not believe I have made a thousand dollars in the practice of criminal law. I have not sought it. I have repeatedly declined it, so that I could hardly be influenced by any such motive; but I do say that if you will pause for a moment and think, you cannot believe that any Delegate upon this floor would so bemean or belittle himself as to lend his influence or voice in the support of any measure to carry out his personal ends. It has been said here, and has been 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] PHELPs. [November 15 . cried out in the loudest of voices, that the Commonwealth’s Attorneys want this thing done; that they want the whole power in their hands. If the report of the Commit- tee be adopted, or if the excellent substi- tute of the gentleman from Lexington be defeated, is it not true that the Common- wealth’s Attorney will still have the power he now has? Is the report of the Com- mittee aimed at the power of the Common- wealth’s Attorney? Is there a thoughtful man upon this floor who will pause for a moment, consider and then say that it is improper for the Judge of the Court and the Commonwealth’s Attorney, who have the parties under their eye, who know all the facts, should be deprived of the power to say whether it would be proper or not to file away an indictment and to save the State the cost of a trial? If the Common- wealth’s Attorney and the Judge, examin- ing the parties, observing the surround- ings, acquainted with everybody interested, knowing all the facts, find that it is unwise that the prosecution should proceed, is it not proper and consistent with the govern- ment of this State that they should be allowed to enter upon the record in writing the reason why the prosecution should not longer proceed? Cannot every lawyer here bear me out that under our form of government the case of the criminal be- longs to the Judiciary until judgment, when it becomes the‘ province of the Executive to execute‘? But I call attention to the fact that the question involved is not a question as to the powers of the Commonwealth’s Attor- neys. It is simply a question of limiting the pardoning power of the Executive. If it be right, if it be proper that the Gov- ernor have this power, in heaven’s name let him have it. If it be unwise that the Governor should have all this power, I say let us be free and manly enough to say that he should not have it. The term “ pardon ” itself implies that there is guilt. If a man be not guilty, what the necessity for pardon? If there be no con- viction, why the necessity for pardon? If aman is innocent, he cannot plead for pardon. “What,” says an outsider. “you say, pardon a man before conviction? You cannot pardon a man before conviction. There is nothing for which to pardon him. Of what is he guilty? For what should you pardon him?” In fact it is the true theory of the law that the Commmon- wealth’s Attorney and the Judge alone should have the power, not to pardon but to stay the prosecution of a man, because, in truth, there can be no pardon unless there be guilt The law itself says that when a man is arrested he is presumed to be innocem‘, and while he is under the pre- sumption of innocence, while the law de- clares him innocent, the Governor rises and says: “I pardon him.” How inconsis- tent. Is precedent of any value to us, Mr. Chairman? Twenty-six States of this Union have refused to allow the Governor to pardon before conviction, and I ap- peal to the history of those twenty-six States to hear me out in the assertion that there is not one of them in which the criminal law is not at least as well admin- istered as in Kentucky. There is not one of those twenty-six States in which crime runs as riot as it does in the State of Ken- tucky. There are but four States, and Kentucky one of those four, which do this paradoxical thing of allowing the Governor to pardon a man who is not guilty. If a man be guilty, even though there be circumstances surrounding him which appeal to the mercy of the Executive, if a man be guilty, is it asking too much under the law to require that the accused should at least present himself, that he at least go before a jury of his peers and there be tried before a fair Judge under the testimony of sworn witnesses‘? Is it asking too much, I say, to require that the matter be investigated for the benefit of the community? Is it. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 29 Saturday,] PHELPs. [November 15 . .asking too much if a man be innocent, and is it not true if he be innocent, he would demand that he be tried and his innocence [declared by a jury of his peers rather than by a one-sided verdict of the Governor? As I said, Mr. Chairman, I have no hope of influencing the vote of any Delegate upon this floor. I simply desire to say to you that this is a matter in my humble opinion, in which we should be consistent. I appeal to you to be consistent. If you use the word “pardon,” will you be con- :sistent when you say in the same connec- tion that it may be exercised before a man is found guilty '? With reference to Lthe other part of the substitute, I want to make one suggestion. It is agreed—I will say, unanimously agreed—by the Delegates upon this floor that this matter of petitions for pardons has been used so as to make it an imposi- tion upon the Governors of this State. Let us take it home to ourselves. How often have each of you Delegates signed peti- tions for pardon without knowing really ‘the merits of the case? How natural is it, when a man brings a petition to you, and says, “Here is a poor fellow, who has a wife and little children at home, having nothing to eat; they are starving, and "there is nobody to take care of them; he is in the Penitentiary. I wish you would sign this, I want to get the Governor to pardon him," for you to sign the paper, and if you be an influential man in the community, the Governor gets a separate letter from you requesting the exercise of his clemency. The Governor has no means of knowing the actual facts in the case. He knows the reputation of the gentleman signing this letter, and the gen- tlemen signing the petition, and he acts upon that light, the best light he can get, .and grants the pardon. Whois responsible ‘for that? Not the Governor. The Gover- nor is informed of certain facts. The Gov- ernor relies upon this information and acts upon it. It is not the fault of the Gover- nor, and I am not here complaining of the exercise of this power by the Governor, or complaining of any indiscretion on their part. I do say that the fault lies with the people, and if we can adopt some measure here which will bring home to the notice of the entire community the facts with refer- ence to these pardons this matter of abuse will be greatly lessened. If we can make it possible that the whole State will know when you sign a petition, and that you are assisting to get that pardon, I say you will carefully investigate the facts and look into that matter before you will lend your aid to the subject. I vam not wedded to the plan suggested by the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal Procedure; any other plan will suit me as well; but is it not proper that some public account should be given by the Executive of the pardons granted, together with the reasons why be granted them‘? A great deal has been said here, and some fun indulged in, at the idea of the Governor making report to the Legislature of his acts; and one gentleman facetiously sug- gested that the Legislature should report to the Governor what acts they passed and why they did it ? Such reasoning is falla- cious. The report that the Governor makes to the Legislature is not intended for the knowledge of the Legislature alone. It is not a matter upon which they are to act. It is simply a means to the end. It is simply a means of presenting to the pub- lic, through the Legislature, what the facts are and what the reasons are. If there can be a better means suggested of making this matter public, I shall favor it; it does seem to me that when the Governor writes his message, it is a simple, plain, common-sense way for him ‘to state that “ During the past two years, since the last session of the Leg- islature, I have pardoned A, B and C. I did this upon the recommendation of Mr. Bronston, of Lexington, or the Hon. Henry D. McHenry, of Ohio, or this or that man; and I append hereto the communication re- 3O EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] M C'HENRY ceived from those gentlemen.” Is not that proper‘? The Legislature has no power in the matter. The Legislature is simply used, as I before stated, as a means to the end. It is simply a means of communicat- ing to the public by making it a part of the record of the Legislature, which under your law is required to go to the public. Mr. MCHENRY. Do you think by re- porting to the Legislature that the informa- tion would be of greater extent than by reporting to each County Court which rendered the judgment or in which the prosecution is pending‘? Mr. PHELPS. The only advantage in reporting to the Legislature would be that by reporting to the Legislature you report to the whole people, whom the Governor is supposed to represent. Although the county alone may have been interested in the prosecution of the man, when he be- comes a criminal, I think the State at large is interested in the question of whether he should again be turned loose on the com- munity. It may be that when he is turned loose he will not go back to that county; and I think that by reporting it to the Leg- islature, and thereby giving the substance, the facts and reasons to the entire commun- ity, you do a vast amount of good, not only to the county that sent the criminal, but to the State at large. And then, too, by doing this you will make gentlemen who are in the habit of using their influence with the Executive to secure pardons very cautious. You will find it will be a much more diffi- cult matter to get letters and petitions from the people. I sincerely trust that the idea contained in the substitute will be approved. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. The motion being put, was carried. The Committee of the Whole thereupon rose, and Mr. Clay, the President, resumed the Chair. IN THE CONVENTION. Mr. COKE. The Committee of the PHELPS—MCDERMOTT. [November 15 ., Whole have had under consideration the report of the Joint Committee on Execu- tive Afi'airs,but not having completed their labors, ask leave to sit again this afternoon at 3 o’clock. The report, upon a vote, was adopted. Mr. MACKOY. Imove that the Con- vention do now adjourn until Monday morning at 11 o’clock. The motion being-put, was lost. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I move that the present session be extended until this after- noon at 5 o’clock, and on that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. LASSING. I second the call. Mr. BECKHAM. I move that when the Convention adjourn at 1 o’clock that it adjourn to meet at half past 11 o’clock on Monday morning. i M r. CLARDY. I move that we do now take a recess under the rule. The PRESIDENT. The motion of the gentleman from Shelby is in order, as it is not exactly the same motion that has just been voted upon. Mr. PETTIT. I will demand the yeas and nays on this motion, if the Delegate from the Fifth District of Louisville will second my motion. Mr. LASSIN G. motion. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion of the Delegate from Shelby that when the Convention adjourn to-day it ad- journ to meet at 11:30 o‘clock on Monday, and on that the Delegate from Daveiss calls for the yeas and nays. Mr. PETTIT. I will withdraw the call. Mr. ASKEW. I will renew it. The call for the yeas and nays made by Mr. Askew was not seconded, and the mo- tion being put, was lost. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs on the motion of the Delegate from Christian that we take a recess until this afternoon. Mr. MACKOY. I call for the yeas and nays. I will second the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 31 Saturday,] M ACKOY—MOORE——EDRINGTON. [November 15 . The call was immediately withdrawn. The motion being put, was lost. Mr. MACKOY. I move that we ad- journ until Monday morning at 10:45 o’clock. Mr. L. T. MOORE. and nays. Mr. EDRINGTON. I second the call. The result of the roll-call is as follows: I demand the yeas YEAS—4I. Amos, D. C. Holloway, J. W. Auxier, A. J. James, A. D. Beckham, J. C. Kennedy, Hanson Bennett, B. F. Kirwan, E. E. Blackburn, James ' Knott, J. Proctor Brents, J. A. Mackoy, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Martin, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan May, John S. Buckner, S. B. McDermott, E. J. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, J. H. Cox, H. _ Muir, J. W. DeHaven, S. E. Parsons, Rob’t Elmore, T. J. Ramsey, W. R. Forrester, J. G. Sachs, Morris A. Funk, J. T. Smith, H. H. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. Trusdell, George Washington, George West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Mr. President Clay. Hogg, S. P. Kai's-£4. Askew, J. F. Lassing, L. W. Ayres, W. W. Lewis, W. W. Beckner, W. M. McElroy, W. J. Birkhead, B. T. M cHenry, H. D. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Brummal, J. M. Miller, W. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Montgomery, J. F. Chambers, G. D. Moore, Laban T. Clardy, John D. Petrie, H. G. Coke, J. Guthrie Pettit, Thos. S. Durbin, Charles Phelps, John L. Edrington, W. J. Phelps, Zack Farmer, H. H. Pu h, Sam’l J. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Forgy, J. M. Smith, W. Scott Graham, Samuel Swango, G. B. Jonson, Jep. C. Twyman, I. W. ABSENT—25. Allen, C. T. Jacobs, R. P. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Applegate, Leslie T. McChord, Wm. C. Berkele, Wm. Nunn, T. J. Blackwell, Joseph O’Hara, R. H. Boles, S. H. Quicksall, J. E. Brown, J. S. Spalding, I. A. Carroll, John D. Straus, F. P. Doris, W. F. Williams, L. P. V. -English, Sam. E. Wood, J. M. Hendrick, W. J. Woolfolk, J. F. Hines, J. S. Young, Bennett H. Hopkins, F. A. It requiring a. two-thirds vote, the motion to adjourn until Monday morning, at 10:45 o’clock was lost. Mr. McHENRY. I move that we grant leave of absence until Monday at 11 o’clock A. M. to those gentlemen who live Within sixty-five miles of Frankfort. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is not serious in his motion. Mr. MCHENRY. If it is objected to, T will withdraw it. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that we take a recess until 3 o’clock, and upon that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. EDRINGTON. I second the call. The PRESIDENT. Before the Chair puts'that motion, the Chair will announce that he appoints the Delegate from Daveiss (Mr. Pettit), as President pro tem., to preside at the session this afternoon and also Mon- day morning. The Delegate from Lincoln moves that we take a recess until 3 o’clock this afternoon, and upon that the Delegate from Lincoln, seconded by the Delegate from Carlisle, demands the yeas and nays. Mr. MACKOY. I make the point of order that under the rule the Convention, when it adjourns, meets at 3 o’clock. The PRESIDENT. But it is not 1 o’clock yet, that is the difference. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I call the atten- tion of the Delegate to the fact that it will be 1 o’clock before the roll-call is over. The Reading Clerk proceeded to call the roll, which resulted as follows: YEAS—31. Askew, J. F. Doris, W, F, Ayres, W. W. Durbin, Charles 32 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] VVAsHING'roN—MILLER—MoNTeoMERY. [November 15. :IglackburigwJaganes gilrington, J. Officers for the State at Large, and upon eckner, . l . more, T. . , , Bennett, B. F. Farmer’ H. H‘ that I call the yeas and nays. Birkhead, B. T. Field, W. W. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The gen- Bmll‘land, H- R- Funk, J-T- tleman from Campbell is in order. His Graham. Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Jonson, Jep. C. Bronston, C. J. Buchanan, Nathan Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis E. Lewis, W. W. Chambers, G. D. Martin, W. H. Clardy, John D, May, John S. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. NAYs—16. Auxier, A. J. Holloway, J. W. Beckham, J. C. James, A. D. Buckner, S. B. Kennedy, Hanson, Kirwan, E. E. Knott, J. Proctor Lassing, L. W. Mackoy, W. H. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Hanks, Thomas H. Hines, Thomas H. Hogg, S. P. McDermott, E. J. ABSENT—19. Allen, C. T. Carroll, John D. Allen, M. K. English, Sam. E. Amos, D. C. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Applegate, Leslie T. Hendrick, W. J. Berkele, Wm. Blackwell, Joseph Hines, J. S. Boles, S. H. Hopkins, F. A. Brents, J. A. Jacobs, R. P. Brown, J. S. Johnston, P. P. B rummal, J . M. The hour of adjournment arrived be- fore the roll-call was completed, and the Convention took a recess. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention met at 8 o’clock in pur- suance to the recess. The Delegate from Daveiss county, Mr. Pettit, in the Chair. Mr. WASHINGTON. It seems to me that we have a very slim attendance, and I make the point of order that, there is no quorum. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the Convention resolve itself in Committee of the Whole for further consideration of the report of the Committee on Executive motion is for a call of the House, which is always in order. Mr. MONTGOMERY, I ask leave of absence for the ‘Delegate from the Fifth Dis- trict of Louisville (Mr. McDermott). Mr. BLACKBURN. I desire to ask leaves of absence for certain gentlemen, one of whom is at home sick, another who was called home by a dispatch announcing sickness in his family. Mr. WASHINGTON. I make the point that this Convention has no quorum, and is not competent to grant leaves of absence. Mr. BLACKBURN. I am aware of the fact that it is in the discretion of this Con- vention not to grant leaves of absence, but I ask leave of absence for Judge Hanks, I do not know his county and so give his name; the Delegate from Fayette county, and for Dr. Williams, who has been called home by a dispatch received just before the recess this morning, and for Dr. O’Hara, who is at home sick. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair will state to the Delegate, from Woodford that when the Convention took a recess this morning it gave leave to the Commit- tee of the Whole to resume its session this afternoon and no motion, except a motion to reconsider that motion, to adjourn, for a call of the House or to resolve the Con- vention into Committee of the Whole is in order. Mr. BLACKBURN. Which has pre- cedence? The PRESIDENT pro tem. If it is determined by any vote that there is not a quorum present then a call of the House is bad Mr. BLACKBURN. I move that the (‘onvention go into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of further consider- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. as Saturday,] BLACKBURN—PHELPS~MILLER. [November 15 . ing the report of the Committee on the Executive Officers for the State at Large. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to call the attention of the Convention to the fact that about a week since, after the holidays, we met and went into the Committee of the Whole with a great many less present than we have now, and I think the Con- vention should be consistent by going ahead in some way. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The ques- tion is upon resolving the Convention into Committee of the Whole. . Mr. W. H. MILLER. On that I call for the yeas and nays. The roll was called, and resulted as fol- lows: YEAS——56. Amos, D. C. Hines, Thomas H. Askew, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Ayres, W. W. Holloway, J. W. Beckner, W. M. James, A. D. Bennett, B. F. Jonson, Jep. C. Birkhead, B. T. Lassing, L. W. Blackburn, James Lewis, W. W. Bourland, H. R. Martin, W. H. Brents, J. A. McElroy, W. J. Bronston. C. J. McHenry, H. D. Buchanan, Nathan Miller, Will. Buckner, S. B. Miller, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J .F. Burnam, Curtis E. Moore, J. H. Clardy, John D. Moore, Laban T. Coke, J. Guthrie Muir, J. W. Cox, H. Parsons, Rob’t T. DeHaven, S. E. Petrie, H. G. Doris, W. F. Pettit, Thos. S. Durbin, Charles Phelps, John L. Edrington, W. J. Phelps, Zack Elmore, T. J. Quicksall, J. E. Farmer, H. H. Rodes, Robert Field, W. W. Smith, W. Scott Forrester, J. G. Swango, G. B. Funk, J. T. Trusdell, Geor e Graham, Samuel Twyman, I. Harris, Geo. C. West, J. F. ABSENT—44. Allen, C. T. Kennedy, Hanson Allen, M. K. Kirwan, E. E. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Auxier, A. J, Mackoy, W. H. Beckham, J. C. May, John S. Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm. C. Blackwell, Joseph McDermott, E. J. Boles, S. H. Nunn, T. J. Brown, J. S. . O’Hara, R. H. Brummal, J. M. Pugh, Sam’l J. Carroll, John D. Ramsey, W. R. Chambers, G. D. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam. E. Smith, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Spalding, I. A. Glenn, Dudley A. Straus, F. P. Goebel, Wm. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, J. S. Wood, J. M. Hopkins, F. A. Woolfolk, J. E. Jacobs, R. P. Young, Bennett H. Johnston, P. P. Mr President Clay Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to indi- cate to the Chair that the Delegates from Marion and Campbell are present and did not vote. Mr. KNOTT. I am exceedingly ob- liged to the Delegate for indicating my presence. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair has no power to make any Delegate vote. Mr. WASHINGTON. No quorum having appeared, I ask for a call of the House. The PRESIDENT pro: tem. That mo- tion is in order, but it has to be ordered by the House. Mr. BLACKBURN. The Delegate from Pike asked me to obtain leave of ab- sence for him, and I forgot it this morn- ing. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair would state to the Delegate from Wood- ford that the roll-call shows no quorum, and the point of order being made, no mo- tion for a leave of absence can be enter- tained by the Chair. Mr. BLACKBURN. It was my fault that I did not ask it before, and I would be glad if the Convention would allow those leaves of absence. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair 34 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] BLAoKBURN—BRQNMon—MILLER. [N ovember 15. would like to 'entertain the motion, and re- grets he cannot. Mr. BLACKBURN. I move that we adjourn. Mr. BRONSTON. On'that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. FUNK. I second it. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Is that motion in order, when it is disclosed that there is no quorum present‘? The PRESIDENT pro tem. A motion to adjourn pending a call of the Conven- tion, is always in order. Mr. BLACKBURN. If we want to know who are absent that can be very easily ascertained. Mr. WASHINGTON. I make the point of order that that is not in order now. There is a motion to adjourn. The PRESIDENT pro tem. of order is well taken. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I want to make an explanation. I do not think that the motives of any Delegate will be called in question. My purpose in making the motion I did was that we could take steps to procure a quorum. A vote being taken on the motion to adjourn, resulted as follows: The point YEAS—19. Beckner, W. M. Miller, Will. Bennett, B. F. McHenry, H. D. Blackburn, James Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Hines, Thomas H. James, A. D. Jonson, Jep. C. Parsons, Rob’t T. Phelps, John L. Quicksall, J. E. Washington, George Knott, J. Proctor West, J. F. Martin, W. H. Kai's—4'2. Amos, D. C. Funk, J. T. Askew, J. F. Graham, Samuel Ayres, W. W. Harris, Geo. C. Birkhead, B. T. Hogg, S. P. Bourland, H. R. Holloway, J. W. Brents, J. A. Lassing, L. W. Bronston, C. J. Lewis, W. W. Buchanan, Nathan McElroy, W. J. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, W. H. Clardy, John D. Moore, J. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Moore, Laban T. Cox, t Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. 3E. Pettit, Thomas S. Doris, W. F. Phelps, Zack Durbin, Charles Pugh, Sam’l J. Edrington, W. J. Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Smith, WV. Scott Farmer, H. H. Swango, G. B. Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Field, W. W. Twyman, I. W. Forrester, J.G. Whitaker, Emery ABSENT—39. ' Allen, C. T. Johnston, P. P. Allen, M. K. Kennedy, Hanson Applegate, Leslie T. Kirwan, E. E. Auxier, A. J, Mackoy, W. H. Beckham, J. C. May, John S. Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm. C. Blackwell, Joseph McDermott, E. J. Boles, S. H. Nunn, T. J. Brown, J. S. O’Hara, R. H. Brummal, J. M. Ramsey, W. R. Carroll, John D. Sachs, Morris A. Chambers, G D. Smith, H. H. English, Samuel E. Spalding, I. A. Glenn, Dudley A. Straus, F. P. Goebel, William Williams, L. P. V. Hanks, Thos. H. Wood, J. M. Hendrick, \V. J. Woolfolk, J .F. Hines, J. S. Young, Bennett H. Hopkins, F. A. Mr. President Clay. Jacobs, R. P. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I renew my motion for a call of the House. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair will direct the attention of the Convention to Rule 43: “ Upon a call of the Conven- tion, the names of the Delegates shall be called over by the Secretary and the ab- sentees noted, after which the names of the absentees shall again be called, the door shall then be shut, and those for whom no sufficient excuse is made, by order of those present, shall be taken into custody by the Sergeant-at-Arms as they appear, or may be sent for and taken into custody where- ever to be found, by special messenger appointed for that purpose by the Ser- geant." Mr. BURN AM. I voted to-day to have an evening session, but I do not think we can accomplish any thing. I do not think we can do any thing better than ad- journ. I was anxious to go on. with this EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 35 Saturday,] MILLER—Biions'rois—BURNAM. [November 15 . work, but as we only have sixty-one Del- egates present, and as there seems to be a disinclination on the part of some to go on with the work, I move to adjourn. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make the point of order that no business has been transacted since the last motion to ad- journ. The PRESIDENT pro few. of order is well taken. Mr. BRONSTON. The point M y recollection is ‘that one day last week, with a less num- ber of Delegates than we now have, we went on with the consideration of the matter, and I do not see why we cannot ' go on with this. Mr. BURNA M. I am entirely willing to do that, and I think it could be done by unanimous con sent. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The mo- tion made by the Delegate from Lincoln would have to be withdrawn. Mr. BRONSTON. I was making the request of him through the Chair that he withdraw that motion. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would be will- ing to withdraw my motion for a call of the House, if the record did not already disclose the fact that there is no quorum, and we cannot resolve ourselves into Com- mittee of the Whole until a quorum is present. If a quorum appears, I have no objection. Mr. BRONSTON. If the Delegate from Lincoln withdraws his motion, and nobody makes the point of order that we have not a quorum, we can proceed with business. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The record already discloses the fact that there is no quorum, and the point of order has been made. I The motion for a call of the House was withdrawn. Mr. KNOTT. I move that we adjourn Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to make the point that we are now in Committee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT 11m fem. Oh, no; we are in Convention. Mr. BRONSTON. Then I desire to make {the point of order that no business has intervened between this time and the last motion to adjourn. Mr. KNOTT. I respectfully submit that the motion for a call of the House has been withdrawn. That is business. The PRESIDENT pro tem. That is business. The question is upon the motion of the gentleman from .Marion to adjourn. Mr. BRONSTON. On that I call the yeas and nays. ' Mr. KNOTT. 1 second it. The result of the roll-call is as follows: YEAS—Qti. Beckner, W. M. Knott, J. Proctor Bennett, B. F. Martin, W. H. Buckner, S. B. MeHenry, H. D. Bullitt, WV. G. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. Parsons, Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Smith, W. Scott Swango, G. B. Washington, George Burnan, Curtis F. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thos. H. Holloway, J. W. James, A. D. Jonson, Jep. C. West, J. F. ' sun's—37. Amos, D. C. Forgy, J. M. Askew, J. F. Funk, J. T Ayres, W. W. Hogg, S. P. Birkhead, B. T. Lassing, L. \N. Blackburn, J amcs Lewis, W. W. Boles, S. H. M cElroy, W. J. Bourland, H. R. Miller. Will, Brents, J. A. Miller, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. Buchanan, Nathan Nunn, J. T. Clardy, John D. Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, Zack Doris,_W. 1i‘. Durbin, Charles. Edrington, VV.J. Pugh, Samuel J. Quicksall, J. E. Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Trusdell. George Farmer, H. H.’ Twyman, I. W. Field, W. W. Whitaker, Emery Forrester, J. G. ABSENT—37. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Allen, C. T. Allen, M. K. 86 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] GOX—WASHINGTON—PHELPS. [November 15 _ Applegate, Leslie T. Kirwan, E. E. ' Auxier, A. J. Mackoy, W. H. Beckham, J. C. May, John S. Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm. C. Blackwell, Joseph McDermott, E. J. Brown, J. S. O’Hara, R. H. Brummal, J. M. Ramsey, \V. R. Carroll, John D. Sachs, Morris A. Chambers, G. D. Smith, H. H. English, Sam E. Straus, F. P. Glenn, Dudley A. Spalding, I. A. Goebel, Wm. Williams, L. P. V. Hanks, Thos. H. Wood, J. M. Hendrick, “T. J. ‘Voolfolk, J. F. Hines, J. S. Young, Bennett H. Hopkins, F. A. Mr. President Clay Jacobs, R. J. ll/Ir. COX. It is entirely evident that there is no quorum. It is evident from the call of the House, and I do not desire to see this Convention violate a law it has made itself. The other day it was decided that fifty-one was a quorum, but evidently that was done at a time of excitement, and I do not desire to see an effort to do busi- ness when there is no quorum, in violation of the law the Convention itself made. Mr. WASHINGTON. My venerable friend from Carroll is laboring under a mis- apprehension. It was decided that fifty- one was a quorum in the Committee of the Whole; but we are not in Committee of the Whole now. The present occupant of the Chair is President pro z‘em., and not Chairman of the Committee of the Whole. We are now in Convention, and the record discloses the fact that there is no quorum. We may get up and talk from now until sundown, but we are powerless to do any business; and I think, under the circum- stances, it is clear that this Convention should adjourn. We cannot resolve our- selves into a Committee of the Whole. We cannot do any thing binding on the Convention, and I, therefore, ask that the President pro tem. declare the Conventidn adjourned. The PRESIDENT pro fem. We are operating here under the rules of the House and one of the rules of the Convention says in explicit terms that it requires two-thirds of those elected to constitute a quorum. The rules also provide that when a quorum does not appear such and such must be done. The action of the Convention and not the action of the President does any- thing. There are but two motions now in order, one is fora call of the House and the other is to adjourn. Mr. ZACK PHELPS I am satisfied that there is no one here except with adesire to get the benefit of this afternoon session. I believe everybody in good faith wants to work if we can. If we can discover any way out of this dilemma, I believe that everybody will approve of it. I call the attention of the President to the fact, and I appeal to the records to hear me out, that when the Committee of the Whole ad- journed this morning the gentleman from Logan, the Chairman, reported the Com- mittee of the Whole had had the matter under consideration, and asked leave of the Convention to sit again this afternoon, and the Convention granted that leave by a unanimous vote. I now suggest as a so- lution that we, under that permission, can go into Committee of the Whole, and in the Committee of the Whole we can trans- act business, because we have a quorum of the Committee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair would suggest to the gentleman from Louisville that we are now in Convention and not in Committee of the Whole, and it is in Convention that we find ourselves confronted with this dilemma. Mr. McELROY. There are certainly but two ways that we can get out of this. The House either stands adjourned or we have to call the roll. It stands adjourned because it _has appeared from the records that there is no quorum. Then there is but one motion and unless the} motion is made for a call of the House, the House stands adjourned. Mr. BLACKBURN. The absence of a quorum has not been discovered in any way provided for under our rules. It may be ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. a? r———~~- .-_. _. __V._ ._ .. _ __'-__ .-._.@~__M_-< .‘___ _____ Saturday,] .MlLLER—BLACKBURN. . [November t5 . that when we are in Convention a call of \ cers for the State at Large. I hope that we the. House will only disclose fifty or sixty will not waste this afternoon. i I or seventy members, because the balance do ' Mr. W. H. MILLER. The point 0 not vote. If we proceed to have a call of I order has been made that there is no the House and find a number of persons ; quorum and now with a view of giving absent the rule tells us what to do. We \ this House a chance of getting out of this shall have the names of the absentees called dilemma and to provide additional busi- aaid if those absent are not excused by the ness so that another motion to adjourn may Convention, the order is to close the door and the President will send the Sergeant-at- the House. That is in order. Arms for the absent members. What are Mr. BLACKBURN. I think it would we to do ‘? Sit here until he returns Mon- 1 be unjust to the members who are absent day. We know some of them have gone to i to have a call of the House, because a great Louisville. There are two or three things many of them made arrangements to go this House can do, "We can resolve our- home before the present rule of the House selves into a Committee of the Whole, to E was adopted. debate the report on the Executive, or we A vote being taken and a division being can proceed under the rule to discover the called for the yeas were 28, and the nays Delegates who are absent without leave, 30. The call of the House was refused. and direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to go after Mr. MILLER. I move that we adjourn. those absent without leave. I, therefore, Mr. FARMER. I second it. move that this Convention resolve itself A vote was taken, and the motion being into Committee of the Whole to discuss the carried, the Convention adjourned. report of the Committee on Executive ()fli- be in order I move that we have a call of ionvention Ziecoro. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. [Na 54 Vol. 1.] FRANKFURT, NOVEMBER 17, 1890. Monday,] MILLER—LEWIS—PARSONS. [November 17 . The Convention was called to order at ‘9:30 o’clock, A. M., by the President pro tem. (Mr. Pettit), and the proceedings were ‘opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Hen- derson. The Journal of Saturday was read, cor- rected and approved. Mr. w. H. MILLER.“ I move that the Journal be approved as read, and on that I ‘call the yeas and nays. Mr. LEWIS. I second it. The result of the roll-call was as follows :' YEAS—55. Amos, D. C. James, A. D. Ayres, W. W. Knott, J. Proctor Beckner, W. M. Lassing, L. W. Birkhead, B. T. Lewis, W. W. Boles, S. H. May, John S. Bourland, H. R. McElroy, W. J. Brents, J. A. MeHenry, H. D. Bronston, C. J. Miller, Will. Brummal,J. M. Miller, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Moore, Laban T. Bullitt, W. G. Muir, J. W. Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. Parsons Rob’t T. Coke, J. Guthrie Petrie, H. G. Cox. H. Pettit, Thos. S. Doris, WV. F. Phelps, John L. Durbin, Charles Phelps, Zack Edrington, W. J. Pugh, Sam’l J. Elmore, T. J. Quicksall, J. E. Farmer, H. H. Ramsey, W. R. Field, W. WV. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. G. Smith, W. Scott Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Graham, Samuel Twyman, I. W. Harris, Geo. C. Washington, George Hendrick, W. J. West, J. F. Hogg, S. P. NAYS—-—3. Hines, Thomas H. Whitaker, Emery Martin, W. H. ABSENT—~42. Allen, C. T. Hopkins, F. A. Allen, M. K. Jacobs, R. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Jonson, J ep. C. Askew, J. F. Johnston, P. P. Auxier, A. J. Kennedy, Hanson Beckham, J. C. Kirwan, E. E. Bennett, B. F. Mackoy, W. H. Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm. C. Blackburn, James McDermott, E. J. Blackwell, Joseph Moore, J. H. Brown, J. S. O’Hara, R. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Sachs, Morris A Carroll, John D. Smith, H. H. DeHaven, S. E. Spalding, I. A. English, Sam. E. Straus, F. P. Funk, J. T. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Williams, L. P. V. Goebel, William Wood, J. M. Hanks, Thos. H. Woolfolk, J. F. Hines, J. S. Young, Bennett H. Holloway, J. W. Mr. President Clay Mr. APPLEGATE. I ask to be ex- cused, as I was not present, and do not know whether the Journal is correct or not. Mr. PAR-SONS. I think it is necessary for each member on this floor, when his name is called, to vote, unless he can show some reason why he should not. Mr. APPLEGATE. I was not here, and do not know whether the Journal is correct or not. ' Mr.W. SCOTT S M 1TH. I move that the gentleman be excused. Mr. BULLITT. I second it. A vote being taken, the motion was car- I ried. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I had no oppor- tunity before the roll-call was commenced, and I now ask leave of absence for the Del- egate from Greenup, who has gone home to see his sick wife. 2 APPROVAL OF THE JOURNAL. Monday,] FARMER—JOHNSTON—BRONSTON. [November 17.. The PRESIDENT pro tem. That mo- tion is not now in order. Mr. FARMER. I would suggest that the name of the gentleman from Fayette be called. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Any gen- tleman who makes his appearance has a right to be recorded under the rule, if he desires, but the Clerk need not again call the name of the gentleman. Mr. JOHNSTON. I have no desire to appear on this roll-call as absent; but I was not here Saturday, and do not know whether the minutes are correct or not. Mr. BRONSTON. I suggest the name of the Delegate from Fleming, at his own instance Mr. L. T. MOORE. I ask a recapitula- tion of the vote. Mr. JOHNSTON. I ask to be excused, because I do not know whether the Journal is correct or not. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I care nothing about this vote, but there might come a time when we might be interested in regard to indicating a gentleman who had not voted. I desire to insist that Delegates have a right to indicate any Delegate on the floor who refuses to vote, and that if he still refuses to vote his name shall be noted as present and not voting. If this action is to be a precedent for the remainder of the session, Delegates will claim the privilege of remaining silent and not voting for the remainder of the session. I know that it is a rule to indicate them in the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives, and in the State Legisla- ture. I make that point with this view, that we may not get into that error, and thereby give members an opportunity here- after to refer to this action as a precedent. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair would state to the Delegate from Russell that this is a well settled principle in Par- liamentary proceedings. It has been almost universally held that neither the presiding OIIICGI‘ nor any deliberative body can com- pel. by rule or otherwise, the voting of a member when he does not so desire—hold- ing that a Delegate is responsible for his action to his constituents alone. been decided by very high authority that you may lead a horse to water, but no power on earth can force him to drink. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I am of opinion that when you lead a horse to water you have a right to call his name. Mr. MCHENRY. I call for the regular order. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The gen- tleman from Russell is out of order. Mr. BLACKBURN. I want to ask leaves of absence for the Delegates from Wolfe, Pike and Jessamine counties. The Delegate from Pike is absent attending the burial of a kinsman. The Delegate from Jessamine is absent attending his Court, and the Delegate from Wolfe is absent for a like purpose. They all requested me to ask the Convention for leave of absence. The PRESIDENT pro fem. The Chair states to_the gentleman from Woodford that after the announcement of this vote the Chair will then recognize the gentle- man. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make the point of order that no quorum has voted on the proposition, and that the Journal is not ap- proved. The PRESIDENT pro tem. is sustained. Mr. BLACKBURN. I feel it my duty to those Delegates to state to the Conven- tion their request, and I hope the Conven- tion will grant the leaves of absence. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have no objec- tion, and will certainly vote for leave of absence to each one of the gentlemen named; but there is no quorum present to transact any business, and no business can The point be transacted until a quorum appears, and,. therefore, designing to have the Conventiorn It has RULES. 3 Monday,] HENDRICK—WHITAKER—BLACKBURN. [November 17 . transact business, I move a call of the House. Mr. HENDRICK. Before that is done I feel it is my duty to ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Floyd, who is absent. The PRESIDENT pro tem. That can only be done by unanimous consent. Mr. WHITAKER. -Has this House the power to do any thing without a quorum ? The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair now recognizes that fact. Mr. BLACKBURN. That will result in unnecessary delay. The gentlemen for whom I am asking leaves of absence, one is absent on account of sickness, another on business. It is sound discretion to say whether those Delegates shall be excused. If a call of the House is ordered, those doors will be closed, and our Sergeant-at- Arms will be sent for the absentees, and what good can we accomplish by remaining here locked up, unable to do any thing‘? We just inconvenience ourselves. I think, undoubtedly, it is competent for the Dele- gates here to grant the reasonable requests of Delegates for leaves of absence, as it is for us to lock the door up and direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to bring the absentees in under arrest. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair will state to the gentleman from Woodford. in the event that there may be a call of the House, that the leaves of absence can then be obtained without affecting the call of the House. Mr. BECKNER. I move that the Con- vention unite in a petition to His Excellen- cy, the Governor, to pardon before convic- tion all those who voted in favor of an af- ternoon session. (Laughter.) The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair would state that there is but one motion in order, and that is the motion for a call of the House, which was made by the Dele- gate from Lincoln, and seconded by whom? Mr. W. S. SMITH.‘ I second it. Mr. BRONSTON. On that I call for . the yeas and nays. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I second it. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll, and during the roll-call Mr. T. H. Hines asked ' leave of absence for the Delegate from Cov- ington,_ Mr. Mackoy, whom he stated was necessarily absent on business. Mr. DURBIN. I ask leave of absence for the Delegate from Gallatin, who is sick and unable to be here. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair states to the gentleman from Grayson and the gentleman from Franklin that at this time the requests cannot be enter- tained. The result of the roll-call is as follows: YEAS—21. Amos, D. C. Edrington, W. J. Ayres, W. W. Elmore. T. J. Birkhead, B. T. Farmer, H. H. Boles, S. H. Graham, Samuel Bourland, H. R. Hogg, S. P. Brents, J. A. Lewis, W. W. Brummal, J. M. May, John S. Coke, J. Guthrie McElroy, W. J. Cox, H. Miller, W. H. Doris, W. F. Ramsey, IV. R. Durbin, Charles sun's—88. Applegate, Leslie T. Martin, W. H. Beckner, W. M. McHenry, H. D. Blackburn, James Miller, Will. Bronston, C. J. Montgomery, J. F. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, Laban T. Buckner, S. B. Muir, J. W. Bullitt, W. G. Nunn, T. J. Chambers, G. D. Parsons. Rob’t T. Clardy, John D. Petrie, H. G. Field, W. W. Pettit, Thos. S. Forrester, J. G. Phelps, Zack Forgy, J. M. Pugh, Sam’l J. Harris, Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. James, A. D. Quicksall, J. E. Rodes, Robert Smith, W. Scott Trusdell, George Johnston, P. P. Twyman, I. W. Knott, J. Proctor West, J. F. Lassing, L. W. ‘ Whitaker, Emery ABSENT—~41. Allen, C. T. Jonson, Jep. C. Allen. M. K. Kennedy, Hanson Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. Auxier, A. J. Mackoy, W. H. Beckham, J. C. McChord, Wm. C. 4 RULES. Monday,] MCHENRY—MILLER—MOORE. [November 17. Bennett, B. F. McDermott, E. J. The PRESIDENT PTO 156???- There is glerkleleglvgn. h lglgpre, JRHH but one proposition—the motion to ad- acxwe , osep ’ ara, . . journ. Brown, J. S. Phelps, John L. _ _ Burnam, Curtis F. Sachs, Morris A. . Mr‘ FARMER' I mslst that We ad‘ Carroll, John D. Smith, H. H. journ. DGHQVQIL 3- E- Spalding, 1' A- Mr. BRONSTON. And on that I call E- Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Washington, George Williams, L. P. V. Hanks, Thos. H. Wood, J. M. Hines, J. S. Woolfolk, J. F. Holloway, J. W. Young, Bennett H. Hopkins, F. A. Mr. President Clay Jacobs, R. P. Mr. McHENRY. I desire at this time to ofi‘er a resolution, and to make a few re- marks, by the courtesy of the House, by unanimous consent. The PRESIDENT pro tem. be done by unanimous consent. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make the point of order that a quorum has not appeared, and that no business is now in order, except the motion to adjourn. Mr. MOHENRY. I do not think the gentleman can tell whether my motion is in order until he hears it; he cannot tell whether I am going to move to adjourn. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Is there unanimous consent to the Delegate from Ohio to proceed? Mr. W. H. \IILLER. I object. Mr. MCHENRY. We are all getting in a tangle here, and we all know the reason of the trouble. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I still insist on my objection. The gentleman insists that we are about to get into a tangle, and he is the very gentleman who led us into it. Mr. MCHENRY. No, sir; I did not. Mr. FARMER. I move we adjourn. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The point is made against the gentleman from Ohio, and the Chair has no option, but must en- force the rule. Mr. WHITAKER. I would like to know what motion is before the House? Mr. McHENRY. You cannot tell what I am going to move. It can only Mr. L. T. MOORE. I second it. The PRESIDENT pro tem. order. Mr. MCHENRY. No, sir, it is not in order. They have not gotten me off the floor yet. I have a resolution to refer the matter to the Committee on Rules to report a rule by which we can get out of this con- fusion. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The mo- tion to adjourn has been made and is in order. It was made by the Delegate from Henderson. Mr. McHENRY. How did he get the floor to make the motion‘? The PRESIDENT pro tem. By the gentleman from Henderson being in order whilst the gentleman from Ohio was out of order. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I desire to offer an amendment to the motion of the Dele- gate from Henderson. The PRESIDENT pro tem. There can be no amendment to a motion to adjourn. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. Would it be in order to move to adjourn to a fixed hour‘? If so, I move that we adjourn until 10:30 o’clock this morning. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I make the point of order on that, that no business is in or- der except a motion to adjourn. The PRESIDENT pro tem. sustains the point of order. Mr. MCHENRY. I move for a call of the House. The PRESIDENT pro fem. That is not in order. There are only two motions that are now in order: One is for a reconsidera- tion of the vote by which the call of the House was refused; and the other is the That is in The Chair lmotion made by the Delegate from Hender- son, which is to adjourn, and has pre- RULES. 5 Monday,] MOORE—BLACKBURN—MCHENR Y. [November 17 . cedence. Upon that there was a call for the yeas and nays. Who demanded the call ‘? Mr. L. T. MOORE. I demanded it. Who seconded it? Mr. BRONSTON. I did. Mr. BLACKBURN. To what point would that carry us if we adjourned ‘? The PRESIDENT pro tem. Nine and a half o’clock to-morrow morning. Mr. BLACKBURN. I think it would only carry us till three o’clock. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair is inclined to think the gentleman is right. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to ask the ruling of the Chair as to what hour We will stand adjourned to if we carry the motion to adjourn? The PRESIDENT pro tem. Without a thorough investigation, while my first im- pression was that we adjourned until _to- morrow morning at half-past nine o’clock, I am now inclined to believe in the interest of business, and since reading the rule gov- erning our proceedings that we would ad- journ until three o’clock this afternoon. Mr. MOHENRY. How can a motion be in order to adjourn until three o’clock? If we adjourn, we adjourn for a day. The PRESIDENT pro tem. My ruling is in the interest of business. The gentle- man from Ohio can appeal from that decision if he desires. Mr. MOHENRY. ‘Oh, I do not care about appealing from it, but my understand- ing is that when we adjourn at one o’clock it is not an adjournment, but simply a recess. If we adjourn now, I think the adjournment would be until half-past nine. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The order of the House, under which the afternoon sessions are held, reads: “Resolved, That all daily sessions of the Convention, held after November 13th, 1890, shall consist of a morning session, beginning at half—past nine o’clock, A. M., and adjourning at one o’clock P. M., and an afternoon session be- ginning at three o’clock, and adjourning at five.” ,- . it " Mr. MOHENRY. Then do you mean to say we cannot adjourn until five o’clock‘? The PRESIDENT pro tem. Of course we can. Mr. MOHENRY. The great trouble comes from that rule, and it is a ridiculous rule, such as never before obtained in any legislative body on the face of the earth. I want to say now, that this is one of the best working bodies I ever saw in my life, and this whole trouble comes from that resolu- tion pushed by a few gentlemen who want to make a little Cheap John notoriety in newspapers by having said that they got the Convention to go to work. Let us meet the question like men. (Applause) The PRESIDENT pro term. The Dele- gate is out of order. I Mr. MOHENRY. Who is objecting to me speaking’? The PRESIDENTpro tem. The gentle- man can only proceed by unanimous con- sent, objection having been made. Is there objection ? There being no objection, the Delegate from Ohio was allowed to proceed. Mr. McI-IENRY. I want to refer this matter to the Committee on Rules, and let them report a resolution that this Conven- tion meet at 9:30 o’clock every day. I am willing to fix it an hour later on Monday to accommodate some of these gentlemen. Let us meet just like all other legislative bodies, say at 9:30, and go on with our work and adjourn when we please. I am opposed to the part of the rule which says that we shall sit here a certain time and have a cer- tain time to adjourn. 1 say we should meet at 9:30 o’clock and let the majority do as they please; let them have an evening ses- sion or not. We all want evening sessions; we want to do the Work of the Convention. We are all anxious to get home, and I say it is child’s play to have such a resolution as this compelling us to meet at a certain time, adjourn at a certain time, and then have an afternoon session at a certain time, and then let out at a‘ certain time. In regard to the reflection thrown out that we are a 6 RULES. Monday,] HENDRICK—M ILLER. [November 17 _ weak, vacillating sort of body and do not know what we want to do; that is not so. This is an industrious body. I have been a member of many legislative assemblages, and this is the most industrious that I have ever belonged to; it is the best working. And I may be permitted to say, in this con- nection, that I have been a member of Con- gress, and in point of ability and desire to work, this Convention compares favorably, according to numbers, with the Congress of the United States. We all of us want to work just as much as the gentlemen who seem to be favorites with the newspapers. Mr. HENDRICK. order. I rise to a point of I have profound respect for the Parliamentary knowledge and experience of the Chair, but I desire to invoke a ruling of the Chair upon a question suggested by the Delegate from Louisville. As I understand it, a call of the House indicates a quorum or no quorum at a given moment of time. I believe that is recognized by all authori- ties on Parliamentary law. Any action subsequent to that time, unless another vote is taken, leaves the House in condition to transact business. I now understand the Chair to rule that a motion to take a recess or adjourn to an hour certain is not in order, and that the only motion in order is to adjourn. I invite your attention to Rule 26, under head of “ Dignity and Privilege of Questions: ” “ When a question is under debate, no motion shall be received but to fix the time to which the Convention shall adjourn, to take a recess, to lie on the table, for the previous question, to postpone to a day certain, to commit or to amend, to postpone indefinitely, WHERE only one such motion shall be in order, which several mo- tions shall have precedence in the order in which they are arranged. And a motion to postpone to a day certain, to commit, shall not be again allowed on the same day, un- less at a different stage of the proposition." Roberts’ Rules of Order, and those other au— thorities which have been referred to, always give the rule that a motion to fix the time at which the Convention shall adjourn takes precedence of a motion to adjourn. I ask the ruling of the Chair, if that motion to take a recess or fix the time to which the Convention shall adjourn has not precedence over the simple motion to adjourn‘? I think that is the universal Parliamentary custom. I am not certain about the motion to take a recess, but I think a motion to fix the time at which the House shall adjourn undoubtedly has precedence of a motion to adjourn, and, to bring up that question, I move that the House now adjourn until 11 o’clock this morning. Mr. W. H. MILLER. 1 rise to a point of order. I insist that the motion of the gentleman just made is not in order. The rule read by him must be construed in connection with a previous rule, which says a quorum must consist of at least two-thirds of the Delegates elected but ten Delegates may adjourn from day to day when a sufiicient number has not met to proceed with the business, and fifteen Delegates, together with the President, may call the House, send for absent Delegates and make an order for their censure. We cannot adjourn, except from day to day, under Rule 10, and the only motion in order is for an adjournment, and that ad- journment is until to-morrow morning at half-past nine. Mr. HENDRICK. In connection with that rule,which saysaquorum shall consist of at least two-thirds of the Delegates elected, but ten Delegates of the Convention may adjourn from day to day when a sufficient number has not met to proceed to busi- ness, and fifteen Delegates, together with the President, may call the House, send . for absent Delegates, and make an order for their censure. Idesire to say we have not ascertained whether we have a quorum or not. We did twenty minutes ago find that we had not a quorum; but there is now amotion to adjourn, and a motion to fix the time to which we shall adjourn takes precedence of the simple motion to adjourn. RULES. 7 -elected as a quorum, governs. Monday,] HENDRICK—PHELPS— M ILLE R. [November 17 . ‘The point I contend for is in keeping with -every rule of the United States House of Representatives, and with the rule taken by Thomas Jefferson from the British Par- liament. A motion to fix the time to which the House shall adjourn, in connection with ‘the motion to adjourn, always has prece- dence to the latter. M r. W. H. MILLER. Rule 26 only ap- plies to the House when a sufficient num- ber is present. Mr. HENDRICK. We have not ascer- tained yet that there is not a quorum here now. Mr. W. H. MILLER. No business has intervened between a motion for the call of the House and this time, and the only in- formation we have on the subject of a quo- rum was received from the last roll-call, which says we had not a quorum. Mr. HENDRICK. Well, cannot any- body now, unless the motion to adjourn had come in, move for a call of the House, and would not that be in order? The ascertain- ment of quorum or no quorum at one min- ute of time is no indication of quorum or .no quorum at a later period. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The Chair I will state that the record, upon the vote ap- proving the Journal, shows that the Con- vention was without a quorum, and Rule 10, requiring two-thirds of the Delegates I will call the attention of the gentleman from Flem- ing to Rule 26, which provides that when a question is under debate, no motion shall be received but to fix the time to which the Convention shall adjourn, a call of the House, etc. “ Call of the House” was in- serted by an amendment to that rule. The Chair holds that in the event no quorum has appeared, that a motion to adjourn to a time certain is not in order. The only motion is for a call of the House and for the House to adjourn. The Chair, therefore, overrules the point made by the Delegate .from Fleming. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. I rise to a ques- tion of personal privilege. I desire to express my disapproval of the discourtesy extended to me by the gentleman from Ohio county, and to say that if his remarks are meant to apply to me as the mover of the resolution by which afternoon sessions were adopted, he does me a very great injus-' tice. I appeal to the records to show that when this resoulution for two sessions was offered, I did not advocate or urge it on the Convention, by offering a single word or fact about the matter. About a month since, I offered a resolution, which was voted down by a majority vote of two. Since that time a number of gentlemen on this floor, who voted against my original resolution, requested me to redraft and re- ofi'er the resolution, which I did without ‘ any remarks or any- criticisms whatever. I desire to state to the gentleman from Ohio, that I am not seeking any notoriety of any kind whatever. I have never in my life been a candidate for any office; I never expect to be, and I do not desire any oflice. from the people, and would not have any office in the gift of the people. I offered this because I conscientiously believed it was not asking too much of the Delegates to ask them to give five hours out of the twenty-four to this business. It is not my purpose to be disagreeable. I have not the slightest disposition in that direction; but as the ma— jority of the Convention have decided that we should hold evening sessions, I think it is in bad taste for the gentleman to attempt to insinuate that it was done for any improper purpose, and I de- sire to avow here that I have no ob- ject in view except a conscientious desire to see this Convention do what they are sent here to do. I did feel, and on one oc- casion said, that while we are sitting here at an expense of eight hundred dollars a day, it was but fair that we should give at least five hours’ attention out of the twenty- four to our duties. Personally, I do not care what the Convention does. If they have an afternoon session, I expect to be here and do what I can in aid of the busi- 8 RULES. expect to be here in the morning and do what I can; but I do object to being put in the attitude of doing things for improper purposes, and I avow that I have no object or purpose to obtain any advertisement. I have done nothing but present a resolu- tion and let gentlemen vote on it, for the record will hear me out that when this res- olution was offered I took no part in the debate. Mr. WHITAKER. I think we are making a record this morning that none of us will be very proud of, and in ten or fif- teen minutes we will have a quorum. Would it not be best to sit here quietly until that time, and not go on calling the yeas and nays in order to demonstrate the lack of a quorum? We would be doing a great deal better work to sit here quietly. We are tied by this arbitrary rule, and we have not a sufficient number to change it. Mr. HENDRICK. I move that the permission be given to the Delegate from Mason county to entertain the Conven- tion. Mr. BLACKBURN. What is the ruling of the Chair as to when the adjourn; ment will be to if the motion to adjourn is carried‘? The PRESIDENTpro fem. The Chair holds that the adjournment would be until three o’clock this afternoon. The holding of the Chair is made in the interest of busi- ness. Mr. APPLEGATE. But I would like to read rule 10 to the Chair: “A quorum shall consist of at least two-thirds of the Delegates elected, but ten Delegates of the Convention may adjourn from day to day when asutfieient number has not met to proceed to business, and fifteen Delegates, together with the President. may call the House, send for absent Delegates, and make an order for their censure.” The PRESIDENT pro tem. I call the attention of the Delegate from Pendle- ton to a rule adopted, which provides: ’ Monday,] WHITAKER———HENDRICK—BLACKBURN. [November 17. ness. If they have no afternoon session, I ' That all daily sessions of this Convention held after November 13th, 1890, shall con- sist of a morning session, beginning at half» past nine o’clock A. M., and adjourning at one o’clock P. M.; and an afternoon session, beginning at three o’clock and adjourning at five. My ruling was upon the resolu- tion adopted as a rule of the Convention, and in this case alone applies. The Clerk then began calling the roll on the motion to adjourn, and during the call of it, the following remarks were made: Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to indicate the presence of the Delegate from Fleming. The Delegate from Fleming thereupon voted in the negative. Mr. BRONSTON. Also the Delegate from Bracken. The Delegate from Bracken then voted in the negative. Mr. BRONSTON. Also the Delegate from the Fourth District of Louisville. The Delegate from the Fourth District of Louisville voted in the negative. Mr. BRONSTON. Also the Delegate from Shelby. The Delegate from Shelby then ‘voted in the negative. Mr. BRONSTON. Also the Delegate from the Second District of Louisville. The Delegate from the Second District of Louisville voted in the negative. Mr. PHELPS. I ask a recapitulation of the vote. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to indi- cate the presence of the Delegate from Pike. The Delegate from Pike thereupon voted in the negative. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Idesire to vote. I was absent from the room at the time the’ roll was called. The Delegate from Daveiss, Mr. Birk~ head, then voted in the negative. The roll-call on the motion to adjourn. was as follows: PETITIONS. 9 M onday,] AYRES—BUCKNER. [November 17 .. YEAS—I. and the motion to adjourn is lost. A quo- Coke, J. Guthrie rum having appeared, the question recurs on the approval of the Journal as read and. NAYS_69' corrected. Allen, M. K- HOHlWaYI J- W- The J ournal was approved as corrected. Amos, D. C. James, A. D. Applegate, Leslie T. J onson, J ep. C. Auxier, A. J. Johnston, P. P. Ayres, W. W. Knott, J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. Lassing, L. W. Beckner, W. M. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James May, John S. Boles, S. H. McDermott, E. J. Bourland, H. R. McElroy, W. J. Brents, J. A. _McHenry, H. D. Bronston, C. J. Miller, Will. Brummal, J. M. Miller, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Moore, J. H. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, Laban T. Carroll, John D. N uir, J. W. Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Cox, H. Petrie, H._G. DeHavemS. E. Pettit, Thos. S. Dorris, W. F. Phelps, John L. Durbin, Charles Edrington, \V. J. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Elmore, T. J. Quicksall, J. E. Farmer, H. H. Ramsey, W. R. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. G. Smith, W. Scott Forgy, J , M. Trusdell, George Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. Twyman, I. W. West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Young, Bennett H.' Hogg, S. P. ABSENT—~30. Allen, C. T. Kennedy, Hanson Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. Bennett, B. F. Mackoy, W. H. Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm. C. Blackwell, Joseph O’Hara, R. H. Brown, J. S. Sachs, Morris A. Burnam, Curtis F. Smith, H. H. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. Funk, J. T. Straus, F. P. ' Glenn, Dudley A.‘ Swango, G. B. Goebel, William Washington, George Hanks, Thos. H. Williams, L. P. V. Hines, J. S. Wood, J. M. Hopkins, F. A. Woolfolk, J. F. Jacobs, R. P. Mr. President Clay The PRESIDENT pro tem. The result of the vote is as follows: Yeas 1, nays 69, The PRESIDENT pro tem. Petitions- are now in order. Mr. AYRES. If there is a quorum present, I will ask the correction of the Convention Journal as indicated by me. I am reported as being absent on last Friday at the time that the roll was called on the substitute of the gentleman from Marion. I was present and voted against the substi- tute. The PRESIDENT pro tem. nal will be so corrected. The J our- Leapes of Absence. Leaves of absence were granted to the Delegates from Nicholas county, city of Covington and Floyd and Gallatin counties. Mr. BUCKNER. Idesire to present a. petition, and ask that it be read. The petition was read, and is as fol- lows: ’ The Petition of Cassius ll/[arcellus Clay; He would respectfully represent: That he is a native citizen of this State, and a farmer by occupation; that he is and ever- has been in favor of a government by and for the people. He holds, with Jefferson, that large estates are inimical to a Republi-- can Government, and agrees with that illustrious statesman that the abolition of' primogeniture was a just measure; but cor-- porations are more dangerous than primo-- geniture. Already this Republic has be» come a plutocracy. He looks upon all other things in the Constitution about to be- made as of infinitessimal importance, and. prays that there be no power given to the Legislature, or any other department, to’ tax the people or appropriate their money to any corporation whatever under the pro- posed Constitution. He further prays that railroads and all other means of travel and transportation shall be owned by the ‘1 0 PETITIONS. Monday,] BUCKNER. [November 17 . people, and operated not for private interests, but for the common good. He declares before all men that he honestly be- lieves that the railroad power is too strong for a Republic, and one or the other must die. He further prays that this petition be entered and printed in the “Convention Record.” CASSIUS MARCELLUS CLAY. White Hall, Ky., Nov. 13th, 1890. Mr. BUCKNER. In asking a reference of the petition in question, I desire to say that I sympathize ‘very fully with much that the eminent gentleman says in regard to corporations. I do not, however, agree with the gentleman that the State should ' own and operate railroads or other corpora- tions; but I desire to give some statistics which are corroborative of the assertion of the eminent gentleman to the efi‘ect that we have become in this country a plutocracy. In reference to railroad corporations, I as- sume, Mr. President, that there is not a gentleman on this floor who is not friendly to railroad and other corporations, when under proper control; but, at the same time, we are too sensible that having abol- ished, as your petitioner states, the rights of primogeniture, having prevented the entail- ing of estates from father to son, and the accumulation, in consequence, we have, after having done that great benefit to the State, nevertheless created by legislation corporations which never die, but which go on accumulating their wealth for an indefi- nite number of generations. The dangers resulting from this are certainly greater than from the rights of primogeniture, and as an evidence of this, I wish to say, from the latest records that I have, that the value of stocks and bonds of railroads and other corporations amounted in the year 1885 to $7,583,424,000. The gross annual earnings of these corporations amounted to $772,000,- 000 and'upwards in that year. The net in- come to $269,493,000; and they distributed in dividends during that year the large sum of $77,672,000; I do not think that we can exaggerate the dangers which may result from corporations which are not under proper regulations. When we see the vast sums at the disposal of what are generally called “soulless corporations,” because, while legislation can create life in these corporations, they have never yet been able to give them a soul. When it is the boast (and it appears in testimony before proper Committees of Congress) of some of these leading railroad directors that they are in the habit of using their money in corrupting the ballots; when it has been the boast of one of the most prominent amongst them that, finding that it was a needless waste of money to buy the election of mem- bers of Legislative bodies, he, therefore, preferred, as a matter of economy, to let the elections go by default, so far as the railroads were concerned, and it was cheap- er to purchase the members afterwards. When, even in our own State, we have in- stances of the interference of railroad cor- porations in our local elections, we may well be alarmed at the possible result that may happen unless we properly regulate and control the corporations created by legislative enactment. Another point which is made by the peti- tioner is, that we have come under the con- trol virtually of a plutocracy in this country. Statistics show that last year the average annual income of the richest hundred Eng- lishmen was $450,000, while the average an- nual income of the one hundred richest Americans amounted to from $1,250,000 to $1,500,000. It further shows that about 25,000 persons in the United States own half the wealth of the whole country, and that 200.000 persons control seventy per cent. of the wealth of the country. The writer of the article from which I quote, and which appeared last yearin the Forum, further states: “Within thirty years, the present methods of taxation being con- tinued, the United States of America will be substantially owned by less than fifty EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 11 M onday,] M ILLERwBECKHAM—BUCKNER. [November 17 . thousand persons, constituting less than one ‘.in five hundred of the adult male popula- tion.” I move that the prayer of the pe- Ititioner be granted, that the petition be published in the Records of the Convention, .and referred to the Committee on Railroads .and Commerce for their consideration. The PRESIDENT pro tem. Is there any ‘objection to the request made? Without objection, such will be the order of the Convention. Reports from Standing Com- mittees are next in order. [After a pause] Reports 'from Select Committees. [After a pause] Motions and Resolutions are now .in order. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I offer a resolu- tion which I will ask to be referred to the Committee on Rules. The resolution was read, and is as fol- .lows: _ Resolved, That the Committee on Rules is hereby directed to prepare and report to this Convention a rule regulating its ses- sions in such manner as to accommodate the various Committees and the Delegates, and to provide for as convenient, industri- ous and constant transaction of business as .the health and strength of the Delegates 'will permit. The PRESIDENT pro tem. The reso- lution will be referred to the Committee on Rules. Mr. BECKHAM. There being nothing further in that direction, I move that the Convention now go into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of further consider- .ing the report of the Committee on Execu- tive Affairs. The motion being put, was carried. Executive Department. The Delegate from Logan (Mr. Coke) thereupon took the Chair. IN COMMITTEE or THE WHOLE. Mr. BUCKNER. I rise for the pur- pose of noticing a little more in detail than was done at our last meeting, some remarks made by the Delegate from the City of Louisville. It is not my object to reflect upon, or to criticise in the slightest degree, the action of any Court in this Common- wealth; but the Delegate in question signi- fied his purpose to defend a friend who was on the Bench. and other friends, and no one can do otherwise than credit him for his chivalrous conduct on that occasion. He urged as a reason, justifying the action of the Court in a certain matter that was specified, that the Governor of the Commonwealth had, in a similar case, granted a pardon to persons similarly situated, who had taken refuge in Canada. I asked the gentleman if that was a fact ‘? He stated that he had been so informed by the Commonwealth’s Attorney. I desire to say, not for the purpose of reflecting on the Court, for the Court, doubtless, acted in accordance with its judgment, and in accordance with its right; but when the gentleman states, as a precedent for that action, that the Execu- tive Department had done certain things, I wish to show that the Executive Depart- ment had done no such thing at all, and therefore, that the premises of the gentle- man were entirely erroneous. In the case to which he alludes, the Executive Journal shows that my predecessor, on an applica- tion for a pardon of one of thesev gentlemen, who had taken refuge in Canada, refused the application. In another case, made after the, present Executive came into ofiice, the case was considered on petition, and with a large number of recommenda- tions,including, I believe, that of the Prose- cuting Attorney. The decision of the present Executive was rendered and pub- lished in the papers of the country, and met, as far as I have learned, with universal approval. As an evi- dence of the action of the Executive in that case, I quote from this decision which has been published, the follow- ing, as a rule, which, I believe, has almost uniformly guided the Executive when in office on questions of this character. I will not mention names. It is needless to drag before the public the names of gentlemen \ 12 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. l o M onday,] * * BUCKNER. [November 1 7 . whose offenses have been passed upon by the Courts. But the Executive stated in this opinion : The facts of the case, as shown in the petition, are that this person at the October term, 1884, of the J efi'erson Circuit Court, was indicted in six cases for violating sec- tion 6 of an act in relation to warehouse- men and warehouse receipts, approved March 6, 1869; and it further appears that before finding the indictments he escaped to a foreign country, where he still remains, and where a requisition cannot reach him. The only question before the Executive is as to the propriety of granting a pardon under such circumstances. It is only in exceptional cases that this extraordinary power of the Ex- utive should be exercised before the Courts shall have had an opportunity of deciding upon the guilt or innocence of the accused party. The power was not conferred for the purpose of authorizing the Executive to pre- judge a case before trial, but to enable him to mitigate a punishment, which facts might establish to be more severe than might be required to attain the ends of justice. Especially it was not intended that such a power should be exercised when the accused places himself beyond the reach of both Courts and the Executive, and defeats all legitimate investigations by persisting in his absence. The exercise of the power under such circumstances would be to defeat the ends of justice. It is also opposed to public policy, for the idea should not be encouraged that a person who of- fends against the laws can receive immu- nity from his acts by temporary absence in a foreign land, and be permitted, by an im- proper exercise of Executive power, to escape all legal investigations of his con- duct. That, Mr. Chairman, was the action of the Executive Department, and when it is stated, as was stated by the gentleman, first without reservation, and then upon the authority of the Commonwealth’s Attorney, I wish to say that the Executive Journals disprove the correctness of his statement. I did not desire to say any thing further than I have already said on this subject of restricting the power of the Executive in the cases of pardon. I think it has been shown by many Delegates on this floor that there are occasions when this power should be exercised. It is charged and contended ' by those who oppose the exercise of the power before conviction, that it ought not to be granted, because the Executive is liable to err, and because the information upon which he acts must necessarily be in- complete. I think, with due deference to those gentlemen, that they themselves are bringing these accusations without full in- formation. They charge that the Execu- tive acts on ex parte statements. They themselves, I think, are acting on m: part6 information. No better evidence of that could be adduced than the statement made by the Delegate from the city of Louisville, because undoubtedly he believed that he was correct, but an investigation shows that not only was be incorrect, but that the- statement he made was opposed absolutely to the facts appearing on the records of the Executive Journal. The logic, as was was well said by a Delegate the other day, employed by these gentle- men, to the efl'ect that the Executive should not be permitted to exercise this power, because as a human he is liable to err, and does err. That logic applied to other cases would also induce us necessarily to abolish juries, because it is well known that juries have been known to convict the innocent and to acquit the guilty. It would also lead to the abolition of all Courts, because we know judges err some- times, and their opinions are overruled. It certainly would lead to the abolition of Legislative Assemblies, because we all know that in many instances they err; and if the argument of the gentleman be correct, that authority or power should not be given to any body of persons which can possibly err, we would necessarily deprive society of all means of enforcing its laws, and re- solve ourselves back into a condition of an- archy and chaos. The true rule, I think, is this: To give to the different depart- ments of government the powers which we think they ought to exercise; to regu- late those powers in such manner that the least possible harm and the greatest amount EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 13 Monday,] BUCKNER—KNOTT. November 17 . of good to the people can arise from them. It is not for the purpose of granting to an individual any particular power for his benefit or pleasure; for I assume for myself, ‘and for those who have preceded me in office, that it would be a boon to the indi- viduals in office to be relieved of this great responsibility; but it is for the good of the people that it should be exercised. Many instances have happened, and I ask the gentlemen who advocate the taking away of this power from the Gov- ernor to look into the records of that ofiice, and I think each of them will find that in every individual case which has been acted upon, there has certainly been a closer at- tention given to investigating the facts as 'far as he could than has been given by these gentlemen themselves to the evi- dences upon which they base their objec- tions. It is proper, I say, in regard to this power,I think it has been demonstrated, ‘that it ought to be retained, and that the Governor should be held responsible for the ‘exercise of that power.’ The people of this Commonwealth can, if they choose. elect to that position a man who will have character “enough to discharge his duty, holding him- .self responsible for its proper execution. He is held responsible foran y violation of the law, for in the Constitution existing, and doubtless in the one which we are to make, the Legislative body, through its different departments, will have the power to try, convict and deprive him of ofiice in case he neglects or disregards his his duty; but in one respect I wish to say that I approve very heartily of all these resolutions which propose to give the Governor greater facili- ties than he now has to investigate the nature of the petitions that are presented 'to him. He certainly labors under many difficulties at present. As is charged by "these gentlemen, he necessarily, to a great extent, acts upon ex parte information; and in the investigation that he makes,iin nearly every instance that I ‘know of, he has consulted, and advised with the ofiicers of the Government. He has advised with the Commonwealth’s At- torneys, sworn to discharge their duty, and necessarily and properly he attaches to their recommendations a great deal of weight; and in most instances that I know of they have been consulted. Their opin- ions have not always been followed, be- cause where it can be shown in a single case they have recommended a pardon which has been granted before trial, per- haps, in ten other cases their recommenda- tions have been overruled by the Execu- tive Department. I think it proper, as is suggested by a Delegate, I forget what particular gentleman now, that before a petition is sent to the Governor for a par- don, whether before or after conviction, an opportunity be given to all parties inter- ested in the locality to present their remon- strance together with the pardon. It will strengthen his hands, enable him to reach a more just conclusion than he can possibly do now, and I think will tend to promote the ends of justice. I have said more than I proposed. My object in rising was simply to correct a statement made by the gentleman from Louisville, which I have no doubt he believed was correct, but which I have shown to be opposed by the records. I desire again to say in making this statement that I do ‘not propose to criticise the action of the Court in that or in any other case. That is a Department of the Government over which the Execu- tive Department has no control and ought to have no control, and he should and does respects its decisions, and believes that whatever action they may have taken was in their judgment proper. It must be another tribunal which must judge of the correctness of its decisions. Mr. KNOTT. I had intended, Mr. Chairman, not to offer a solitary word on the question under present discussion. I trust, however, that I may ,be indulged for a few moments in order that I may set the Committee entirely right in relation to a 14 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. A Monday,] question of fact with regard to which there seems to have been, and is some misappre- hension on the minds of certain Delegates. I wish simply to say, that whatever there may have been in other circumstances to influence the action of the Court and Com- monwealth’s Attorney in the cases alluded to by the distinguished gentleman who has just taken his seat, he is entirely correct in the statement that no justification could-be found for it in the official conduct of either him or myself. So far as I am concerned, I will say that while I was frequently and earnestly im- portuned by many of my most valued per- sonal and political friends to grant par- dons in those cases while the parties accused were beyond the reach of the process of the Common wealth, I invariably took the ground that, while they were voluntarily beyond the reach of her justice, they had no right to ask her mercy. That before the Ex- ecutive could be asked to treat with them or their friends upon the question of their pardon, they should at least render them- selves amenable to the law. In saying this, however, I would not be understood as impugning in the slightest the action of either the Court or the Common- wealth’s Attorney in those cases. Far from it indeed. The late distinguished Judge of the Jefferson Circuit Court “was my friend, faithful and just to me.” In more than one instance I had occasion to testify in the most emphatic manner my high ap- preciation of his judicial ability, as Well as of his personal and official integrity, by devolving upon him the most delicate and responsible duties, which I am glad to have occasion to say he invariably discharged, not only to the satisfaction of the Execu- tive, but with honor to himself; and now that he is dead, no one could place a greener laurel upon his honored grave than I would myself. I hope I may be permitted to add that, as suggested by the distinguished Delegate who preceded me, we are all liable to mis- KNOTT. [November 17 . takes. Juries may make mistakes; Courts- may make mistakes; Legislatures may make mistakes; we ourselves are not in- fallible. And in my judgment if the- amendment under discussion shall be adopted, our action will afford incontestable evidence of that fact. I think we will commit a very serious mistake. As has already been suggested by others, the pardoning power is not vested in the Executive as a personal favor to him, but for the protection of the people in cases where the dry, technical letter of the law, unless relieved by the benign principles of equity and mercy. might work an impartial injustice and injury to some member of society. Wheth- er that power should be exercised before or after conviction, it seems to me, should be determined by the circumstances of each particular case. If a party is worthy of being pardoned at all, and it can be clearly manifested to thejudgment of the Execu- tive before conviction, I see no reason why it should be postponed, and himself, as well as the Commonwealth put to additional trouble and expense, simply in order that he may be convicted. It is not the convic— tion, but the crime which is pardoned after all. There have been many cases, indeed, in the history of our Commonwealth in which the exercise of this power before con- viction has been attended with the most beneficent results; while if it had been withheld, inj ustice,personal woe and individ- ual ruin would, perhaps, have been the con- sequence. I recall now an instance, which occurred a'number of years ago, that may illustrate this thought. Two boys, respectively seventeen and fifteen years of age, the sons of honest, in- ' dustrious, reputable farmers in comfortable but limited circumstances, were permitted to spend a Saturday in town, where they were unfortunately made drunk. Under the influence of their intoxication each of them committed a petty theft, the punish- ment for which at that time was by stripes EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 15 M onday,] KNOTT. [November 17 . at the whipping post. The larceny com- mitted by them was totally without mo- tive. The articles stolen were not worth over sixty cents, and of such a character that they could have had no use for them in the world, yet they were arrested, and as the proof against them was overwhelming, they were held for further trial. They appealed to me in their extremity as the friend of their parents. I procured them bail, and at once communicated the facts to the Governor, asking him to pardon them before trial, which he did at once, upon the ground that to tie those boys up to the public whipping post, as would inev- itably have been the case, and inflict upon them the most degrading punishment that could be conceived by a sensible mind, would not only ruin them forlife, but place a stigma upon their families which could never be effaced, and, perhaps, compel their parents to go with bowed heads sorrowing to the grave. Those boys are now honorable and re- spected citizens. Very few. know or re- member any thing of their boyish indiscre- tion. They are married and have growing , up around them happy and interesting fam- ilies. But, contrast the picture with that which might have resulted had‘ they been tied up, whipped and sent out upon a career in the world with a brand as dis- graceful as the mark of Cain upon their brows. I will mention another instance, and of a different kind: An old man, who had reached his three-score years and ten, was indicted upon a false charge of criminal conspiracy, on ,the testimony of his alleged accomplice, who was at the time confined in jail under an indictment for burglary- He was arrested and his bail fixed by the Judge, whom he had been accused of con- spiring to kill, at over ten thousand dollars. It had as well been a million, so far as he was concerned, as he could not have given security for over a thousand. Under the pretext that there was danger of his being 4 rescued, he was carried to the jail of a dis- tant county and immured in one of its cells to wait the next term of the Court. With- in a few days his two sons—one of them dying of consumption—were taken from his house by the parties who had procured the indictment against him and butchered, with a brutal ferocity that would have- blanched the cheek of a Comanche with horror. His counsel abandoned his case for- fear of losing their lives if they appeared in his defense, notwithstanding they were- satisfied of his innocence. When these facts were communicated to the Governor he pardoned the old man—pardoned him at once, without allowmg him to languish, in jail for six months, to have his trial postponed for six months longer perhaps, to be continued again and again, until he should die in his cell—~and with all the- facts before you, there is not a man among you who, had he failed to do so, would not have been denounced as a brute or a mon- ster. All of us are liable to misfortunes, sir,~ and I ask, gentlemen, if they can, to imagine themselves in the position of that old man, or their sons in the position of the two boys to whom I have referred. While this power may have been mis- used, through mistake in some instances, so far as my observation has gone, it has never been willfully abused by any one But the Executive may be strengthened, and the people protected from its improvident or‘ mistaken exercise by another and a differ- ent provision from any I have heard sug- gested. However much this power may have been misused, it has not been misused to half the extent to which the ‘Executive has. in its honest exercise, and acting in good faith upon the representations of those upon whom he had reason to believe he could implicitly rely. I have frequently thought, therefore, that the evil complained of might be remedied to a great extent if the law were amended so as to render every man who makes a willful misrepresentation to 16 EXECUTI VE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] BRONSTON. [November 17 . the Governor touching an application for pardon, whether by way of petition or re- monstrance, liable to the pains and penal- ties inflicted upon a witness for the crime of perjury. The Governor receives peti- tions setting forth the most plausible grounds for Executive clemency, which he exercises because he has confidence in the truth and integrity of the petitioners, but when the storm of popular vituperation bursts over him in consequence of that mis- taken confidence, they slip cowardly aside and permit the responsibility to rest en- tirely upon the one whom they have care- lessly or willfully deceived. But I beg pardon of the Committee for having de- tained it so long. I only intended, when I rose, to set Delegates entirely right, so far as I was concerned, with regard to the question of fact to which I alluded at the outset. Mr. BRONSTON. I believe, under the arrangement, I am entitled to conclude on the substitute offered by me, and the Dele- gate from Oldham is entitled to conclude the general debate. Oftentimes in my life, and especially during my official career, when I arose to address a jury the family of the accused, with tear-stained cheeks, and bowed heads, caught my eye and I have felt like asking that the cup might pass from me. So I feel this morning, after listening to that tender, delicate, sentimental appeal from the distinguished Delegate from Marion. As was whispered to me by a friend upon my side, “Kentuckians cannot resist such tender appeals as that.” But, as on former occasions, so do I now suppress such feelings of human sympathy and re- spond to a duty which I owe to the grandest people that God ever gave existence: This discussion has given me great pain, because it has drifted somewhat into a personal as- pect. It has been charged time and again upon this floor that it is but an effort of the Commonwealth’s Attorneys, represented by myself, to increase their power, and to dero- gate from the power heretofore extended to the Executive. That does not wound me personally, because when I entered this door and walked to that desk, and lifting my hand to Heaven, swore to discharge my duty, no longer was I a Commonwealth’s Attorney. It has been whispered—and I understand has even reached the form of communications to newspapers from this House—that there are corpora— tion lawyers here-men in the interest of corporations. Mr. Chairman, I have too much regard for each and every Dele- gate upon this floor to believe that any man is here as a lawyer, Commonwealth’s Attor- ney, a Governor, a farmer or a doctor; but they are here as representatives of the sov- ereign people, to do justice to all classes, whatever their vocation may be. (Ap- plause.) I am heartily sick and tired of such in- sinuations being made. Remember that we are Kentuckians. That upon this floor we represent the grand people that sent us here, and whether it be the humble tenant of the cot 111 the vale or the occupant of the palace of the city. each demands at our hands the same exact justice. I speak from the heart of Kentucky when I say that we fail to adopt the substitute, we are laggards, and are afraid to discharge our duty. As was stated by the distinguished Delegate from Madison, when upon this floor, there were but four States left in this Union of ours that have failed to incorporate these same provisions in their Constitutions. Those four States are Delaware, Georgia, Ken- tucky and Mississippi. I have had placed in my hands this morning the Constitution of the State of Mississippi, adopted No- vember 1st of the present year, and I find that Mississippi has had the courage to come to the front and stand in line with the other States of the Union, and adopt exactly the provisions that we are now advocating upon this floor. They say the Governor shall not pardon before conviction; that he shall have no power to grant pardons for forfeitures. I do not ask you to go that far. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 17 Monday,] BRONSTON. [November 17 . ‘That he shall keep a record in his oflice of ‘each and every petition, and the reasons for the pardon, and they go further than I would ask this Convention to do, and that is, they require thirty days’ publication in :a paper of the county before he can act on the pardon.‘ I find that in the other States, that of Delaware, the Constitution was passed as far back as 1831. According to the compilation of Mr. Poore, no Constitu- tion has been adopted by that State since that ~time, and the provision in the little State of Delaware on this subject is as follows: “ He shall have power to remit fines and forfeit- ures, and to grant reprieves and pardons, _ except in .cases of impeachment. He shall set forth in writing fully the grounds of all reprieves, pardons and remissions, to be entered in the register of his official acts and laid before the Gen- eral Assembly at its next session.” The only other provision,then,of any remaining .State in the Union which you propose to follow is that of the State of Georgia, ‘whose Constitution was passed in 1868, and whose provision is similar to that of the present Constitution of Kentucky. N ow, Mr. Chairman, lay aside sentiment for just one moment, and let me take in or- der the objections that have been made. I will take first the two touching in- stances given by the distinguished Dele- gate from the county of Marion. he says two little boys went to town, ,got under the influence of liquor, and ‘committed the crime of petit larceny, with no intention of doing wrong, by steal- ;ing sixty cents; that the testimony was overwhelming as to‘ their guilt, and unless the Executive had interfered that they ‘possibly would have received the penalty of the law and led degraded lives. May I beg leave to remind him that under the law, which we ought to respect, if properly ‘given by the Court to the jury which tried those young men, they would, as the very ‘essence of crime, have had to determine athe intent; and if the same evidence had No w, _ been presented to twelve jurors as was pre- sented to his Excellency as to their drunken condition, that as they were incapacitated from doing wrong, and on account of their want of intent, both Jury and the Court would have acquitted them. The wrong done in those cases, as I insist, is this: I will venture the assertion that in that very county, at that very time, there were other boys charged with petit larceny who may have had the same want of inten t,and yet because they could not reach the Executive, each received the penalty of the law. Take the other case, cited by the distinguished gen- tleman, as to the old man who was charged with conspiracy to commit burglary- He says that whilst he was confined in jail, because he could not give bail, that the parties who had procured the indictment against lIiIu,went to his house, dragged out his unfor- tunate consumptive son, and there commit— ted a great outrage, and the Executive was appealed to and he granted a pardon; otherwise he would have had to stay in jail for six months, and possibly six months longer. That presents in stronger lan- guage the reason that actuates me than any case that could be given, and what is it? I believe in the majesty of the law. I be- lieve, in that case, instead of shrinking from its performance, that the ofiicers of the law should have taken those who committed the outrage upon his son and punished them with the greatest severity. I believe that the law ought to have investigated the charge against the man and, if he was guilty of burglary, let the sentence be pro- nounced; and why‘? Because whenever you shrink, whenever you tamper with justice in that way, you create disrespect for the law, and I will venture the as- sertion that there were six others confined there for grand larceny, or burglary, in the jail at that very time, who had to serve their sentences in the penitentiary; and I am heartily in accord with the distinguish- ed Delegate from Taylor, who so familiarly says to us, we should grant exclusive privi- leges to none, and equal rights to all. 18 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] One thing more: I expected when the distinguished Delegate from Bullitt, left his high position in the Chair and came to his desk, that he would speak with great force, and my friend on my left came to me afterwards and said, “We are very proud, in- deed, to know that the distinguished Dele- gate from Bullitt has broken the force of what you said in the forenoon.” I felt the force of his logical argument, but I could not have had a better auxiliary. What he said is exactly in support of the position I have taken. Mark you, we are asking, first, a restriction upon the power of par- doning before conviction; second, a re- striction or a limitation or a guard upon the power after conviction. The gentle- man was intending a thrust at me, for which I was very much obliged; I am not here to abuse Governors nor defend Com- monwealth’s Attorneys, and when you reach that provision of the Constitution I will be found standing side by side with every Delegate upon this floor trying, if I can, to correct any and every evil to which that system may have been subject to. He says that frequently Governors have had to interfere by pardoning before convic- tion, in order to protect unfortunate criminals from Common wealth’s Attornevs -blood-thirsty Commonwealth’s Attor- neys—what does that mean‘? It means that the man has violated the law; it means that the penalty of the law will of necessity be visited upon him; it means that there is no escape before a jury under the instruction of a Court; it means that after a penalty has been imposed, that the ofiicer gets that which the law heretofore gave him, but which it does not now, his thirty per cent.; of what‘? Thirty per cent. of the penalty which the law imposes for its violation, and yet you say that the power should be lodged in the hands of the Governor, merely to prevent an ofiicer from getting his pay, to excuse a confessed viola- tor of the law? That argument proves much in support of his cause; but it goes one step further, as to pardons after con- BRONSTON. I [November 1 7 . viction. He says that he has known Com- monwealth’s Attorneys, after they have collected their thirty per cent., to write letters to the Governor and ask the Gov- ernor to remit the penalty. He meant that as a great censure upon Commonwealth’s Attorneys. I do not care; if they deserve a censure, administer it; but does not that support the position that I am taking before this Convention, which is this: Let the Governor publish those letters to the world; and let each and every man within the borders of Kentucky read them, and the Commonwealth’s Attorney will be slow indeed to write such a letter. Does not his argument suppo'rt the position that I have taken, and it is this: To pre- vent the indiscriminate applications to the Governor. Let it be understood that when a letter is written, it is not to go into a hole in the Executive Office, but it is to be- spread on the record, and read by each and every man in the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky. He says again, that this is not the exercise, on the part of the Governor, of any judicial power or quasi-judicial power. Let me make this broad suggestion, and I am glad to know that I am to be followed by the distinguished Delegate from Old- ham, because I know of no one, whose bet- ter judgment I would trust in matters of this kind, than his. Under our system of government we have framed laws, for what‘? For the protection of society. We have fixed rules of action ——for the protec- tion of man in his health, in his liberty, and in his possession and enjoyment of happiness, health and property. Now, when one individual violates that law, we have affixed a penalty. \Ve have provided a way to ascertain whether he has violated the law, by saying first, that upon afiidavit or informa- tion a warrant shall be issued, and he shall be apprehended and brought before some Judicial tribunal, and there, with the aid of counsel, and in the face of the witnesses, he shall hear the testimony against him; and, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 19 Monday,] BRONSTON. __‘,_- [November 17 . if he be guilty, he is held to await the action of the Grand Jury, and upon an indictment by the Grand Jury, he is to be arraigned and tried before a Petit Jury under the light of the law. Suppose a man is charged with crime; that is, he is charged with violating a fixed law, which he him- self has helped to place upon the statute book. An application is made to the Executive for a pardon. What does the Executive do? He says, “This citizen of the Commonwealth of Kentucky is charged with having violated a law. I must determine one of two things: first, upon the case as presented to me. is he guilty‘? Or if he be guilty, is it a case where I should exercise mercy?” When the Executive does that. I ask, and insist, that my question shall be answered: Does he not undertake to discharge a judicial act‘? Does he not take the place of the jury in determining the weight and the character of the evidence? Does he not take the place of the Court in determining the law? Then does he not take the place of the executive ofiicer in executing that law, either bya conviction ' in his refusal or by an acquittal in his par- don‘? And permit me to say just here, Mr. Chairman, that which I regret very much, indeed, has been misunderstood. It seems that I have often been misunderstood in my life. During the last eleven years of my ofli- cial career, it has been my misfortune to have somebody, I know not who, to get closer to the Executives than I and pour into their ears poison, and make them believe that I was hostile or disposed to criticise; but,‘ con- cerning the Executive whose names I have not mentioned, but whose names I will mention now, thelamented Blackburn, Gov- ernor Knott, and Governor Buckner, with whom I have been brought closer, I wish to say this: Inasmuch as my friend from Pike thinks that there has been a disposi- tion to criticise the unfortunate dead, no man within the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky—no, not even the representative of his own family on this floor—entertains for his memory a higher personal regard than I. A great philanthropist and humanita- rian, a man who acted possibly as I would have acted, under the law and the facts before him in each individual case. I can give a little private history of that man: When Kentucky was criti- cising because it could not abridge the'par- doning power, as he was about to leave his ofiice, he called to me and said, “ If you know any man within your district ‘who deserves a pardon, tell me his name.” He added, “Mr. Bronston, I do not mean the rich and influential who have friends to ap- ply to me, but I mean the obscure, the poor, who have nobody to come for them. I ask you as an ofl‘icer of the Commonwealth, to carefully revise your list, and if there are any such deserving, let me know.” Idid so, and that good and noble heart responded. No, it is not a criticism upon his adminis- tration, it isa criticism upon the system of law that will allow the Senate of the State of Kentucky, men who are holding po- litical oflice, men who knew no facts, men who were simply influenced by personal appeals made to them, to leave their Sen- ate Chamber and go across and ask him to fix a stain upon the fair name of the coun- try. It is the system that I object to. Now, again, coming down to the distin- guished ex-Governor—now Delegate from Marion—Kentucky 'ought to have been proud, and she is proud of the wonderful scholarship, of the true patriotism and statesman ship which characterized his ofiicial acts. I possibly was the cause of his doing some things that provoked more criticism than anything else. I can bear testimony to the fact that Kentucky never had, and never can have, a more worthy Executive. ' And as to the present Executive, do you say I am criticising or abusing him, as the distinguished Delegate from the Seventh Dis- trict of Louisville, or be from Scott, charges me with prosecuting the Governor‘?- There never has been an act of his which has not 20 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] Bnonsron. *[Nevemberwfi . been weighed not only with careful judicial exactness, but with absolute military pre- cision. Ever has he been actuat‘ed bya desire to do the greatest good to the great- est number, and he has never flinched in courageously discharging that duty. Away with such carpings, then, wherein you say that we are criticising or abusing the Ex- ecutives. No, I want to take the Execu- tives out of the murky pool wherein these men, from personal interests, are constant- ly pouring into their ears false statements and making the law trampled under foot and degraded. Place them above it. Let them understand that they are to be held responsible. The distinguished Delegate from the Seventh District of Louisville said he came to the Convention the other morning with his mind made up to vote for this proposi- tion; but that after reading carefully and prayerfully—I believe he said—the speech of the Delegate from Lexington he made up his mind that he would vote against it. Now, Mr. Chairman, that offended my pride a little, because if you will take the pains to read my few remarks, you will find that while they were purely extemporane- ous, I endeavored to deliver them in the simplest possible language; and I was real- ly trying to make them so plain that they would even reach the depths of the intel- lect of my distinguished friend from the Seventh District of Louisville; and I was mortified, indeed, to learn that I had failed. That is my misfortune, not his; but when he said in a few moments afterwards that he had been over to the Executive Office and had looked into the question of par- doning in a few cases down in Louisville; that he had come to the conclusion that you ought not to invest the pardoning power in Attorneys for the Commonwealth and Circuit Court Judges, but you ought to leave it where it was, I agreed with him in the result of that careful and intel- ligent investigation, that it ought not to be taken away from the Governor, and ought not to be given to the Common- wealth’s Attorney. And I asked him if he meant to do that, and he responded: “Why, no, I do not mean to do that ; but what I want to do first, is to get at the corruption of these ofiicers.” That was a pertinent' re- sponse, and it elicited applause upon this floor —applause, which I promise you now, will lead me to descend with you, as he insists you shall, to the lowest, and commencing at that point, see if we can correct the evil. But, Mr. Chairman, I submit if the Common- wealth’s Attorney or the Judge of the Jefferson Circuit Court committed an error in dismissing a case, does that argue any thing about this proposition? When you come to the point of fixing or limiting the duties and powers of Commonwealth’s Attorneys and Judges of Circuit Courts, you must make restrictions there; but the fact that they have committed a wrong, does that argue any reason why you shall not adopt the principle suggested by the Delegate from Hart this morning, and in which I agree with him heartily, which is this, that in giving the power to any De- partment, the Executive, or the Legislative, or the Judiciary, lay such restrictions around that power as will prevent, if possi- ble, any mistake, and secure the greatest good to the greatest number ? That is cor- rect. Now, I say this: There has not been a case mentioned upon this floor—taking even the long list suggested by the distinguished Delegate from Clark —wherein, if the Executive had not the power to pardon before conviction, no possible mistake could have arisen. Take two instances: one wherein he said a number of Directors of a Fair Association, in the county of Oldham, or in that dis- trict, were indicted; that the Governor was appealed to; that he pardoned all except one, and said that they might make a test of the law as to that one. What necessity was there for the exercise of such clemency? Was that one any more guilty than the others‘? Ought any more responsibility at- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 21 Monday,] BRONSTON—APPLEGATE. [November 17 . tach to him than to the others? If you want the law tested why not leave it to an intelligent Court to give the law to a jury, and leave it to an impartial jury to deter- mine whether the law has been violated in letter and in spirit in every case? Take the other case, my friend cited, where the Courier-Journal was indicted three times for publishing a lottery advertisement. Mr. APPLEGATE. You stated the . jury would determine whether the law had been violated in letter and in spirit. Can the jury determine whether the law has been violated in spirit or not‘? Mr. BRONSTON. My judgment is, that they can, in this sense of the word, de- termine in many cases the intent. The in- tent is the essence of a crime, and it is sub- mitted to a jury to determine whether it is done with criminal intent. In this particular case, I doubt very much whether the jury could have determined on the question of intent; but I think they could have deter- mined the responsibility of the directors in- dividually for that which had been done; Mr. APPLEGATE. Is not the only thing they can determine whether they intended to do the act, not the consequence of the act? Mr. BRONSTON. Of course not. Ifa man steals, the act is the taking, but if he takes it without larcenous intent, it is not lar- cen y; and it is submitted to a jury to deter- mine whether his intent is larcenous. In the case cited by the Delegate from Marion, he concluded, and wisely con- cluded, that upon the facts presented as to these two boys, they had no larcenous in- tent, and were not guilty, therefore, of larceny. So it is with burglary. You must enter a house, but the jury must de- termine whether it was with the intent to commit a felony, and must determine from the facts what particular felony was intended to be committed. So with the ease of robbery. It must be with larcenous intent. A man may take from another his property, but the ‘jury will determine whether he intended a larcenous taking, and the Court submits that to the jury. They determine it, just as I said in the other case I was about to cite. The gen- tleman says that the Courier-Journal was indicted in three cases for publishing lot- tery advertisements; that the Governor pardoned as to two of the cases, but as to A‘ the third, he said he would allow the Court to test it; and he says the Court decided it, and found that the Governor had acted properly. The point I make is just ‘this: If this pardoning power should have been exercised as to two of those cases, why not in the other? In other words, if there should not have been any judicial investigation of two cases, why not wipe it out as to the third? In determining thefirst two, did not he vir- tually determine the third? I will venture the assertion, if the facts were brought to light, the third acquittal was the result of the pardon of the first two cases. Men would disrespect the law, and say if they are not guilty in these. two cases, they cannot be guilty in the third. What was the 11e- qessity for Executive interference in those two cases‘? Why should the Executive interfere for the protection of a newspaper charged with violating the lottery laws? Was it because they could not employ counsel, because the public peace and har- mony required such interference? No; I venture the assertion it grew out of the fact of the strong representations that were made to the Executive; the strong presen- tation of facts upon one side without ever hearing a word of the facts upon the other ; and I do not blame the Executive for inter- fering under such circumstances " When they present petitions and they make out a case, I cannot censure the Governor, and‘ never will I be found eensuring the Ex- ecutive for the discharge of this power as lqng as you leave the power in the hands of the Executive. Let me ask you the question, what necessity is there in allow- ing the Executive to be encumbered by 22 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] this enormous amount of extra investiga- tion and labor? Do not do as suggested by the distinguished Delegate from Hart. Sup- pose you give the Executive the power to require the Attorney for the Common- wealth to furnish him with the facts in the case, and then take a case like I had in the city of Lexington, where a man went into a house at the dead hour of night and assassinated a poor unof- fending, defenseless girl, where, for months by night and day we were engaged in ferrcting out the facts, uncovering the steps of this stealthy assassin. Suppose his friends had appealed to the Executive for pardon. and a call been made upon me by the Executive as Attorney for the Common- wealth to furnish him with a full statement of the facts; should I stop my work‘? Should I abandon the trial, and spend six or eight or possibly ten hours in writing out a full statement of the facts in order that the Executive might determine-~what'7 Might determine whether or not this man ought to be brought to trial before a jury of the land. I say that you are complaining to— day that you have not Courts enough to discharge the duties devolving upon them, and if you fix it as the law of the land that, upon application to the Governor for par- don even before conviction. that you can require the officers to furnish him a state- ment of the facts-4f nineteen Circuit Court Judges and ten Statutory Judges cannot perform the work, how would you expect one Executive to carefully revise it? Your rule destroys itself. Stand to the law. No man has ever suffered by being brought to trial. This Commonwealth of oursis made . up of kind and tender-hearted people. The heart of the Judge who sits upon the Bench, the Commonwealth‘s Attorney, and especially the juries who sit in the box, all go out in tender sympathy for the pris- oner at thesbar. Yea, I know that they turn away from the dark narrow cell into which a human being has been thrust with- out warning, without an opportunity of BRONSTON. [November 17 , appealing to his God, and turn to the prisoner at the bar, and say, “It won’t do to send him to Frankfort or to the gallows. He is a human being.” We all sympathize with him. The Jury, the Court, the ofiicers, the witnesses all sympa- thize with him, and I say that never, ex- cept that in extreme cases, does a man receive stronger punishment than the facts demand. If that is the case, let us, gentlemen of this Committee, have the manhood to place ourselves in line with the great States of this Union, and say that we will do everything in our power to lift Ken- tucky up, and no longer permit them to point to us as a country filled with sympa- thy and pity for crime, thus keeping people from coming within our borders. I do not expect Utopian perfection. No. I do not want to see the time come when we will cease tb be human beings, but I do want this: I want to see the time come when an officer of the law holds in his hands the law of Kentucky, that each and every Ken- tuekian will how his head in great respect. feeling that is a part of my existence. It is my law. It is the foundation of my liberty, and without it I have neither liberty nor security. You have it not in Kentucky to-day. No. Do not let men understand that they can override the law, as has been suggested here, about the difiiculties in the mountains, where they say that they arise in armed bands, and you have pardoned them. My experience has been whenever you shirk from the law, whenever you trample it under foot, the criminal, in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred, will take new courage, and will widen the effect of his crime. Take the county of Rowan. it you please. There the Court and the Commonwealth’s Attorney suggested, in order to promote peace and harmony, a pardon before trial. They promised to leave the county, but in less than five months from that time back they were again; and there was but one EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 23‘ Monday,] way to stop it, and that was for the law to assume its majesty, and they had to do it, and shoot down upon the streets those who they say thus violated the law. Then it stopped. And I say now and here, that we have made a provision for those counties wherein a Judge, as has been suggested by the Delegate from Hart, and the Attorney for the Commonwealth could not discharge the duties, and could not bring these men to trial, that you can move it to an- other county and try them. And what do you do when you adopt and adhere to that principle? You simply fix it as if it were in golden letters upon the wall. This is the law; this law is supreme, and whoever violates it shall answerby the pen- alties provided in that law, and we will not shirk from its enforcement. I believe it would be better for each one of us here upon this floor, if it were necessary, to leave our homes and firesides,put muskets upon our shoulders, go to that section of the country, and there stand until we see that justice prevails, that the law is executed, rather than to crouch at our firesides and say, let us turn them loose to again become the violators of the law. and bow in respectful submission to them. (Applause) So I trust, now, that I have made myself understood. I do not want the idea to go abroad in Kentucky, by reason of state- ments made by Delegates upon this floor, that I am here to abuse anybody. No, .sir. I come to represent possibly an insig- nificant portion of this great Common- wealth. I come to stand here and say, that whilst I will stand by that old Constitution to the letter, unless experience has taught me that some change should be made; yet when I feel that that change should be made, though every man upon this floor .should criticise and hurl at me his darts, I “will say for the people who sent me here, I My peo- ' will ask that change to be made. ple feel the necessity for it. If I were to .stand in their midst to-day, whilst their Court is in session, and look around me and BRONSTON. [N ovember 17 . back at the eleven years of my experience, I would say that law as it had been admin- istered, whether in the Courts, whether by the Executive officers, whether by the officers or Attorney for the Common wealth, has been av farce. The way it is adminis- tered in Kentucky to-day isa farce. Let- ter after letter do I receive while here from poor fellows in the penitentiary, who have no friends, asking me to interpose. I recollect the case, and look at the list of those who were convicted at the same term of Court, and find that they are free, out walking around, and yet these poor fellows are suffering the penalty of the law. Has the time not come when we could say that the law was intended for the rich, the influential and the poor alike? If that time has come, without reflection upon the Executive, but to re- lieve him and dignify his oflice, let us say that when a man violates the law, he can- not be pardoned until his guilt has been judicially determined; and when his guilt , has been judicially determined, let us pro- vide a safe guard for the Executive, and that safe guard is in this: That when these letters come, they come from men who know that they are to be published at the next session of the Legislature; that they will go back to the comn'lunity, and there they can be read and seen by all. It is the best safeLguard that you can give to demand at their hands true and accurate statements. No longer then, as I suggest- ed to a distinguished citizen of Lexington on yesterday, will you or I, simply because some trifling worthless fellow has rendered an insignificant service, make an appeal to the Executive to relieve him for robbing or murdering a fellow-man. - Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Committee, you may all disagree with what I have said. It'may be, as sug- gested by a distinguished friend this morning, that I have been overwhelmed by the efforts of Delegates on this floor. I have made no appeal to prejudices. ‘I have 24' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] DEHAVEN. _._-- [November 1 7 . submitted what I have had to say to your judgment. Weigh it. If I am wrong, no one could be more grateful than I for the better light that you could give me by your judgment. If I am right, if the in- terest of your great State demands it, push behind your personal desires and personal preferences and adopt that clause which, in my judgment will, more than any thing else, show that Kentucky is determined to be abreast with that age which feels that human life, liberty and property can only be preserved by adherence to and respect for the law. I thank you. Mr. DEHAVEN. It is with some re- luctance and with no little embarrassment that I rise to close the discussion upon the question that we now have under considera- tion. In my humble judgment, it is a question to which the most mature thought and the most earnest consideration ought to be given by every member upon this floor. It is one of vital importance to the people of this State. I regret, too, that I cannot concur in what has been said by the distinguished Delegate from the city of Lexington. I always listen to him with very great pleasure, and while I know he would not make a statement upon this floor that he does not conscientiously be- lieve to be true; while I know he would divest himself of everything that savors of oflicial life, yet I humbly submit if a good portion of his speech to-day, and more especially that portion of the conclusion when he appealed to us to stand by the law of the State, did not sound much more like the fervid appeal of the Prosecuting Attor- ney to a weak-knecd jury than it did to Delegates upon this floor? ( Laughter.) We are to look at this question calmly and candidly. I yield to no man upon this floor in reverence for the law of my State. Judicial Department for years. It has been my business to do all that I could to see that the criminal laws of my State were executed, and in the discharge of that , present I have been connected with the r duty I may be permitted to say that I have of offense to- “a conscience void wards God and tempted to do at man.” I have at— least that which I conscientiously believe it was my duty to- do. But it is not a question here of how much reverence we have for law ‘? It is nota question of how the laws in some sections of our country may have been trampled upon; but the grave question for us to determine is, as to whether or not it is politic for us to further limit the power of the Governor in the exercise of the par- doning power. In the discussion of the question we? have now before us, I intend to take up but very little time of this Con- vention. It would be utterly impossible in the time that I have alloted to myself to- notice all the amendments that have been offered to the report of the Committee. They are multitudinous, and they are mul- tifarious. . I desire to call the attention of the Convention more particularly to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington. If I understand the scope of his amendment,.it embraces two, and but two distinct propositions : One is whether the power of the Governor to pardon a person accused of a crime before convic- tion should be taken away; and the other is, whether the Governor shall be required, by Constitutional provisions, to report the names, the date of pardon, the crime of which the party was accused, and the rea- sons that influence the Executive in grant- ing that pardon. Those are the only two propositions which to my mind are in- cluded in the amendment offered by the- gentleman from Lexington. My friend has again renewed this morning in eloquent tones his allegiance to the Constitution. He has eulo- gized it very. highly, and he deemed it incumbent upon him to in— form this Convention or to give this Con- vention a good reason for taking away that power, and then he must go one step fur- ther, he must demonstrate to us that his EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25 Monday,] DEHAVEN—BRONSTON. [November 17 , amendment will unquestionably rectify the wrongs that are complained of. I submit to this Convention whether those two prop- ositions have been established. I may con- cede all that he has said; I may concede the lawlessness; I may concede the neces- sity for observing the laws of the State; that the law is the only protection that any of us have for life, liberty or property; but that is not the question that ‘we have before us. The question that we have is as to whether or not the good people of Ken- tucky require at this time to ‘take away from the Executive the power to pardon before conviction? What are the reasons assigned by my distinguished and honored friend‘? What is it of which he so seriously and eloquently complains? What remedy does he provide for the evils under which he says we are now laboring? He says that he does not intend any thing he has said or may say to refi ct upon any of the Executives who have filled that chair for the last ten, fifteen or twenty years, but I will ask that Delegate to tell me, and tell me A candidly, if in his judgment the power has been abused, as he says it has ? If in his judgment this Executive clemency has been abused as he says it has, in the cases mentioned as coming from the county of Scott, and in the various other cases that have been alluded to by gentlemen, if the Executive Depart- ment has been imposed upon in granting these pardons, I will ask him to tell me if the remedy he proposes will obviate that trouble hereafter? I deny it. \Vhy is it not just as easy for me to obtain a pardon after conviction as before? If the Execu- tive is imposed upon before conviction, will he not be imposed upon after conviction ? Are not the same appliances open to those who appeal to the Executive for clemency after conviction that are open to them be- fore. An extension of the argument ad- vanced by the Delegate from Lexington must inevitably result in depriving the Ex- ' ecutive of that power altogether. If he is . . willing to go to that extent and introduce such a proposition as that, let those who think it is right and proper to take away that power from the Governor vote for it or against it; but while he is not prepared to go to that length, he thinks taking from the Governor the pardoning power; before conviction will correct all the abuses of which he has complained. I am unable to perceive even how that can possibly do it. Mr. BRONSTON. permit me a question ? Mr. DEHAVEN. Certainly. Mr. BRONSTON. I understand that the Delegate would like to argue" correctly on the position I have taken. Mr. DEH AVEN. Certainly. Mr. BRONSTON. I do that position; I said if you took away par- Will the Deleg ate not take cloning before conviction, you would relieve part of the trouble, and relieve it in this way, that before trial the facts had not been ascertained from sworn witnesses, and, of course, the Governor only acts upon the representations made to him. After trial the facts could be easily ascertained. To correct the remaining trouble I have sug- gested that you place a bar to misrepresen- _ tation to the Governor. Mr. .DEHAVEN. Does your amend- ment do that? Mr. BRONSTON. Yes, sir; by having the petitions, applications and ‘letters all printed, so that you would restrict a man from tellingalfalsehood if he knows it will be found out. Mr. DEHAVEN. accused ? Mr. BRONSTON. By the State. Mr. DEHAVEN. “I do not think I mis- conceived the position of the Delegate from Lexington. I said, and insist upon it, that the logical extent of the argument he used would inevitably result in abolishing the power of pardon at any time, because the only reason that he has shown for his limitation of that power is that it has been By the State or the 26 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] BRONSTON—DEHAVEN. [November 17 . abused; that the Governor had been im- posed upon by those accused of crime, and that. therefore, he wants to restrict the Governor of the power of that pardon, and then throw around the Executive such lim- itations as will keep him from exercising it hereafter. Now, I do not propose to weary the patience of the Convention’ by traveling all over what has heretofore been said on this important subject. Mr. BRONSTON. permit a question‘? Mr. DEHAVEN. Oh, yes. Mr. BRONSTON. I am satisfied he has had experience enough not to be both- ered by an interruption, but as he has the closing argument, I would not like to have him state my position incorrectly. It was not to intimidate the Governor, but to let him feel that he has the facts before him, and that they would be facts because the citizens would be intimidated in not stating them falsely. It is the citizens who peti- tion that I want to intimidate and restrict from telling that which is not true. Mr. DEHAVEN. The result is the same. I do not perceive the force of the gentleman’s explanation at all. The only effect that the amendment can possibly Will the gentleman ' have, if not the only object of its introduc- tion, is to intimidate the Governor from granting pardons in many instances where he would otherwise do it. Now, Mr. Chair— man, I agree with the gentleman from Lexington in nearly all he says about the many imprudent declarations that have been uttered on this floor in censure of the various departments of government. I agree fully with that, but I am sorry to say that he broke over the line he himself laid down rules for our conduct. He says no Delegate on this floor ought to say any thing against a Court, a Common- wealth's Attorney or against a Governor, and I fully agree in all that; yet in one of his most fervid periods he turns around and tells us unless we adopt his amendment we are the veriest laggards on earth. Is that done to intimidate us? Is that scare us into adopting the gentleman’s amendment? I hardly think he would attempt to do any thing of that sort, and I do not suppose it was uttered with any such intent, but in the fervor of the torrent of eloquence, in which he was indulging and in order to make a point in regard to what other States have done, he says unless we adopt his amend- ment we are laggards and away behind the political age in which we live. As a mat- ter of course, I want to know all about what other States have done. I am fond of hearing the provisions of other Consti- tutions alluded to on this floor, but, for one, unless the provisions of the Constitutions of those States meet with my appro- bation, I cannot follow them, and I do not care whether they were adopted by one or twenty-six States. As I said before, and as I say now, there are but two propositions that the gentleman advances in his amendment, and I say that every single objection that has been urged against the power of the Governor to par- don before conviction can be used with equal, if not more, terrific force against the exercise of the power after conviction. Now, as to the second proposition, I do not think I am mistaken in the position of that amendment. If I am, I would ask the Clerk to read it to me. My recollection is that the second provision is that we pro- vide that the Governor shall keep the name, age and crime, of which accused was con- victed, and the date of the remission and the reasons that actuated him in grant- ing it, and that those shall be reported to the Legislature. Now, it has been well said upon this floor that the Gov- ernor is a coequal and co-ordinate branch of this Government. He is not responsible for his official acts to any other department of the Government. He must exercise the high powers with which he is charged, ac- cording to the dictates of his own judgment, and according to the dictates of that judg- done to EXECUTI VE DEPARTMENT. 27 Monday,] ment and his duty to the people to whom he is responsible. I will ask the Delegate from Lexington what earthly good will it do that‘ the Governor shall return his reasons to the Legislature for granting a pardon to a man‘? This sovereignty is lodged in the Governor by the people them ‘selves, for the reason that it is most conven- ient and best. If I were ever Governor (which I never will be), and’ acting under that sort of a law, and the Legislature was to demand of me my reasons for having pardoned A, B, C or D, I would say to Mr Legislator: “I did it because I wanted to; I did it because I thought it was a case calling for Executive clemency, I am not responsible to you for my official acts, but to the people.” And if you put this in the ~Constitution about to be framed, you will submit that Department of the Government toithe most mortifying and humiliating treatment that was ever heaped upon any Executive in the world. You will always find in the Legislature. some man who either does not like the Gov- ernor, or who wants to make a little cheap capital, or wants to make himself notori- ous, and in order to do that he will, by resolu- tion, or, if this amendment is put in the Con- stitution, seize upon _that particular branch of the Executive duty for the purpose of abusing him on the floor of the House. I say we ought to preserve the dignity and power of the Executive Department just as wepreserve the dignity and power of the Legislative or Judicial Departments. The Legislature has - nothing to do with the granting of pardons; they have no super- visory power over the ‘right to grant par- dons. Mr. BRONSTON. My position on that is wholly misconceived. It is offered in that way, as being the only way it can be done under our system of having it pub- lished in the public documents, for the in- formation of the people at large, and if the gentleman will permit me to suggest, if the Executive had discharged his duties as they DEHAVEN—BRONSTOX. .last twelve months? [November 17 . have in the past, would such criticisms from such a source affect them at all before the people‘? Mr. DEHAVEJ. It mav not affect them before the people, but it would give a malicious or vindictive man an op— portunity of 2abusing or humiliating the Governor, without any opportunity on the part of the Governor to respond. I think it is our duty to preserve the dignity of that Department, just as much as it is to maintain the' dignity and power of any other department of the Government. I hardly‘ suppose the gentleman would re- quire the Governor to do a useless or sense- less thing, and I speak it with all respect, what earthly good can there be in the Governor reporting to the Legislature the reason why he pardoned A, B, C or D ‘? The only thing required of him to commu- nicate to the the Legislature is his message, and other things of that sort, but he comm u- nicates with them on questions over which they have jurisdiction, and calls their atten— tion to things he thinks ought to be done, and recommends such measures as they can legislate on; but what construction would they be able to give to a long list of par- dons that the Executive has rendered in the What would they do with it‘? The gentleman says they would spread it on the records and send it all over the country. If the gentleman wants to give publicity to it in that way, he will have to devise some other means, for I do not think there are fifteen twenty thousand who ever look at the Journal of the House. They look at the Acts, but hardly ever at the Journal. I would like to see my friend from Lex- ington in the Legislature when a long list or a short list of pardons was presented. I know that with his legal acumen and po- litical sagacity, a broad smile would stretch over his face when he would see the Secre- retary of the Governor coming in to report to the Legislature this long list of pardons. I know, with his acute practical mind he men out of . 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] DEHAVEN—BRONSTON. [November 17 , would turn around and say, what in the name of goodness have we to do with that ‘? Does the Governor expect us to say that we will reconsided his action, that we will re- verse his action‘? Does the Governor think that we have the Constitutional power to set aside the pardons he has granted, or that we will send our Sergeant-at-Arms after a man who has been sent out of the penitentiary and put him back? Or will we reverse his action when he has pardoned amah who was to be hung”? Why, Mr. Chairman, such a thing as that, in my judgment, would be entirely nugatory. It is wrong in every respect. Humillating to the Governor, no good can result from it, and, in my humble judgment. it would be highly unwise and impolitic for us to in- augurate such a thing. Mr. BRONSTON. Ibelieve the Com- missioner of Agriculture furnishes the Leg- islature a report as to the condition of crops of the country. I will ask you for what purpose that is. Is it for legislative action, or for the purpose of informing the people generally of the country‘? So it is with the Commissioner of the Insurance Bureau and the Register of the Land Of- fice. That is not for the purpose of legis- lation, but for the purpose of disseminating knowledge to the State at large. Mr. DEHAVEN. I suppose the Dele- gate from Lexington put that question because he knew I was a farmer, and he proposed to find out what- I knew about farming. Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. DEHAVEN. I take pleasure in answering the gentleman. I have some in- terest in farming, and I will say to the gentleman that each and every one of those reports present some subject upon which the Legislature may legislate. It is thus with the Commissioner of Ag- riculture, the Commissioner of the In- surance Bureau and others. But the Legislature does not supervise, control or Yes, that is it. overlook the Governor of the Common- wealth, nor does it have the power. Be- sides the Secretary of State is now required by the Constitution of the State to keep a record of all those matters, so that anybody can go there and examine them. the provision of the present Constitution : “He shall keep a fair register and attest all the official acts of the Governor, and ‘shall, when required. lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto, before either House of the General Assembly; and shall perform such other duties as maybe required of him by law.” But I am not particular about any of these provisions. The great point I want is to maintain this power in the hands of the Governor entirely unimpaired and entirely intact. Now, I have trespassed as long as I had intended upon the patience‘ of this Committee andI desire to offer but few additional suggestions and they are upon the same line as were the remarks of ‘the Delegates from Russell, Hart, Marion, Nelson and others My contention isfand I think it must be apparent to the mind of every man upon this floor who will give it a moment’s thought, that if the Gov- ernor is imposed upon at all, if this Executive power is abused at all, it is just as liable to be abused after con- viction as before conviction. Then, the- inquiry arises in our minds, if we take from the Governor the power to grant pardons before conviction will that secure a more direct and universal enforcement of the laws to the country ‘? I say not, and if it does not, I say we ought not to take it from the Governor if there ever was an instance in which its exercise was proper- Take the several instances which have been presented in this Committee; take that of the gentleman’s from Nelson, where a woman’s husband was convicted of felony and where some lawyer had told her that that conviction was an absolute divorce and the poor woman in want, hardly able to make a living for herself, Here is- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ‘ 29 ‘ Monday,] ' trouble DEHAVEN—BRONSTON. [November 1 7 . married another man, under the mistaken belief that she was divorced, and after- wards that woman is indicted for bigamy; :and I ask the gentleman from Lexington to tell me if he would have our‘ Constitu- tion in such a condition that the Governor could not relieve that poor woman from the ‘dilemma in which she was placed? Mr. BRONSTON. I would not; but this ‘is what I would like to have done: I would like to have the facts ascertained upon sworn testimony that she did marry under that impression; that she was so advised, and a verdict of the jury had. It would only postpone the exercise of the pardon- ing power probably twenty-four hours.- Mr. DEHAVEN. 'But before you can 'exercise that power there must be a con- viction; you must haveatrial and a judg- ment and a conviction. I know that my ‘distinguished friend from Lexington has "too big a heart in him to say that he would have that poor woman arraigned before a court of justice and there found guilty of felony, because it is a felony, but he would say to her to go free. That is the reason why I want this provision still to remain in our Constitution,in order that the Executive may exercise this power in cases of that sort. I doubt exiceedingly whether the various cases that have been pointed out as abuses -of power were abuses. gates from the city ‘of Louisville made a ' great mistake in his facts. One of the Dele- The gentlemen from Lexington and Scott differ about their facts. And so in all these cases; but whether they be abuses or not, I care not. They do not reach the which I have in my mind, nor answer the position that the Commit- tee occupy upon that question. There is a large class of cases where the ends of justice absolutely demand that the Governor shall have the right to intervene before conviction. Let me put a case, be- cause it is one that happens every day. I have no doubt it has happened within the personal knowledge of every Delegate upon this floor. Take a boy sixteen or seventeen years of age; he may have wandered from home; he may have wandered from the strict paths of rectitude; he may’have been led into crime by older and more vicious persons; he may have committed .a crime, and he may have been arrested and indicted and about to be put upon his trial.‘ It may be perfectly apparent, both‘ to the Court and the jury, that that boy has been made merely the dupe of older and wiser heads; although you may believe. that that boy was duped into committing the crime; although you may believe that he was not fully aware of the turpitude of the crime he had committed or was about to commit; although, if left to himself, he would not have perpetrated that crime; still that does not present a legal defense in a Court of J ustiee; he has committed an offense, and there is nothing to do but . to impose the penalty. , Mr. L. T, MOORE. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. Mr. DEHAVEN. Well. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I will ask if every man who is duped into offense according to your idea is to be acquitted of the crime on Executive clemency? Mr. DEHAVEN. I say no. Mr. MOORE. Then where do you draw the line? Mr. DEHAVEN. If you will just let me draw it, 1' will get to the line directly. I am not assuming that every one who has been duped into crime is to go acquit of justice. I am putting a case which has happened, perhaps, within the observation of all of us. That boy may be the only son of a poor widowed mother. Her afl'ec- tions may cling strongly around him as any mother’s around any boy. That boy’s moral consciousness may have been awakened, and he may see that that is not the way for him to go ; he may have had a taste of that doctrine which teaches us that the way of the transgressor is hard. He may have gone farther than that. He may have in- so ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] voked and obtained the forgiveness of God himself for the commission of that offense; and then, is there a single man on this floor who would shut the constitutional door in the face .of the boy, and say to him: “ You shall not have the right of appealing to the Governor upon this state of facts, and ask- ing him to grant you clemency?” Is there a man on this floor who would say to the mother of the boy: “Your boy has perpetrated a crime; I think he has been duped and led into it; Ido not think the public good would be injured by pardoning him; but I cannot permit that to be done; he must go into Court and go through the mortification and humiliation of a trial before I can consent that the Executive pardon may be granted.” Why, sir, on the state of facts I have presented, I would like to see any Delegate on this floor, looking unmoved on that poor dis- tressed mother, tottering to Frankfort, clad, it may be, in homely garb, her hands yellow and hardened with honest toil; her person decked, it may be. with a few faded emblems of mourning for her departed husband, tottering to Frankfort to obtain a pardon for her wayward boy, I would like to see the Delegate from Lexington, or any other man on this floor, raise his voice against granting her petition. I would like to see him step up and close this constitutional door in the face of this widow, and say: “No,I want to make your son a felon first, and then I will consent to have him pardoned." Mr. BRONSTON. That is a very seri- ous charge to make against me, and I will answer it. I will say I never tried a crim- inal who did not have friends who ap- pealed to me just that way, and my only answer has been, let the facts be ascer- tained and the law enforced, so that by its precept, all will understand it is to be enforced, and then as soon as the guilt is ascertained I would ask the Judge to unite with me in a petition to the Gov- ernor to grant Executive clemency. DEHAVEN—BRONSTON. [November 17 , Mr. DEHAVEN. That is simply a repetition of the two arguments which have already been made by the Delegate from Lexington. I go further, and say the public good demands that this power should be lodged in the hands of the Gov- ernor before conviction. If it has ever been abused, it has been in a few isolated cases. Every law by reason of its universality must occasionally work hardships, and it is for that purpose that in every humane Government there is a power lodged some- where which can soften the hardships of the law. 1t ought to be exercised in this, as ‘in all cases, with great care- In my judgment it has seldom, if ever been abused, but whether it has or not, I care not. We must have the pardoning power lodged somewhere to grant par- dons to the people of the State. We are all poor, weak human creatures. We are taught on our mother’s knees to raise our eyes in adoration to Heaven and say, Father, forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us; and I say in every civilized Government. in every humane Gov- ernment, there must be power lodged some- where which will relieve these hard cases in the administration of the general law of the State. I yield to no man in admiration for or desire to have the laws of the State ex- ecuted. It is the only protection we have; but I tell you there are cases in which the infliction of the penalty provided by law would do more harm than good, and it is ex- actly that class of cases that I desire the Gov- ernor should retain the power that he now has, to protect the people from these hard cases in the law. I desire to offer one other suggestion and I have done. I have no special objection to the amendment to this extent, that there be kept in the Secretary’s ofiice, as is now kept, arecord of the facts. Gentle- men keep insisting that these are private papers. I do not understand them to be so; but whether private or public, I would have no objection in the world to an amend- ment which would go to that extent, that EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. _ 31 M onday,] DEHAVEN—BIRKHEAD—PETTIT. [November 17 . the Governor or Secretary of State -should be required to keep a record of all those cases in a book, if you please, and that this should always be open to public inspection of any body who had the curiosity to go and look at it. I think without serious detriment to the ex- ercise of that power, we may go to that extent, but no further. Do not let us hu- miliate the Governor by putting him under the surveillance of a Legislature or any other Department of the government. Let him exercise those high powers on his own responsibility; let him exercise this power in fear of the people and in the light of his own conscience and judgment. Then I would cheerfully submit to whatever he may do, believing that it will be done with the best .spirit and for the best purpose in the world. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. The motion was put, carried and the Pres- ident resumed the Chair'.‘ Mr. COKE. The Committee of the \Vhole have had under consideration the report of the Committee on Executive Of- ficers. They report progress and ask to be allowed to sit again. Upon a vote the report was adopted. The Convention then took a recess. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention was called to order by Mr. President Clay. Mr. BURNAM. I move the House re- solve itself into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of consideration of the re- port of the Joint Committee on Executive Department. Executive Department. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer an amendment, that when We go into that we do it under the five-minute rule. Mr. PETTIT. - I desire to oppose it. unless I can obtain fifteen minutes in the Committee. I should have no objection then to the five-minute rule. Mr. BRONSTON. I withdraw it. The vote being taken on tne motion of the Delegate from Madison, it was carried and the President designated the Delegate from Logan, Mr. Coke, as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. PETTIT. I have an amendment which I desire to offer. I ask that it be read, and that it take its place regularly. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Strike out of the substitute all after the word “reprieve” in the tenth line, "down to and including the word “same” in the fif- teenth line and insert the following: “The Governor shall keep a public record open in his office, giving every case of’ reprieve, remission, pardon or commutation of sen- tence, stating the name of the person con- victed,the crime for which he was convict- ed, the sentence, its date, the date of par- don, reprieve, remission or commutation and the reasons for granting the same.” M r. HENDRICK. amendment. Mr. PETTIT. I yield for that purpose although I have not relinquished the floor. Mr. HENDRICK. I do not desire to deprive you of the floor. The substitute of the Delegate from Fleming was then read, and is as follows: I desire to offer an At the first meeting of the General As- sembly after the election of State officers the Governor shall, within the first ten days of the session, and by and with the advice of the Senate, appoint three persons having the qualifications of members of the most numerous branch of the General As- sembly for a term of four years, who, with the Governor. shall constitute a Board of Pardons, having power to remit fines and forfeitures, grant reprieves and pardons, ex- cept in case of impeachment. In cases of treason the Board of Pardons shall have power to grant reprieves until the ‘end of the next session of the General Assembly in which the power of pardoning shall be vested; but it-he Board of Pardons shall 32 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] PETTIT. [\November 1 7 . have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sheriff or Commonwealth’s Attor- neys in criminal or penal cases. The Gen- eral Assembly shall provide compensation for the services of the Board of Pardons. Mr. PETTIT. Mr. President, no vote of mine shall be cast in this Convention that shall be construed as detracting in the least from the Executive ofiice of this Com monwealth. It is rightly clothed with high power and great responsibility—hav- ing in keeping, in certain events, the life, liberty and property of the citizen. I be- lieve in some instances this pardoning power should be abridged; in other in- stances an enlargement might be beneficial to the State, although in this period of pub- lic schools and enlightenment among the masses, the tendency of the times is in the direction of limiting all power conferred and referring them to the people—the sovereigns of this land. The evils growing out of the exercise of the powers conferred in the tenth section of the report of this Committee, I believe is one of the propell- ing reasons for the call of this Convention by the people; it is one of the important points to be decided in their interests. The delays of the Courts, the technicalities surrounding their proceedings, the hope of Executive clemency does not deter, at all times, the commission of crime. The contrary is oftener the fact. Let this Convention so construct our Judicial system as to have fewer delays, a cer- tainty of punishment for the offender against the law, and the Executive so lim- ited in his pardoning power as to forbid him from its exercise, except upon a full knowledge of all the facts, and those facts submitted to the judgment of the people; andI honestly believe a new and a hap- pier era will have dawned upon our Com- monwealth. It was a strange doctrine enunciated by the gentleman from Bullitt the other day, when he asserted that the “abuse of the pardoning power was no reason for its restriction.” It seems to me that an admission of its abuse in so high an official, is the strongest argument that could be presented for its restriction if not absolute withdrawal, else the whole ends of justice might be entirely defeated. Why incur the expense of the Judicial system if the Executive can abuse his high functions, and ‘ count the actions of the Courts as naught. Before assuming my seat as a Delegate upon this floor, Mr. President, my mind was convinced that the Executive authority to pardon before conviction should be with- held; and nothing has occurred during the able debate on this subject to waver me in that conviction. The people in the section of State, which I have the honor to represent, know the evil effects of this power in former administrations, and possibly every Delegate could “ a tale unfold;” but that is not our province here. In the hands of a careful Governor, a minimum of good may result, Whilst a maximum of evil in the hands of a less careful one, is more likely to follow. The gentleman' from McCracken has made a speech on this point. He believes in the Governor exercising this power. He drew a strong parallel between the com- parative tranquility of ‘Kentucky and the unfortunate dissensions in Missouri at the close of the civil war, and ascribed it to the fact that the pardoning power before conviction existed, and was exercised by the former, while no such power was granted or could be exercised by the latter oflicial. Knowing we were framing a Constitution that should stand the test of troublous as well as peaceful times, I hesitated as to my duty to the Common wealth. But, upon examination, I find the people of that great State differ with my distinguished friend from McCracken on that point, and the Missouri Constitution was identical with our own, and was not changed until No- vember 30, 1865. Mr. BULLITT. Was not the action of Gov. Crittenden since the adoption of the present Constitution of Missouri ‘2 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 33 after conviction.” sary, with the experience of Kentucky on .striction and limitation as he Monday,] BULLITT—PETTIT—SMITH. [November 17. Mr. PETTIT. I know nothing what- ever concerning the action of Gov. Critten- den, but I am here to assert that the Constitution of the State of Missouri, during the period when a large number of pardons were granted before conviction in Kentucky, was in the Constitution of Missouri, and the same power was in its Governor. Just after the granting of these pardons in Ken- tucky, a Convention was held in Missouri, and we find that upon this very point changed that instrument, and the change makes a boomerang for the argument of the gentleman from McCracken. Mr. BULLITT. What was that change? Mr. PETTIT. The Constitution adopted by the people of Missouri in 1865, taking effect November 30th, the sixth section, says: “The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons They believed it neces- this point before their eyes‘, to urge that ‘this change in their Constitution should be made. It reads further: “For all offenses except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions and with such re- may see proper, subject to such regulations as may be provided by law relative to the manner for applying for pardons.” Then, listen what it says further: “He shall at each session of the General Assembly com- municate to that body each case of reprieve, commutation or pardon granted and state the name of the convict, the crime ofwhich he was convicted, the sentence, date, the date ‘of its commutation, pardon or reprieve and the reason for granting the same.” Almost _ the identical provision which is proposed by the Delegate from Lexington in his substitute. This adds another instance where it has become necessary to limit this ‘power of the Governor until after convic- tion. I believe that it ought to be limited, because it is well known that the seekers for these pardons before conviction are oftener those that fear most the action of the Courts. There is a principle involved, and these isolated cases which have been recited in our hearing have slight bearing. I view it as an infringement upon one of the co- ordinate branches of the Government—the Judiciary ; and that it is violative of the principle that no man is guilty of crime unless convicted‘ by a jury of his peers. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Will the gentle— man yield for a question ? Mr. PETTIT. Yes, sir; with pleasure. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Has not there been in the last four years about ten times as many pardons granted after conviction as before? Mr. PETTIT. I do not know the record on that point. That may be true, but that has no bearing as ‘I think on this point. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I meant to show that the power had not been abused; and that if you took away a part of the power you should take away all of it. Mr. PETTIT. The experience of the great State of Missouri is that pardons shall not be granted by the Executive until after conviction; that he shall report his action to the General Assembly and assign his reasons therefor. By my amend- ment it is provided the Governor of Ken- tucky shall; keep an open record in his office, that those interested may know his reasons for so exercising this high and dangerous trust, and that he may be shielded from misrepresentations by those interested in securing his clemency. I prefer it to that portion of the amendment of the gentleman from Lexington, because the General Assembly only meets every two years, and may under this Constitution, only meet every four years, when interest in the matter may have passed away ; and prefer it to the amendment of the gentle- man from Adair because it does not give the facts to the public in general and the expense that may attach in obtaining the imformation to which, I believe, the public is’ entitled “without money and without price.” 34 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. M onday,] For the reasons assigned and others, Mr. President, I shall vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Lexington, with or without the amendments proposed; and if it fails, will vote against the twefth section of this report in the present form and en- largement of powers, in the hope that something nearer the wants of the con- stituency whom I have the honor to repre- sent may be devised. Mr. BULLITT. Is it not true that in Missouri they did not think they had the power to exercise pardon before conviction until Gov. Crittenden exercised it? Mr. PETTIT. I do not know about that matter. I simply state what was their Constitutional provision on that point up to November 30th, in the year 1865, and it was almost identical with the Constitution of Kentucky, and the Governor of Mis- souri had the same power to pardon before conviction as was exercised by the Governor or Kentucky. Mr. MCDERMOTT. W'ill the gentle- man permit me a question‘? Mr. PETTIT. Certainly, Mr. MCDERMOTT. How many per- sons have been pardond before conviction in the last seven or eight years ? Mr. PETTIT. I do not know. It was stated by the gentleman from Clark that there were only twenty-seven pardons be- fore conviction by our present careful Gov- ernor. Twenty-seven obtained pardons before conviction that we hear about. If these were entitled to pardons, how many more ought to have been thus benefited who were not blessed with influential friends to present their cause, and of which we hear nothing. The power should not be conferred. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Is it not true there have been only sixty pardons be- fore conviction in the last seven or eight years. Mr. PETTIT. I do not know; nor does it alter the principle. BULLITT—PETTIT—SMITH. [November 17 . Mr. BECKNER. Do you not remember that one of the cases pardoned by Governor Buckner was where the Legislature reported that there should be a pardon iwhich was absolutely a condition precedent to securing peace in that locality‘? Mr. PETTIT. Yes, sir; and we went ahead and made a precedent in the State of Kentucky that ought never to have been established. > Mr. BECKNER. though ‘? . Mr. PETTIT. It may have brought peace for the time, but permanent peace we will never have where :there are so many It brought peace abuses in our ‘court system and so many pardons by the Governor before and after conviction. (Applause) Mr. BECKNER. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. Mr. PETTIT. I stand here to be cate- chised. Mr. BECKNER. This State is bound to be a great manufacturing State? Mr. PETTIT. I hope so. Mr. BECKNER. When that time comes we are liable to have strikes, conflicts between labor and capital, when both sides will go to the extremes, and it may be that this power is necessary to bring about peace, and that the exercise of this power would be a condition precedent to peace, would it not be wise to have some one to exercise it ? Mr. PETTIT. I differ with the gentle- man from Clark in ioto. I will say that I believe honest laws, faithfully executed, is the best way in which we can secure peace whether it affects capital or laboring in— terests. (Applause) Mr. BECKNER. That is very true, but the question is sometimes how to exe- cute laws. Mr. PETTIT. If a man has violated a law, let him be convicted and then come to the Governor and be pardoned afterwards, if he deserves it. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 35 Monday,] BECKN ER—PETTIT—MBHENRY. —__\ [November 17 . Mr. BECKNER. I would say to the gentleman that he would send us all to hell if the laws were rigidly exercised. Mr. PETTIT. Then we ought to go there. (Applause) Mr. MOHENRY. I would like to offer an amendment to this second section. Has that been voted on yet? The CHAIRMAN. None of the amend- ments have been voted. Mr. MCHENRY. I would like to have a vote taken on this. It will not take much time. I move to strike out this clause that prevents the Governor from remitting the costs of the Clerks, Sheriffs, and Common- wealth Attorneys. I believe the part I want struck out is in these words: "He shall have no power to remit the fees of Clerks, Sherifi’s, or Commonwealth Attorneys in penal, criminal or civil cases.” I want to say one word : 1 do not think that the Governor, if he has the right to pardon at ~all, ought to be limited. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is out of order. Mr. MCHENRY. How am I ‘? The CHAIRMAN. There is a motion to rise. ' Mr. BURNAM. I made the motion to rise, and I wish to have all the amend- ments ofi‘ered reported to the House. Mr. MoHENRY. Well, that is all right. Mr. BRONSTON. Is that an amend- ment to my substltute ? ,Mr. MCHENRY. We are not going to take a vote on it now. Mr. BRONSTON. I move when it comes up-—- Mr. BURNAM. My motion was to rise and report the tenth section of this report together with all amendments which have been ofi'ered to the same. .A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried, and the President resumed the Chair. THE CONVENTION. Mr. COKE. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the Committee on Executive Officers. They report progress and ask to be relieved from the further consideration of the tenth section and amendments there- to, which are hereby reported to the Con- vention. The PRESIDENT. The recommenda- tion of the Committee of the Whole is that the original tenth section and pending sub- stitutes and amendments be reported to the Convention for its action. The question is upon the adoption of the report of the Committee. A vote being taken, the report of the Committee was adopted. Mr. BURNAM. I move the previous question 011 the tenth section and all amend- ments. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk will re- port the first amendment to the original section. The CLERK. The first amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Ohio as a substitue for an amendment ofl'ered by the Delegate from Caldwell. The Delegate from Caldwell moved to amend section 10, lines six and seven, by striking out the words “Clerk, Sherifl' or Commonwealth’s Attorney,” and inserting in lieu thereof the words “or any oflicer.” The Delegate from Ohio offers as a substitute for said amendments strike out all after the word “vested” in the tenth line. Mr. McDERMOTT. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. FUNK. I second it. Mr. McHENRY. I think the object is to make a record on my amendment. Would it not be as well to vote on my sub- stitute to the amendment and then call the yeas and nays on whether that shall be adopted? . Mr. McDERMOTT. I have no objec- tion to that. 36 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] BRONSTON—-—MCHENRY—M OORE. [November 17. Mr. BRONSTON. I understand that is an amendment to the report of the Com- mittee by which you mean to give the Governor the power not only to pardon before or after conviction, but to remit the fees of ofiicers. Mr. MCHENRY. My amendment is to give the Governor the power to remit the fees of the oflicers as well as the part which goes to the Commonwealth before or after conviction. The CLERK. If the amendment of the Delegate from Ohio is adopted the words beginning “but he shall have no power, etc.” are to be stricken out. Mr. L. T. MOORE. The amendment of another Delegate is that you shall say the fees of all officers. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will hold that the amendment of the Delegate from Ohio is to the entire original section, and the vote will first be on the amendment of the Delegate from Caldwell. A vote being taken, the said amendment was rejected. The amendment of the Delegate from ‘Ohio was again read. Mr. MCDERMOTT. On that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. APPLEGATE. I second it. Mr. MODERMOTT. To explain why I want these words stricken out, I will say it is to give the Governor the disinterested advice of the oflicers on the question of pardon. '.l he PRESIDENT. Debate is not in order. Mr. McDERMOTI‘. Without the con- sent of the whole House, I do not want to proceed. If you will allow just a few words I shall speak them. This amendment will make it always to the interest of the officers to inform the Governor, and let him know Whether it is proper or not proper to grant the pardon. He will have the advice of the persons who want to save their fees. The result of the roll-call is as follows: YEAS—Q'Y. Allen, M. K. Lewis, W. W. Applegate, Leslie T. McDermott, E. J. Birkhead, B. T. McHenry, H. D. Bourland, H. R. Montgomery, J. F. Bronston, C. J. Moore, Laban T. Buchanan, Nathan Petrie, H. G. Buckner, S. B. Pettit, Thos. S. Bullitt, W. G. Phelps, John L. Carroll, John D. Phelps, Zack Clardy, John D. Pugh, Sam’l J. Doris. W. F. Quicksall, J. E. Durbin, Charles Smith, H. H. Funk, J. T. Twyman, I. W. Hogg, S. P. NAYS—49. Amos, D. C. Holloway, J. W. Auxier, A. J. Jacobs, R. P. Ayres, W. W. James, A. D. Beckham, J. C. Jonson, Jep. C. Beckner, W. M. Johnston. P. P. Blackburn, James Kirwan, E. E. Boles, S. H. Lassing, L. W. Brents, J. A. Martin, W. H. Brummal, J. M. May, John S. Burnam, Curtis F. McElroy, W. J. Chambers, G. D. Miller, Will. Coke, J. Guthrie Miller, W. H. Cox, H. Moore, J. H. DeHaven, S. E. Muir, J. W. Edrington, W. J. Nunn, T. J. Elmore, T. J. Parsons, Rob’t T. Farmer, H. H. Ramsey, W. R. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. G. Smith, W. Scott Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. ABSENT—24. West, J. F. Whitaker, Emery Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay Allen, C. T. Knott, J. Proctor Askew, J. F. Mackoy, W. H. Bennett, B. F. McChord, Wm. C. Berkele, Wm. O’Hara, R. H. Blackwell, Joseph Sachs, Morris A. Brown, J. S. Spalding, I. A. English, Sam. E. Straus, F. P. Glenn, Dudley A. Swango, G. B. Goebel, William Washington, George Hines, J. S. Williams, L. P. V. Hopkins, F. A. Wood, J. M. Kennedy, Hanson Woolfolk, J. F. So the amendment was rejected. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Henry. EXEC UTIVE DEPARTMENT. 37 Monday,] AUxIER—PHELPs. [November 1 7 . Amend section 10 of the Committee’s re- port by adding after the word “power,” in the first, line the words “after judgment.” A vote being taken, the said amendment' was rejected. The CLERK. The next amendment proposed is by the Delegate from Fayette to amend section 10, by inserting after the. word “impeachment,” in the third line the words, “and he file with each appli- cation a statement of the reasons for his decision thereon which shall always be open to public inspection.” A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Clin- ton. Amend section 10 by adding the follow- ing, namely: “The General Assembly may provide by law for certifying the facts, and that reasonable notice shall be given to the County Attorney that appli- cation has been or will be made to the Governor for the exercise of Executive clemency as heretofore provided.” Mr. AUXIER I have an amendment to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Fayette which comes in before that. The CLERK. We are not on the sub- stitute yet. ‘ . A vote being taken -on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clinton, the same was rejected. The next amendment, proposed by the Delegate from Russell, was read, and is as follows: - Provided, further that a copy of the petition and the names of all the petition- ers shall be filed in the Clerk’s office of the Court having jurisdiction in the case not less than thirty days before the pardon shall be granted and the Clerk shall notify the County Attorney of the filing of said papers. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire the Clerk to indicate at what point that amend- ment comes in. The CLERK. I suppose it comes in at the end of the section, but it does not say so. A vote being taken, the said amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. ' The CLERK. That is all of the amend- ments to the original section. The PRESIDENT. Report the sub- stitutes offered for the sections? .The CLERK. The first substitute is' that offered by the Delegate from Lex- ington: The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves, remissions, pardons and commu- tations of sentence after conviction for all offenses, except treason and cases of im- peachment, upon such conditions and with such restrictions and limitations as he may deem proper. Upon conviction of treason the Governor shall have power to suspend the execution of sentence until the case shall be reported to the General Assembly at its next meeting, when the General As- sembly shall either pardon, direct the exe- cution of the sentence or grant a further reprieve. The Govern or shall communicate to the General Assembly at the beginning of every session every case of reprieve, re- mission, pardon or commutation of sen- tence, stating the name of the person convicted, the crime for which he was con- victed, the sentence, its date, the date of the pardon, reprieve, remission or commu— tation, and the reasons for granting the same, but the Governor shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sherifi‘ or Commonwealth’s Attorney in penal or criminal cases. The Delegate from Caldwell offered the following amendment: ' Strike out the words Clerk, Sheriff or Commonwealth’s Attorney, and insert the words “or any officers.” A vote being taken on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Caldwell the same was rejected. The CLERK. The next amendment to the substitute is proposed by the Delegate from Russell to strike out the words “after conviction.” Mr. BRONSTON. On that I call the yeas and nays. 38 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] Moon E—BRONSTON—DEHAVEN. [November 17 , Mr. L. T. MOORE. I second the call. Mr. BRONSTON. That simply means to give the Governor the power to pardon before conviction. Mr. DEHAVEN. I would suggest to the Delegate from Lexington that when his amendment is perfected he can call for the yeas and nays. Mr. BRONSTON. That is the very vital part of the amendment. The roll-call resulted as follows: YEAs—36. Allen, M. K. Jonson, Jep. C. Applegate, Leslie T. Johnston, P. P. Auxier, A. J. Knott. J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. Lassing, L. W. Beckner, W. M. Lewis. W. W. Blackburn, J ames McDermott. E. J. Brents, J. A. McElroy, W. J. Brummal, J. M. MeHenry, H. D. Buckner, S. B. Miller, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Burnam, Curtis F. Moore, J. H. Clardy, John D. M uir, J. \V. DeHaven, S. E. Nunn, T. J. Edrington, W. J. Funk, J. T. Hanks, Thos. H. Hines, Thomas H. Phelps, John L. Rodes, Robert Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Jacobs, R. P. W hitaker, Emery NAYS—‘ll. Amos, D. C. Hogg, S. P. Ayres, W. W. Holloway. J. W. Birkhead, B. T. James, A. D. Boles, S. H. Kirwan, E. E. Bourland, H. R. Martin, W’. H. Bronston, C. J. May, John S. Miller, Will. Moore, Laban T. Parsons, Rob’t T. Petrie, H. G. Buchanan, Nathan Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Pettit, Thos. S. Doris, W. F. Phelps, Zack Durbin. Charles Pugh, Sam’l J. Elmore, T. J. Quicksall, J. E. Farmer, H. H. Ramsey, W. R. Field, W. W. Trusdell, George Forrester, J. G. Twyman, l. W. Forgy, J. M. West, J. F. Graham, Samuel Harris. Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. ABSENT—23. Young. Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. Allen, C. T. Mackoy, W. H. Askew, J. F. McChord, Wm. C. Bennett, B. F. O’Hara, R. H. Berkele, Wm. Sachs, Morris A. Blackwell, Joseph Spalding, I. A. Brown, J. S. Straus, F. P. - English, Sam. E. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hines, J. S. Hopkins, F. A. Kennedy, Hanson The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment, The CLERK. The next amendment is that offered by the Delegate from Pike. Strike from line two the words “after conviction," and insert after the word “ proper“ the words “ but no reprieve, re- missions, pardons, commutations of sent- ence shall be granted, before conviction, until days’ notice of the application therefor be given in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the offense has been committed." The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks the first part of the amendment is out of order, as the House has just voted on that, but will take the vote on the latter part. The vote being taken, the latter part of the amendment was rejected. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from the county of Henderson. which reads as fol- lows: That in cases of rebellion and armed op- position to the law by large parties of men, the Governor may, by proclamation, an- nounce that he will pardon such as may lay down their arms and surrender to the civil authorities in a specified time, and may then pardon such ofi'enses without trial. Mr. BRONSTON. I do not know whether it is in my power, but I desire to indicate a willingness to accept that amend- ment. A vote being taken on the said amend- ment and a division being called for it resulted as follows: Yeas, 44; nays, 21. The amendment was adopted. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from the county of Adair. Amend substitute'lof the Delegate from Washington, George Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 39 M onday,] PETTIT—BRONSTON——TWYMAN. [N ovember 1 7 _ Lexington by striking out all that part thereof after the word “reprieve” in the ninth line, and to and including the word “same' in the fifteenth line, and insert in lieu thereof the following: “The Gov- ~ernor shall in case of reprieve, pardon or commutation of the sentence cause to be prepared a written statement of the rea- sons for granting the same, a record of which shall be kept by the Secretary of State in a book kept for that purpose by public record, and a copy of such written statement shall be transmitted to the Court in which the prosecution was pending or in which the judgment was rendered, which shall be filed and noted of record in said Court. Mr. PETTIT. I would like to make a Parliamentary inquiry if this amendment is adopted. 1 have an amendment in almost identical words. Do you then take a vote upon my amendment? The PRESIDENT. \Vhat does the gentleman mean by “almost the identical words?" Mr. PETTIT. It is proposed by the gentleman from Adair to strike out the same that I do. If that is adopted, does that preclude my amendment being voted on ? The PRESIDENT. Yes, if the words are inserted in lieu of your words. M1‘. PETTIT. Can I not then move to strike out those words and insert mine ‘? The PRESIDENT. include other words. The votebeing taken, the amendment was rejected. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from the Seventh District of Louisville. Not unless you Amend substitute of the gentleman from Lexington, as follows: “Provided further, That the General Assembly, at the close of \each regular or called session thereof, shall report in writing to the Governor the num- ber of acts passed, the titles of the same :and the reasons for their passage.” Mr. FUNK. I desire to withdraw :that. The PRESIDENT. Is there objection ‘? The Chair hears none, and the amendment is withdrawn. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Larue. Amend substitute of the Delegate from Lexington by inserting after the word “same,”in the fifteenth line thereof the following words: “But the Legislature shall take no action on said report, ex- cept to have the same read and published with the Acts of the General Assembly. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to state I have no objection to the amendment if the gentleman will strike out the word “read.” Mr. TWYMAN. I have no objection to striking out that word. The vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Da- veiss: Strike out in substitute all after the word “reprieve,” in the tenth line, down to and including the word “but,” in the fifteenth line, and insert in lieu thereof the follow- ing: “ The Governor shall keep a public record open in his office, giving every case of reprieve, remission, pardon or comm uta- tion of sentence, stating the name of the person convicted, the crime for which he was convicted, the sentence, its date, the date of pardon, reprieve, remission or com- mutation, and the reasons for granting the same.” Mr. BRONSTON. As I caught the reading of that amendment, I desire to state that I have no objection whatever to it. The vote being taken, it resulted 20 in the aflirmative and 23 in the negative, so the amendment was rejected. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to have the substitute as amended reported. The Clerk thereupon read the substitute offered by the Delegate from Lexington as amended by the various amendments which were just adopted; also the report of the Committee as amended by the amendments adopted. 4O EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] PETRIE—BLACKBURN—BRONSTON. [November 17 . Mr. PETRIE I would like to have a division of that substitute. The PRESIDENT. The substitute is not amendable. It is a substitute for the whole report of the Committee, and it is not susceptible of division. Mr. BLACKBURN. I would like to ask if the word “reads” is in that substi- tute‘? Mr. BRONSTON. I object. Mr. BLACKBURN. I knew you would. I want to ask the construction of that. The reason given is also to be pub- lished. Mr. BRONSTON. I object to the gen- tleman making a statement. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would state that is not a parliamentary inquiry. Gentlemen themselves will have to judge of the meaning of the proposition before the Convention. Mr. MOORE. On that I demand the yeas and nays. Mr. HOGG. I second it. The roll-call being taken thereon, re- sulted as follows: YEAS—36. Amos, D. C. Hogg, S. P. Birkhead, B. T. Holloway, J. W. Boles, S. H. James, A. D. Bourland, H. R. Kirwan, E. E. Bronston, C. J. Martin, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan May, John S. Chambers, G. D. Miller, Will Coke, J. Guthrie Moore, Laban T. Cox, H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Doris, W. F. Petrie, H. G. Durbin, (Iharles Pettit, Thos. S. Elmore, T. J. Phelps, Zack Farmer, H. H. Quicksall, J. E. Field, W. W. Ramsey, W. R. Forrester, J G. Trusdell, George Forgy, J. M. Twyman, I. W. Graham, Samuel West, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Young, Bennett H. Nays—41. Allen, M. K. Jonson, Jep C. Applegate, Leslie T. Johnston, P. P. Auxier, A. J. Knott, J. Proctor Ayres, W. W. Lassing, L. W. Beckham, J. C. Lewis, W. W. Beckner, W. M. McDermott, E. J. Blackburn, James McElroy, W. J. Brents, J. A. McHenry, H. D. Brummal, J. M. Miller, W. H. Buckner, S. B. Montgomery, J. F. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, J H. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Carroll, John D. Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. DeHaven, S E. Edrington, W. J. Funk, J. T. Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Rodes, Robert Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Whitaker, Emery Mr. President Clay Jacobs, R. P. ABSENT—23. Allen, C. T. Mackoy, W. H. Askew, J. F. McChord, Wm. C. Bennett, B. F. O’Hara, R. H. Berkele, Wm. Sachs, Morris A. Blackwell, Joseph Spalding, I. A. Brown, J. S. Straus, F. P. English, Sam E. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hines, J. S. Hopkins. F. A. Kennedy, Hanson The Clerk then read the next substitute offered by the Delegate from Caldwell, as follows: He shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, commute sentences, grant par- dons, except in cases of treason and im- peachment. In cases of treason he may grant reprieves until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, in which department of the government the power of pardoning shall be vested, but he shall have no power to remit the fees of any officer in penal or criminal cases. He shall keep in his ofiice a record of all remissions of fines and forfeitures and commutations of sentences and grants of pardons, the reasons therefor, and letters referring to each sub- ject to the inspection of all citizens of the State, and to call the General Assembly. The vote being taken on the said amend- the same was declared rejected. The Clerk reported the next substitute offered by the Delegate from Laurel, as follows: He may grant reprieves, remissions, pardons and connnutation of sentence after conviction for all ofl'enses, except treason and in cases of impeachment upon such. Washington, George. Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 41 Monday,] BLACKBURX—BRONSTON—RAMSEY. [November 17 . conditions and with such limitations as he may think proper. Upon conviction for treason, he may suspend the execution of the sentence until the case shall be reported to the General Assembly at its next meet- ing, when the General Assembly shall either pardon, commute the sentence, direct its execution or grant a further reprieve. He shall communicate to the General Assembly at the beginning of every regular session every case of re- prieve, remission, pardon or commutation of sentence, the name of the person con- victed, the sentence, its date, the date of the pardon, reprieve, remission or com- mutation and the reason for granting the same. Provided, however, that the Gen- eral Assembly may, by law constitute a council to be composed of the ofiicers of the State, without whose advice and con- sent the Governor shall not have the power to grant pardons, in any case except such as may be left to his sole power. Mr. BLACKBURN. I think the for- mer point of order is good against the first part of that amendment to that substitute that we have just voted on. The PRESIDENT. The substitute is voted upon as a whole, and is in order. Mr. BRONSTON. On that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. RAMSEY. I second it. The result of the roll-call is as follows: YEAS—30. Birkhead, B. T. Hogg, S. P. Boles, S. H. Holloway, J. W. Bourland, H. R. , James, A. D. Bronston, C. J. Kirwan, E. E. Buchanan, Nathan Martin, W. H. Chambers, G. D. May, John S. Coke, J. Guthrie Miller, Will Cox, H. Moore, Laban T. Doris, W. F. Pettit, Thos. S. Elmore, T. J. Phelps, Zack Field, W. W. Quicksall, J. E. Forrester, J. G. Ramsey, W. R. Forgy, J. M. Twyman, I. W. Graham, Samuel West, J. F. Hendrick, W.'J. Young, Bennett H. Nays—47. Allen, M. K. Jonson, Jep. C. Amos, D. C. Johnston, P. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor. Auxier, A. J. Lassing, L. W. Ayres, W. W. Lewis, W. W. Beckham, J. C. McDermott, E. J. Beckner, W. M. McElroy, W. J. Blackburn, James MeHenry, H. D. Brents, J. A. Miller, W. H. Brummal, J. M, Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Moore, J. H. Bullitt, W. G. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Nunn, T. J. Carroll, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Clardy, John D. Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. E. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Farmer. H. H. Funk, J. T. Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Rodes, Robert Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Trusdell, George Whitaker, Emery Mr. President Clay. Jacobs, R. P. ABSENT—23. Allen, C. T. Mackoy, W. H. Askew, J. F. McChord, Wm. C Bennett, B. F. O’Hara, R. H. Berkele, Wm. Sachs, Morris A. Blackwell, Joseph Spalding, I. A. Brown, J. S. Straus, F. P. English, Sam. E. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hines, J. S. Hopkins, F. A. Kennedy, Hanson Washington, George Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. So the amendment was rejected. The substitute of the Delegate from Fleming was read, and is as follows: Amend section ten by adding to the sub- titute as follows: At the first meeting of the General Assembly after the election of State oflicers, the Governor shall, within the first ten days of the session,and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint three persons having the qualifications of members of the most numerous branch of the General Assembly, for the term of four years, who. with the Governor, shall con- stitute a Board of Pardons having power to remit fines, forfeitures, grant reprieves and pardons, except in cases of treason. In cases of treason the Board of Pardons shall have power to grant reprieves until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, in which power of pardoning shall be vested, but the Board of Pardons shall have no power to remit the fees of Clerks, Sheriffs or Commonwealth’s Attorneys in penal cases. The General Assembly shall provide compensation for the services of the Board of Pardons. 42 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Monday,] HENDRICK—DEHAVEN. [November 17 . M1. HENDRICK. On that I demand the yeas and nays. Mr. DEHAVEN. I second it. The result of the roll-call is as follows : YEAS—8. Boles, S. H. Hogg, S. P. Elmore, T. J. Phelps, Zack Field, W. W. West, J. F. Hendrick, W. J. Young, Bennett H. NAYS—67. Allen, M K James, A. D. Amos, D. C. J onson, J ep. C. Applegate, Leslie T. Johnston, P. P. Auxier, A. J. Kirwan, E. E. Ayres, W. W. Knott, J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. Lassing, L.W. Beckner, W. M. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, J mes May, John S. Bourland, H. R. McDermott, E. J. Brents, J. A. McElroy, W. J. Brummal, J. M. MeHenry, H. D. .Buchanan, Nathan Mille1',‘Will Buckner, S. B. Miller,W H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Burnam, Curtis F. Moore, J. H. Carroll, John D. Moore, Laban T. Chambers, G. D. Muir, J. W. Clardy, John D. Nunn, T. J. Coke, J. Guthrie Parsons, Robt. T. Cox, H. Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. E. Pettit, Thos. S. Doris, W. F. Phelps, Jon L. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Forrester, J. G. Ramsey, W. B. Forgy, J. M. Rodes, Robert Funk, J. T. Smith, H. H. Graham, Samuel Smith, W. Scott Hanks, Thos. H. Trusdell, George Harris, Geo. C. Twyman, I. W. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W. Whitaker, Emery Mr. President Clay. Jacobs, R. P. ABSENT—25. Allen, C. T. Kennedy, Hanson Askew, J. F Mackoy, W. H. Bennett, B. F. McChord, Wm. C. Berkele. Wm. O'Hara, R. H. Blackwell, Joseph Sachs, Morris A. Bronston, C. J. Spalding, I. A Brown, J. S. Straus, F. P English, Sam E. Swango, G. B. Farmer, H. H Washington, George Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Williams, L P. V. Wood, J. M. Hines, J. S. Hopkins, F. A. Woolfolk, J. F. So the amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. The question now is upon the adoption of the report of the Committee as amended. Mr. PETTIT. On that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. BRONSTON. I second it. The result of the roll-call is as fol- lows: YEAs—47. Allen, M. K. Hines, Thomas H. Amos, D. C. Jacobs, R. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Jonson, J ep C. Auxier, A. J. Johnston, P. P. Ayres, W. W. Kirwan, E. E. Beckham, J. C. Knott, J. Proctor Beckner, W. M. Lassing, L. W. Blackburn, James Lewis, W. W. Bourland, H. R. McDermott, E. J. Brents. J. A. McElroy, W. J. Brummal, J. M. MeHenry, H. D. Buckner, S. B. Miller, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Carroll, John D. Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. Phelps, John L. Cox, H. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Rodes, Robert Doris, W. F. Smith, H. H. Durbin, Charles Smith, W. Scott Edrington, W. J. West, J. F. Funk, J. T. Whitaker, Emery Graham, Samuel Mr. President Clay. Hanks, Thos. H. NAYSLQQ. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Bronston, C. J. May, John S. Buchanan, Nathan Miller, Will Chambers, G. D. Moore, J. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Elmore, T. J. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Harris, Geo. C. Hendrick, W. J. Hogg, S. P. Holloway, J. W. James, A. D. Moore, Laban T. Parsons, Rob’t T. Petrie, H. G. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. Young, Bennett H. ABSENT—24. Allen, C. T. Askew, J. F. Kennedy, Hanson Mackoy, W. H. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 43 J ONSON—MILLER—MOORE. [November 17 . Monday] Bennett, B. F. McChord, Wm. C. Berkele, Wm. O’Hara, R. H. Blackwell, Joseph Sachs, Morris A. Boles, S. H. Spalding, I. A. Brown, J. S. Straus, F. P. English, Sam E. Swango, G. B, Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hines, J. S. Wood, J. M. Hopkins, F. A. Woolfolk, J. F. So the section as reported by the Com- Washington, George Williams, L. P. V. , mittee was adopted. Mr. J ONSON. I have a resolution which I would like to have read, and it will have to lay over one day. The Clerk read the resolution, which is as follows: WHEREAS, The holding of two sessions each day by this Convention appears to have interrupted the work by rendering it impracticable for the several Committees to meet and duly consider important mat- ters severally referred to them, then by the time they have properly informed them- selves upon the question under considera- tion; therefore, Resolved, That on and after the 19th of November there shall be two sessions held only on alternate days until further ordered by the Convention. Mr. J ONSON. Under the rule I believe that lies over one day. .Mr. MILLER. I think the Committee on Rules may have that subject under con- sideration this evening, and, therefore, I ask the gentleman to have his resolution referred to the Committee on Rules, so that we can take action on it at the meet- ing. The PR ESIDENT. Without objection the resolution will he so referred. Mr. J ONSON. I would like to ask that the Committee report on this resolution to- morrow morning. Mr. L. T. MOORE. On this morning, when we were struggling along without a quorum, I asked leave of absence for the Delegate from Greenup. I would like to have the leave granted now. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is granted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. As has been an- nounced, the Committee on Rules are to meet this afternoon, and as that Committee is composed chiefly of old gentlemen like myself, I move that the Convention do now adjourn. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried and the Convention thereupon ad- journed. ionvention Record KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 'Vol. 1. FRANKFURT, NOVEMBER 18. 1890. No.55 "Tuesday,] GRAHAM The Convention was called to order by ‘the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Henderson. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read and approved. Petitions, Etc. Mr. GRAHAM. I have a petition from citizens of Lyon county, asking that a clause be inserted in the present Constitu- ‘tion prohibiting the employment of con- victs outside of the walls of the penitentiary, which I would like to have referred to the Committee on Crimes, Punishments and Criminal procedure. The PRESIDENT. \Vithout objection, it will be so referred. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a com- munication from the County Clerk of Boyd county, which I ask to have referred to the “Special Committee of which the Delegate ' from Anderson is Chairman. Mr. MCHENRY. The Committee on Rules, to whom was referred two resolu- tions relating to the time of the meeting of "the Convention, have had the same under consideration,and have given the subject, if not their prayerful attention, at least very careful consideration, and they have directed me to make a report to the House, which was the result of an almost unanimous vote. ‘I do not exactly concur in the report myself, but I believe it was approved by all who were present, except myself, and it was a full meet- ing of the Committee. I will state the sub- stance of the report that I am going to make : It is, that we have no evening session this evening, but that we have an evening ses- sion Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, and _ "that next week we have evening sessions MILLER—McHnxnx. [November 18. on alternate days, commencing Monday, Wednesday and Friday, and then, after that, have evening sessions five days in the week, and going on until Kingdom come, until the hammer falls, going into night sessions maybe; and we have fixed that so that it will require a two-thirds vote to do away with it. In regard to the time we meet, we have given the question very care- ful consideration, and the report suits the gentlemen who live near the city of Frank- fort, who were elected to the Convention with the distinct understanding that they were to have the right to go home to their families every Saturday and be back Mon- day. We feel that the interests of the State ought not to interfere with the con- venience of those gentlei'nen, and so we have our sessions beginning on Monday at ten-thirty, one hour later than our regular sessions, which begin at nine-thirty, every other day in the week, and we will have no evening session on Saturday. Then, on other days, we provide that we shall meet at nine-thirty and sit until one; but I take it a majority can adjourn before one if they ‘ so prefer; but if we do not, we adjourn at one o’clock, and in the evening session we make no provision for adjournment.- WVe can go on as long as we choose. And then those gentlemen who like to speak and vote against the previous question, can stay till midnight if they want to. Those indus- trious gentlemen should support this report and go to work and clean up the work of this Convention as soon as possible. The report offered by Mr. McHenry was read, and is as follows: That evening sessions be held November 19th, 20th, 21st, on November 24th, 26th, 2 COMPENSATION OF OFFICERS. Tuesday,] MOORE—MCHENRY—ELMORE. [November 18 . 28th, and, beginning on December 1st, be held on each day of the week exce tSatur- day. That the morning session egin on Monday at 10:30 A. M., and on other days at 9:30 A. M., and continue to 1 P. M. The afternoon sessions shall begin at 3 o’clock P. M. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Without intending to destroy the symmetry of that report, I should like to move to strike out “ on other days at 9:30 a. M.," and insert “9.” It seems to me we can get here at 9 just as well as at 9:30. The vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Boyd, it was lost, on a division of the House, by a vote of 33 yeas to 38 nays. The vote being taken on the resolution, it was adopted. Mr. MCHENRY. The same Committee, to whom was referred aresolution directing us to fix the pay of the employes of this Convention, make report. The Committee considered that matter very carefully, and the report is the unanimous consideration of the Committee, and they express the hope that it will go through. The report offered by Mr. McHenry was read. and is as follows : Resolved, That the compensation of the employee of the Convention be fixed as fol- lows, and they are allowed to draw the same: Todd Hall, Janitor, $4.00 per day; John Thompson, Assistant Janitor, $1.50 per day ; Fred Castle, Keeper of the Cloak Room, $3.50 per day; Bowman Adams, Assistant Keeper of the Cloak Room, $2.50 per day; the Pages of the Convention, each $2.50 per day; the Secretary, Assist- ant Secretary and Reading Clerk, Sergeant- at-Arms and Door-Keeper are allowed to draw $5.00 per day until the further order of the Convention. The vote being taken on the adoption of said resolution, same was adopted. Mr. ELMORE. I call for a division. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is too late. He did not call for the division in time. The PRESIDENT. Are there any more reports from Standing Committees? Mr. MOORE. I would like to know if the Committee on Rules have considered the resolution I introduced in regard to leaves of absence? Mr. McHEN RY. I do not remember ‘whether I had it before the Committee or not. I am told that I had, and that they postponed action on it. We have another meeting next Monday to consider another very important matter, and it will probably come up then. Mr. McDERMOTT. I desire to offer a resolution. Mr. McDermott’s resolution was then read, and is as follows: Res-o teed, That the Printer be instructed to print seven extra copies of the Conven- tion Record each day, and that one of said copies, exactly like those put on the desks of the members, be given each morning to the representatives of the newspapers now reporting the proceedings of this Conven- tion. Mr. MOORE. I move to lay that on the table, and upon that I demand the yeas and nays. Mr. ELMORE. I second the call. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I ask the privilege of saying two or three words. I offered the resolution because I think it important that the representatives of the press who are constantly reporting the proceedings of this body should have correct copies of what we do and say. I think it would be money well spent. I am told the seven copies of the Record will not cost fifty cents a day, and the roll-call will cost more than that. Mr. L. T. MOORE. It does not make any difi‘erence to me what the roll-call costs. I want to stop this thing of constantly in- creasing the expenditure of money. I propose to stand on that. The vote being taken on said motion, the- result of the roll-call was announced as fol» lows: "TEAS—~34. Amos, D. C. Hines, J. S. Auxier, A. J. Hogg, S. P. Birkhead, B- T. Johnston, P. P.- THE CONVENTION RECORD. 3" . Coke, J. Guthrie Tuesday,] M1LLER--McDERMoTr—CLARI)Y. Kirwan, E. E. McElroy, W. J. Miller, Will. Moore, Laban T. Blackburn, James Boles, S. H. Bourland, H. R. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Muir, J. W. Clardy, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Durbin, Charles Petrie, H. G. Edrington, W. J. Phelps, John L. Elmore, T. J. Ramsey, W. R. Farmer, H. H. Rodes, Robert Field, W. W. Smith, W. Scott Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Graham, Samuel Twyman, I. W. Harris, Geo. C. West, J. F. ‘SAYS—41. Allen, M. K. Jacobs, R. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Jonson, Jep. C. Ayres, W. W. Lassing, L. IV. Beckham, J. C. Lewis, W. W. Beckner, W. M. Martin, W. H. Berkele, Wm. Bronston, C. J. Buckner, S. B. May, John S. McDermott, E. J. McHenry, H. D. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, W. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Moore, J. H. Carroll, John D‘. Nunn, T. J. Chambers-G. D. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack' Cox, H. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Quicksall, J. E. Doris, W. F. Smith, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Swango, G. B. ‘ Funk, J. T. Whitaker, Emery Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Holloway, J. W. ABSENT—25. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. Allen, C. T. Knott, J. Proctor Askew, J. F. Mackoy, \V. H. Bennett, B. F. McChord, Wm. C. Blackwell, Joseph Montgomery, J. F. Brents, J. A. O’Hara, R. H. Brown, J. S. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam. E. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Hines. Thomas H. Hopkins, F. A. James, A. D. Kennedy, Hanson Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would like the mover of the resolution to state what neces- sity there is for furnishing these gentle- men with copies of the proceedings. If we are to furnish the press with a copy of the Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Washington, George Williams, L. P \l . Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. , proceedings at all, it seems to me we ought to furnish the press of the whole State. I voted against laying the resolution on the table, because I would like to hear further from the mover of the resolution. Mr. McDERMOTT. These seven copies will cost fourteen cents a day. Mr. CLARDY. I voted in favor of lay- ing the resolution on the table, because I think we have enough copies of the pro- ceedings. I move now that they be furnished a copy each morning out of the 125 we are now having printed. We do not need that many. Mr. HENDRICK. Those copies are not corrected. Mr. CLARDY. I thought the object was to give them one of the copies as we receive them every morning. 1 think we have copies enough to furnish them with them every morning. Mr. McDERMOTT. We are only print- ing now one hundred and twenty-five copies. I know from information furnished by the Sergeant-at-Arms that those one hundred and twenty-five copies are coni- pletely exhausted each day. The extra ,copies will cost about fourteen cents daily. I want to have the resolution adopted not simply for the benefit of the newspapers-- though that would be a suitable courtesy —but for our benefit also. We cannot ig- nore the fact that these gentlemen are con stantly~ reporting the doings of this Con- vention to the country, and it is some- times important that they should have full reports of our actions. The other papers throughout the State do not have represen- tatives here constantly. The people should learn through every possible channel of our work as it progresses. I am not for extravagant expenditures. I shall try to vote in these matters for the good of the State, and 1 shall vote for each expenditure on its merits, or at least on what I believe are its merits. ‘ The PRESIDENT. It the gentleman insists on his motion, he will have to put it in writing. Mr. CLARDY. I will not insist on it. I [November 18 .' 4 COMPENSATION OF OFFICERS. Tuesday,] PHELPs—McH ENRY—TWYMAN. [November 18 . am for it, if we have enough copies, but I will not insist on my amendment. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I would simply suggest this: That if the newspapers want to have some of the copies that are laid on the desks, I will lend some of them mine, and I presume any other Delegate will do the same. If either of them will step around, I will lend him mine. I will give it to him if he wants it. And I would like to ask the Delegate from Louisville how he gained his second information about the cost. His first statement was, that it was fifty cents a day, and, after the question had been debated, he said it would cost fourteen cents a day. Mr. McHENRY. I made the sugges- tion to him. Ihave made the calculation in my head. I do not know that it is cor- rect, but I can tell you how I figured it. They furnish these to the public at fifty cents a month, and that is about two cents a copy. Seven times that would be four- teen cents. Five minutes’ debate of this Convention will cost more than the whole thing. . Mr. TWYIWIAN. The gentleman says we will furnish the newspapers the copies as laid on our tables. We get them about the second morning after the proceedings of the Convention. The Reporters of the papers send out each day’s proceedings as soon as they are through. Does the gen- tleman expect the newspapers to go back and correct any thing they have reported wrong in the two days preceding‘? Mr. MCDERMOTT. They would do that cheerfully if necessary. A vote being taken on the resolution, it was adopted. Mr. BECKHAM. I move that the Con- vention proceed with the further considera- tion of the report on Executive Affairs. Mr. GRAHAM. I would like to have this resolution reported and, ask the House to pass it immediately. I have not bothered the House much since I have been here, and I beg of the Delegates that they will not table it or refer it to a Committee, but take action on it in this body and that each gentleman of the House will have the gal- lantry to put himself on record. I ask a little time to put myself on record. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Graham, which is as fol- lows: Be if resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that any member, officer or aftache of this Convention that asks for and is given leave of absence or absents himself without leave. shall not be allowed to draw any pay for the time he is absent, except it be in case of sickness of said em- ploye or member or some one of his own family. Mr. GRAHAM. There is some little dissatisfaction looming up in regard to the attendance of members and the order of business. We have made a rule which we have broken; but I shall not comment on that. I am willing to be governed by any rule or law while it is in force. I am not willing to break down any rule or law to accommodate any gentleman in this House. My proposition is a little rare—I have no doubt of that—but I have considered the matter tolerably well, and it has been on my mind for years, and since I have be- come better informed on the matter since I came here, I desire to lay it before this body for their consideration. I hold there are three things essential to good membership, and without them we will fail to make a good Constitution. The first is patriotism, the next philanthropy, and the next economy. It is not necessary for me to give the definition of these words. Every member in this House knows what pratriotism is; every member in this House knows what philanthropy is; and all the members know what economy is. In order that I may bring this before the body in its best light, I will have to discuss very briefly as to what rights are public and private. Blackstone says there are but two rights, public and private rights. When we discuss private rights we understand COMPENSATION OF OFFICERS. 5 ' you represent. Tuesday,] GRAHAM. [November 18 . that each man guards his interest, takes care of it, allows no man to invade it, but holds sacredly, justly and legally all the rights belonging to him; and when his money is to be used, it is done under his scrutiny, judgment and juris- diction; and when there is an infringe— ment upon his rights and an attempt to take his money without just compensation, he resists it to the extent of the law. That is private right guarded by individual men. It is right, just and honorable to do it, and do it to the extent of the law. Therefore, when he has employed a lot of men and set them to work under certain guidance, under certain discipline, under certain pay, and under certain contract, when the pay-roll is made out and held up ' before his face, there is not a man in this House, in my judgment, when his private funds are at stake, who would pay a man who did not work. He would not do it; Iwould not; you would not; merchants would not; farmers would not, and me- chanics would not. He would not do it because he says he did not serve, and, under the contract, he may charge so much per day. He has failed to render a day’s work, and he is justly sustained in the law in re- fusing to do it. That is enough on private rights. You see how men guard their own rights; how they take care of their own money. We come here as a body of men intrusted with public rights. We are the agents; they confide in us. They say to us, go and take care of, through your patriot- ism and philanthropy, the hard earnings of men who pay taxes. Do that for us, and manifest your fidelity to the men whom Very well. I promised not to talk much. You will at once see the argument. We come here under acon- tract, and no man disputes it. Each man has a contract, and I expect a great many men labored to get the job. I understand that some men actually made an investment to get here. When you come, and come in that faith, with that trust, that you should economize, because it is just to do it, it is right to do it, and every man ought to do it in apublic capacity, and with that scrutiny and fidelity that should be paramount to every thing else, when he is intrusted by men who work for money and send him here, that it shall not be wasted. Is not that right? Is there any one here who says it is wrong? I say not. Do you put yourselves in an attitude of de- priving men and exposing your private rights in this body of men who are not , serving according to. contract? Let us see if we are acting in keeping with the contract. I want to come at it from the Constitution and the law, and I am sur- rounded by legal wisdom and lights, and if I am wrong I feel safe in saying that they will set me right, and I will feel grateful. I say we ought to economize, and in order to do that, I will say this: if we will pro- vide in this body, which we have a right to do and ought to do, that men shall not have compensation, except as the law directs, plenty of men will be here when we want a quorum. The railroads have generously given free passes to many of the members. Withdraw these passes, and, at the same time, stop the per diem, according to the law and the Constitution, and it will be an incentive for men remaining here, which they will not do without it. Let us see if this thing comes under the law; if there is a law- which can provide for a man to take pay without serving? I will thank any lawyer to come up and show the law, and relieve the people in my county that men are out- raging by taking money which they do not earn. When I say this in regard to this body, I do not mean adjournment or recess, because I believe honestly th--.t when we adjourn, we are entitled to it, from the labor spent in night work, and on Committees; and I believe I can say to my people when I go home that the labor of the Committees at night will justify the compensation for the time of reasonable recess or adjourn- Q 6 COMPENSATION OF OFFICERS. ~ .-.._-_>____._( ._______. - _ ...~ _._ Tuesd ay,] 3. I believe I can do that to their sat- isfaction; but I know I represent people who are mortified, and complain all the time that they will elect no man to this House who will fritter away the time and take money when they do not earn it. The Bill of Rights touches that question: “That all free men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and that no man or set of men are entitled to emoluments, unless they work.” Is not that the Bill of Rights: “That no man or set of men are entitled to public emoluments, except in considera- tion of public services," which is only in other language‘? That is the Bill of Rights. It is the law that they shall Work; and the men who made this pro— vision were to have the same privilege we take, because this says they are not en- titled to compensation under the Bill of Rights, unless they labor or render public services for it. That is what the Bill of Rights says. The Bill of Rights provides, in conclusion, that this is the law, and no power under heaven, no Legislature has any right to tamper with it. To guard against transgressions of the high powers which we have delegated, every thing in this article, the Thirteenth Article of the Bill of Rights, is excepted out of the gen- eral powers of the Government or State, and shall forever remain inviolatc, and no law shall be held in force, but shall be void, which is contrary to this clear ex- pression upon the rights and titles of men to money when they do not work. That is the Bill of Rights. But one gentleman says that we are in the Constitutional Con— vention, and our power is higher than the law. I deny that. But then we are gov- erned by the law under this provision which calls us together here, which says the Delegates shall receive as compensation he same allowance per diem as they do when they are representatives. I want to see if it is the law or not; if not, you who understand, please get up and set this mat- ter right. In regard to pay, here is the ment. GRAHAM. [November 18 . statute on it: “The per diem of members of the General Assembly shall be five dol- lars for each day’s attendance on the same.” That is the law. Now he has got to attend, if there is any thing in the lan- guage of the law, or he is not entitled to pay, and that carries me back to the Bill of Rights: “That nobody is entitled to pay.” How does he draw it? He comes up and claims it, and there is nobody to defend the State, and in common we all commit the same outrage on the. Treasury. The Bill of Rights says no man is entitled to it. If he is not entitled to it, in the name of God, how has he got the cheek to go and get it? It is bycommon consent. Each of us and each of the members of the General Assem- lily is guilty of the same thing, in my opin- ion. If my opinion is wrong, let the gentleman tell me. I will call your atten- tion to the oath. When we laid our hands on the Bible, we swore before heaven and earth that we will support the Constitution and the law. Every man in this House swore to that. What is the law‘? That no man shall have five dollars per day, only the day he attends and renders service in his office, and the people who delegated him the power expect it. I say that is the law. It is the Constitution; it is in the Bill of Rights, and we swore that we would support it, and here is the law; here is the Constitution; here is the oath, and here is the time. I believe it is morally and legally wrong to take the money, and I ask this body now, as I did in the beginning, with these few rough remarks, that you do not table this; that each man has the grit and gallantry to go to record. because I shall certainly call the yeas and nays on it. I ask you, gentlemen, to confer the only thing I ever asked, not to table it or refer it, but come to the front and place your name on the record about this matter. I thank the Convention. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I offer an amend- ment. The amendment reads as follows: COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS. ‘Tuesday,] FoRRnsTER—BEc-KN‘ER—GRAHAM. [November 18 . And that those Delegates who have been absent from this Convention, except when .sick or to attend their sick families, refund whatever amount they have drawn from the Treasury. or their per diem whilst absent. Mr. FORRESTER. I desire to offer an amendment. The amendment reads as follows: WHEREAS, The State has contracted to pay each Delegate of this Convention the enormous sum of five dollars per day, but little of which is being earned; now, be it Resolved, That no Delegate hereafter shall charge any compensation for his ser- vices. Mr. BECKNER. which I desire to offer. The substitute reads as follows: I have a substitute That a Committee of three be appointed by the Chair, whose duty it shall be to ascertain and determine whether the State ‘gains or loses by the absence of such mem- bers who may fail to attend this Conven- tion at any of its sittings; and if the State ‘gains to allow such member to have his per diem during such absence, and if the State loses then to forfeit his per diem to the extent of the loss, not exceeding, how- ever, the total. amount of per diem to which such member may be entitled: Pro- vided, however, That the President shall ap- point no Delegate on said Committee who a has in any way failed to discharge his whole duty since he became a member of this body. Mr. H. H. SMITH. In view of the munificent salary received, and in view of the fact we came to make a Constitution and not records, and for the accommoda- tion of the gentleman from Marshall, I move to lay that resolution and all amend- ments on the table. Mr. GRAHAM. On that I call for the _ yeas and nays. Mr. FARMER. I second it. Mr. BRENTS. I wish to make an in- quiry. Suppose we passthis resolution, will it be binding on anybody? The PRESIDENT. That is for the gentlemen to determine. _ The result of the roll-call is as follows: . ‘ERAS—29. Allen, K. Field, W. W. Amos, D. C. Forrester, J. G. Applegate, Leslie T. Hendrick, W. J. Beckham, J. C. Hines. J. S. Beckner, W. M. Hogg,,S. P. Berkele, WVm. Holloway, J. WV. Brents, J. A. Johnston, P. P. Brummal, J. M. Kirwan, E. E. Buckner, S. B. Martin, ‘V. H. Bullitt, W. G. McHenry H. D. Burnam, Curtis F. Miller, W. H. Carroll, John D. Montgomery, J. F. Chambers, G. D. Smith, H. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Edrington, W. J. Young, Bennett H. NAYS—48. Askew, J. F. May, John S. Ayres, W. W. McDermott. E. J. Birkhead, B. T. McElroy, W. J. Blackburn. James Miller, Will Boles, S. H. Moore, J. H. Bourland, H. R. Moore, Laban T. Bronston, C. J Muir, J. W. Buchanan, Nathan Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Cox, H. Petrie, H. G. - DeHaven, S E. Pettit, Thos. S. Doris, W. F. Phelps, John L. Durbin, Charles Phelps, Zack Elmore, T. J. Pugh, Sam’l J. Farmer, H. H. Quicksall, J. E. Forgy, J. M. Ramsey, W. R. Funk, J. T. Rodes, Robert Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos H. Harris, Geo. C. Smith, W. Scott Swango, G. B. Truesdell, George Jacobs, R. P. Twyman, I. W. Jonson, Jep C. West, J. F. Lassing, L. WV. Whitaker, Emery Lew'is, W. W. Mr. President Clay. amuse-23. Allen, C. T. Knott, J. Proctor Auxier, A. J. Mackoy, W. H. Bennett, B. F. McChord, Wm. C. Blackwell, Joseph O’Hara, R. H. ‘Brown, J. S.‘ Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam E. Glenn Dudley A. Goebel, William Hines, Thomas H. Hopkins, F. A. James, A. D. Kennedy, Hanson So the motion was lost. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I am opposed to this whole business. In the first place the mover of the resolution, I understand, is a Spaulding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. Washington, George ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Tuesday,] FUNK—GRAHAM—BOLES; [November 18 _ physician, and he has declined to take his own medicine; in the second place, and my chief reason is, I am against this resolu- tion on the broad principle of philanthropy. We have been guilty of many acts of cruelty since we have been Delegates to this Convention, and now if you pass a res- olution providing that no Delegate to the Convention shall receive his pay while he is away enjoying himself, it will be the crowning act of cruelty, and the devil will split his sides with laughter and wag his tail with joy, and therefore I am opposed to the whole thing. Mr. FUNK. I move the whole matter be referred to the Committee on Rules. Mr. GRAHAM. On that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. BOLES. I second it. The result of the roll-call was as follows: vans—~50. Allen, M. K. Holloway, J. W. Amos, D. C. Jacobs, R. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Jonson, Jep. C. Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E E. Auxier, A. J. Lewis, W. W. Beckham, J. C. Martin, W. H. Beckner, ‘V. M. Berkele, Vl'm. Brents, J. A. Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S. B. McChord, wWm. C. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Miller, Will. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Burnam, (‘urtis F. Moore, J H. Carroll, John D. Moore, Laban T. Chambers, G. D. Muir, J. W. Coke, J. Guthrie Nunn, T. J. Cox, H. Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. E. Edrington, W. J. Field, W. WV. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam‘l J. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. G. Smith, H. H. Funk, 0]’. T. ‘Vest, J’. F. Hendrick, W. J. Whitaker, Emery Hines, J. S. Young, Bennett H. Hogg, S. I’. Mr. President Clay. vars—28. Ayres, W. W. Harris. Geo. C. Birkhead, B. T. Johnston, P. P. Blackburn, J ames Lassing, L. W. Boles, S, H. May, John S. Bourland, H. R. Miller, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Clardy, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Doris, W. F. Phelps, Zack Durbin, Charles Quicksall, J. E. Elmore, T. J. Ramsey, W. R. Farmer H. H. Smith, W. Scott Forgy, J. M. Swango, G. B. Graham, Samuel Trusdell, George Hanks, Thomas H. Twyman, I. W. ABSENT—22. Allen, C. T. Kennedy, Hanson Bennett, B. F. Knott, J. Proctor Blackwell, Joseph Mackoy, W. H. Brown, J. S O’Hara, R. H. Buchanan, Nathan Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. Glenn, Dudley A. Straus, F. P. Goebel, William Hines, Thomas H. Hopkins, F. A James, A. D. Washington, George Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. The motion was carried, and the refer- ence ordered. Mr. MCHENRY. I move we take up the report of the Committee on Executive Officers. Mr. BECKHAM. My motion was that the Convention proceed with the further consideration of the report of the Commit- tee on Executive Affairs. Mr. GRAHAM. The only request I have ever made has been refused; and I ask that you appoint a Committee of three of the best lawyers in the House to report their legal opinion on the matter; and in order to give the Delegate from Lincoln a double dose of his own medicine, I ask that he be appointed Chairman. The PRESIDENT. The motion before the Convention is that we proceed with the further consideration of the report of the Joint Committee on Executive Depart- . ment. Mr. DEHAVEN. This was a report of the Committee of the 'Whole, with the vari- ous amendments; and the previous ques- tion was called on that section and the various amendments pending thereto, and it was adopted in the Convention itself. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is right. That matter was disposed of All the balance is in the Committee of Whole, and never was reported to the Convention- y EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 9* Tuesday,] MOORE-13LACKBURN—TVVYMAN. [November 18. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I move we resolve ourselves into Committee of the Whole on the report of the Joint Committee on Ex- ecutive Department. Mr. BLACKBURN. I wish to send up an amendment to be considered. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, the amendment is considered as in order. - The motion of the Delegate from Boyd that the ‘Convention go into Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of the report of the Joint Committee on the Executive Department being put to a vote, was carried, and the President designated the Delegate from Logan, Mr. Coke, as Chairman of the Committee of the- Whole. Mr. TWYMAN. I have an amend- ment to the twenty-sixth section. Mr. BECKHAM. I move that the Com- mittee rise and report this report of the Committee on Executive Affairs to the Convention, and ask to be relieved from its further consideration. Mr. BRENTS. I am opposed to that motion, and I want the vote by which section 3 was adopted reconsidered, as I have an amendment to ofi'erfland I wish to be heard upon it. I believe it was adopted on the 6th of November, and I see it was stated by some Delegate upon the floor that on that day there was no quorum present. I think it is nothing but fair and right that every member of this Conven- tion should be heard or have an opportu- nity to offer amendments to any portion of the report. Mr. McHENRY. I would like to ask the gentleman whether it was the action of the Committee of the Whole which he wants to reconsider and move an amend- ment to, or was it the action of the Con- vention ‘.7 Mr. BRENTS' I wish to reconsider the action of the Committee of the Whole in order that I may have an opportunity be heard, because when before the Con- vention the previous question may be or~ dered, and I would then have no opportu- nity to be heard. Mr. MCHENRY. Do you want to go» into Committee of the Whole for the pur-, pose of moving a reconsideration ‘? Mr. BRENTS. It is in Committee of‘ the Whole now; and before it is reported, to the Convention 1 want to move a recon-- sideration. Mr. MCHENRY. I make the point of‘ order that a motion to reconsider cannot be heard in Committee of the Whole. It is a. rule laid down by all parliamentary law that there cannot be a motion to reconsider- in Committee of the Whole. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair sustains- the point of order. There was a motion pending at any rate. The motion is made and seconded that the Committee of the Whole rise, report the report with pending amendments and substitutes to the Conven- tion, and ask to be relieved from further consideration of the same. Are you ready for the question‘? Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would like to make one or two suggestions, and to have- unanimous consent to do so. I cannot pro-- ceed otherwise. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the gentleman may proceed. Mr. W. H. MILLER. There is very great advantage in debating these matters in Committee of ‘the Whole: and my opin- ion is that a great deal will be said. Vari— ous gentlemen desire to be heard on various- propositions. If we undertake to discuss- this matter in Convention, they will inev- itably make every effort to be heard, and we will be delayed by calls of the roll and dilatory motions, and therefore I think. we had better discuss it in Committee of the Whole,where these various motions are notv allowed, and where roll-calls cannot be had; and after it has been freely discussed, and every gentleman who desires to speak has. been heard, then to go into Convention and stay further discussion by a prompt appli- 10 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Tuesday. “BEckHAM—BRENTs. [November 18 . cation of the :previons question. That is the universal Parliamentary practice, and is the best and saves time; and I hope that the motion of the gentleman will not pre- vail, but that we will discuss this mat- ter before going into Convention, and then when in Convention promptly move the previous question and act upon it. Mr. BECKHAM. My motion was made for the purpose of facilitating the business of the Convention. I felt and assumed that other Delegates felt, that a great amount of time had already been spent in the discussion of this report. I make this motion, not for the purpose of cutting off debate in the Convention, but that the business of the Convention may be hastened .and facilitated. I think we can consider it better in Convention in its present stage than in Committee of the Whole. Mr. BRENTS. I would like to say one word: When section 3 was reported to the Committee of the Whole, I had no op- portunity to present an amendment at that time. It is an important question, and there are two principles involved—one is eligibility, and the other re-eligibility. One is right and the other is wrong, and which- ever is right ought to prevail; and we should commence with the office of Gov- ernor, and if we make him ineligible to the office, that principle ought to prevail through the whole Constitution; and if we desire the Governor be eligible to re-elec- tion, that principle ought to prevail through the whole Constitution, in order that it may be consistent with itself. A vital principle is involved, and we have been discussing these questions in Committee of the Whole, and I prefer to continue to do so. I agree with the plan suggested by the Delegate from Lincoln, that before this matter is reported to the House, an oppor- tunity should be given to all to discuss this question in Committee of the Whole. I want to say further, that it was understood when We adjourned on the 31st of October that no important business would be taken up for consideration before Monday, the day set apart for the consideration of the Preamble and Bill of Rights; and as there was no quorum here on Thursday, when this was adopted, I think it but right and fair that we should give those who were not present at that time an opportunity to dis- cuss these matters, and an opportunity to be heard. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. While we are in Committee of the Whole I desire ‘to send up an amendment. The CHAIRMAN. There is a motion pending, but by unanimous consent it can be offered. Mr. BLACKBURN. I hope that the motion of the Delegate from Shelby will not prevail. I am unable to appreciate the motives that prompted that motion thus early in the morning. All of you will re- member that the report of Committee on Public Ofiicers for the State at Large, was considered in Committee of the WVhole when many of us were away, and when there was no quorum. It was done by grace, by leave. There is only one section of the report that has had fair discussion before the Committee of the Whole, and that is section 10. As said by my friend, we have had no opportunity to offer an amendment. There was no quorum. There was a material change in this report. Sec- tion 21, I call attention to, varies from the present Constitution; section 24 varies in some respects. It makes an oflicer ineli- gible after one term. I think Delegates will want to consider that and know the reasons why that change was made. Sec- tion 27 provides for the abolishment of a Constitutional officer. I think, at any rate, it would be well enough for us to con- sider this matter in Committee of the Whole, where we would be free from the previous question, and where gentlemen who have amendments pending can ex- plain them, and we may know what we are doing. Mr BECKHAM. I would liketo sug- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 1 1 Tuesday,] BLACKBURN—BECKHAM—BRONSTON. [November 18. ,zgest to the gentleman that there has cer- tainly been no disposition on the part of this Convention at any stage of its proceed— ings, so far as I have observed, to order the previous question until thorough debate has been had on the question under consid- ‘eration. Mr BLACKBURN. I make no im- peachment of that kind; I simply say I do 'not understand the necessity of the gentle- man’s motion. Mr. BECKHAM. There has been no [disposition manifestcd on the floor of this House to cut off debate by ordering the previous question ; but when we are in the House, the previous question can be or- ‘dered and we can get to a vote on these matters‘. Mr. BRONSTON. May I ask what the pleasure of the Committee is on that sub- ject? Mr. BURNAM. I would suggest that .the House remain in Committee of the Whole for the consideration of some sec- tions that have not been acted upon, and I wish to say now, that if the proposition of the gentleman from Clinton to have the "vote reconsidered by which a certain section was passed should prevail, it throws us back where we started. Nearly all the report which has been made conforms to the pres- ent Constitution itself. Hardly any changes have been made. The proposition ' before the House, if we remain in Commit- tee of the Whole, is, I think, the considera- tion of section 24. 1f the Clerk will turn back and read the sections adopted, he will ' find, I believe, that all of them have been passed until we reached that point, and the very proposition that the gentleman desires to have reconsidered, although there were not perhaps sixty-seven members present, was, according to may recollection, passed by almost an unanimous vote. It is in en- tire conformity to the present Constitution of the State of Kentucky, and the Commit- tee and House were furnished with no reason .why itshould be changed. Mr. BRENTS. I want to say to the gentleman that I live a long distance from the seat of government, and I could not return in time to be present when that sec- tion was considered; and I think it is noth- ing but fair and right that I should have an opportunity to express my views upon that subject of eligibility. , Mr. BURNAM. I wish to say to the gentlemen that when the House comes to consider these propositions that have not been acted upon, when the Committee shall have returned its report with the amend- ments to the House, he can have his propo- sition considered there; and I do not think there ought to be any delay now in the discussion of the other sections of the re- port that have not been acted upon. Mr. BRONSTON. I merely asked the question as to what the pleasure of the Committee was in the matter? I think it is a courtesy due to a Committee to allow them to take that course which they prefer. Mr. BECKHAM. I will state in answer to that, that before making this motion this morning I had conferred with- the Chairman of the Committee on Executive Afl'airs for the State at large, the Dele- gate from Oldham, and found it was quite agreeable to him. The motion being put, and a division be- ing called for, it resulted yeas 18, nays 89, and the motion was lost. Mr. EDRINGTON. I offer an amend- ment to section 28. The amendment was read as follows: Follow the blank in line 4 of section 28, with the following: “On Tuesday, after the first Monday in November in the year 1891.” The amendment of Mr. Brents was read as follows: Amend section 26 by striking out lines 1, 2 and 3, and the words “been elected” in line 4. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Lincoln moves to strike out from section 24, all words after the word “elee- tion ” in the sixth line. 12 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ll‘llsSElsi/J s e I MILLER-I-CLARDY—DEHAVEN. [N ovember 18 . The Delegate from County of Warren (Mr. Rodes) moves to strike out the first paragraph in section 26, ending in line 4 with the word “elected.” Mr. ~W. H. MILLER. I offered my amendment to sectionl‘24 as an amendment to the amendment of the gentleman from the Fifth Louisville District. He moved to strike out the words “Secretary of State,” and I move to strike out the addi- tional words in conjunction with his motion. Mr, CLARDY. I offered an amendment to section 24. I desire simply to change one word in it. It says “ Commissioner of Agriculture and Statistics." I desire to change it so as to read, “Commissioner of Agriculture, Horticulture and Statistics.” It was a mistake of mine in writing it. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may make the change, there being no objection. Mr. DEHAVEN. It occurs to me if we take up this report, section by section, and consider it, and let gentlemen who desire to offer amendments offer them to that par-- ticular section, and dispose of one at a time, we would get along much more rapidly with the report than otherwise; and I move that we now take up the first section un- disposed of, and let it be considered, and amendments offered to it, and confine our attention to that until we shall have dis- posed of it, and so on until we get on with the report. The motion was put and carried. Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to offer amend- ments to sections 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20. The CHAIRMAN. Under the motion just carried, that is out of order. ‘We have to take up the sections undisposed of in the order in which they come. Mr. RAMSEY. Do I understand that only section 18 is now under considera- tion ‘Z The CHAIRMAN. Only section 18 is now under consideration. The READING CLERK. Mr. Mackoy offered for section 18 the following substi- tute :— Mr. RAMSEY. The substitute that I desire to offer affects that section. The CHAIRMAN. It affects that sec- tion, but others also. You must confine yourself to the sections undisposed of and before the Convention. Mr. RAMSEY. I move, then, to recon- sider the vote by which the other sections were adopted. The CHAIRMAN. The motion to re- consider is out of order in Committee of the Whole. The substitute offered by Mr. Mackoy for section 18 was read, and is as follows: A Speaker pro tempore of the Senate shall be elected by each Senate as soon after it is organized as possible, the Lieu- tenant-Governor vacating his seat as Speaker of the Senate until such election shall be made; and as often as there is a vacancy in the ofiice of Speaker pro tem- pore another Speaker pro tempore of the Senate shall be elected by the Senate if in session; and if during the vacancy of the ofiice of Governor the Lieutenant-Gcwcrnor shall be impeached, removed from oflice, refuse to qualify, resign. die, or be absent from the State, the Speaker pro Z‘cmpm'e of the Senate shall in like manner administer the Government; provided, that whenever a vacancy shall occur in the office of Gov- ernor before the first two years of the term shall have expired, a new election for Gov- ernor shall take place to fill such vacancy. Mr. BUCKNER. The Delegate who offered the amendment to the section which has just been read is not in the hall. I be- lieve he is absent. I wish to say, having heard him state fully the objects of the amendment, that it is intended, in the first place, to prevent the possibility of any va- cancy, even temporarily, in the office of Governor; and in the second place. to avoid the expense of calling together the Senate when a vacancy does occur in order to elect a temporary Chairman. It pro- vides, as I understand, that the Senate on as’ sembling shall avail itself on an early occa- sion to elect a Speaker pro temporc, thus avoiding the expense of reconvening. I wish to say, in this connection, that I con- sider the amendment an excellent one,. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 13 Tuesday,] because it is practical and avoids ab- solutely the possibility of any vacancy in the ofiice. It has happened within the last few years that there came very near being a period of time when the Com- monwealth might have been left for a short period without any one to execute the duties of that office at all. In the ab- sence of the Governor under the existing Constitution, the Lieutenant-Governor acts. On that occasion the Lieutenant-Governor the Governor being absent, was taken sick, and under the orders of his physician was compelled to leave the State. The Gov- ernor fortunately learned by telegraph of the fact, and reached the State on the evening of the day that the Lieutenant- Governor left. The importance of this may be apparent when it is seen that there are Executive duties connected with the office which, in the absence of both of these officers, would be suspended entirely; such as requisitions to be made upon Governors of other States, responses to requisitions in addition to the ordinary routine duties of the ofiice. I think the amendment is practical, and will be very effective in pre- venting the possibility of such interregnum. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to offer an amendment to the substitute, and I desire to call the attention of Chairmen of the Committees that have had this matter under charge. I see that everywhere it has been designated as Speaker of the Senate. I move to strike out the word “Speaker,” and make it “President of the Senate.” I make this motion for this reason: We have under our Constitution a Speaker of the House of Representatives, and for the purpose of making a distinc- tion, to designate the presiding ofiicer of the Senate as President of that body. I see in a great number of the States, they have adopted this mode. It is the mode in operation in the Congress of the United States, and I believe it would be an im- provement on the old Constitution in that respect; and I believe it is almost the BUCKNERflPETTIT—M. ILLER. . when. [November 18. 2 universal custom to always address the presiding officer of our Senate as President of the Senate, although under our Consti- tution there is a Speaker of the Senate as well as Speaker of the House of Represen- tatives. ‘ The vote being taken on Mr. Pettit's amendment. it was adopted. A vote being taken on the substitute as amended, it was adopted. Mr. PETTIT. I ask unanimous consent that in sections 16. 18 and 19, of the report of the Committee already passed over, to strike out “Speaker of the Senate" where- ever it occursand insert the words, ~‘ Presi- dent of the Senate,” so as to conform to the amendment just mnde. The CHAIRMAN. By unanimous con— sent that will be allowed to be done. Mr. \V. H. MILLER. I offered a sub- stitute for section 17 which must have been passed over. The CHAIRMAN. Section 17 has been adopted heretofore. Mr. WV. H. MILLER. The CHAIRMAN. I WVhen? do not know I suppose it must have been while some of us were absent. The READING CLERK. The next section is section 20. for which the Delegate from Covington (Mr. Mackoy) offers the following as a substitute. If the Lieutenant-Governor shall be called upon to administer the government, and shall, while in such administration, re- sign, die or be absent from the State during the recess of the General Assembly, if there be no Speaker pro iempm‘e of the Senate, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, for the time being, to convene the Senate for the purpose of choosing a Speaker; and until a Speaker is chosen, the Secretary of State shall administer the government. If there be no Secretary of State to perform the duties devolved upon him by this section. or in case that officer be absent from the State, then the Attorney- General, for the time being, shall convene the Senate for the purpose of choosing a Speaker, and shall administer the govern- ment until a Speaker is chosen. 14 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Tuesday] js Mr. JONSON. Has section 19 been passed upon ‘? The CHAIRMAN. I understand sec- tion 19 was adopted some days ago. Mr. JONSON. I was not aware of the fact. I was not present at the time. A vote being taken on the substitute, it was adopted. Mr. PETTIT. I— desire to call the at- tention of the Committee to the fact that “Speaker of the Senate” appears there in- stead of “President of the Senate,” and I suggest that that change be made. The CHAIRMAN. I understood the vote of the House was that the change should be made wherever Speaker pro tem- pore was used. The READING CLERK. The next section is section 24, which reads as fol- lows: ' Sec. 24. A Treasurer, Auditor of Public Accounts, a Register of the Land Office, Secretary of State. and an Attorney Gen eral shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at the same time the Governor is elected, for the term of four years. each of whom shall have been a resident citizen of this State for at least two years next before his election. The Secretary of State shall keep a fair register of and attest all of the ofiicial acts of the Governor, and shall,when required, lay the same and all papers, min- utes and vouchers relative thereto before either House of the General Assembly, and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law; and may appoint his clerk. Mr. BUCKNER. I have an amend- ment that I Wish to offer to that sec- tion. Mr. GLENN. an amendment. The READING CLERK. The fOllOVv— ing amendments have been proposed to section 24. The Delegate from the county of Chris- tian moves to amend section 24 by adding after State in the second line, the words “Commissioner of Agriculture, Horticul- ture and Statistics.” I would like to send up J ONSON—PETTIT—BUCKNER. [November 18 . —__..l The Delegate from the county of Todd moves to amend section 24 as follows: Strike out the words “Secretary of State” in line 2: and after the word “elec- tion” in line 6, section 24, add the following: “The Governor shall nominate. and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate shall appoint a Secretary of State, who shall be commissioned during the term for which the Governor was elected, if he shall so long behave himself well. The Delegate from the city of Louisville, Fifth District, offered the following. Strike out the words “Secretary of State" in the second line, and all'the words after the word “election” in the sixth line, and insert at the end of the report these words : “The Governor shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint a Secretary of State, who shall be commissioned during the term for which the Governor was elected if he shall so long behave himself well. He shall keep a fair register of and attest all the official acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto be- fore either House of the General Assembly ; and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law; and he may appoint his clerk. Q The Delegate from Ohio moves the fol- lowing amendment to section 24. Amend by adding thereto the following: Strike out the words “and Treasurer” from the first line of section 24, and insert in lieu thereof, the word “and.” Mr. MCHENRY. My other amend- ment comes in right there. The READING CLERK. It comes in as an additional section after ‘section 24. Mr. MCHENRY. It is offered in con- nection with that. Please read it. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Ohio moves the following as an additional amendment : The Governor shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint a Treasurer of State, who shall be commissioned during the term for which the Governor was elected, and he shall hold. his ofiice during the pleasure of the Gov~ ernor. The said Treasurer shall ‘execute such bond, perform such duties and receive- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. , ' 15' Tuesday,] M ILLER—PETTIT—CLA RDY. [November 18 I such compensation as shall be prescribed by law. The CHAIRMAN. That is not in order as an amendment to this section. The READING CLERK. The Dele— gate from Shelby moves the following amendment to section 24 : Strike out all of section 24, relating to the Secretary of State, and add one new section, viz. Section 21 of Article 3 of the present Constitution. The Delegate from Woodford ofl'ers the following: Add to section 24 the following words: “And shall cover into the Treasury any fees collected by him under the law.” The Delegate. from Lincoln moves to amend section 24 by striking out all words after the word “election” in the sixth line. ‘ Mr. W. H. MILLER. I understand the Delegate from the Fifth District of Louisville has offered an amendment which covers that; and I desire, therefore, to withdraw it. The CHAlRMAN. If there is no ob- jection the gentleman can withdraw his amendment. ‘ The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate froin the county of Hart offers the fol- lowing: In section 24, line 11, strike out “' Clerk” and add “Assistant Secretary of State.” The Delegate from the county of Madi- son moves to amend section 24, by strik- ing therefrom the words “Secretary of State,” in the second line thereof.” The Delegate from the county of Fayette moves to amend section 24 by striking out the words “four years,” in the fourth line, and insert in lieu thereof the following words: “ Six years, and they shall be ineli- gible for re-election for an ensuing term.” Mr. PETTIT. I have an amendment that I desire to offer. The Reading Clerk read the amendmeat as follows: Amend section 24, in line 11, by striking out the words’, “and may appoint his Clerk.” The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will’ now report the amendment in order. The READING CLERK. The first ' amendment in order is that proposed by the Delegete from Christian. Add after the word “State,” in the sec- ond line, the words, “ Commissioner of Ag- riculture, Horticulture and Statistics. Mr. CLARDY. As I have offered this amendment because I believed it would be an advantage to this great agricul- tural interest of the State, I wish to make a few statements to substantiate that position. I will say in beginning that I shall not detain the Commit- tee very long. It will doubtless be ad- mitted by all that agriculture is the great- est interest of this State, is of more import- ance to the people, has done more to make the State what it is ‘than all other interests in it. It is not antagonistic to any other interest. It is really helpful to all, and is- that industry upon whichall others rest- This proposition does not include only agriculture, but also horticulture, which is- a minor branch, you might. say, of the same industry; and it not only includes these two, but includes another subject very important to this State, especially at this time, that is the subject of statistics. ‘These three important matters would be under the chargeof this Department, or this Agricultural Bureau. If it be true that this is a most important industry, and that it is necessary that we have the statis- tics of the State properly tabulated, so they can at any time be seen not only by citizens of this State, but by the citizens of other States, and by any other person who may desire to know what the condition of Ken- tucky is, and what are the advantages ofi'ered to those who desire to come into our midst, and to bring means to aid us in developing the great industries of the State, this department must have a head, if it amounts to anything. It must have ‘l 6 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Tuesday,] CLARDY. [November 18 . somebody authorized to make these reports. to represent these great industries and to give the information desired upon this sub- ject. This should not be attached to an- other Department of the State Govern- ment; that is to say, it should not be a minor position. It should be a separate Bureau, which of course should report to the Governor or to the Legislature, any matters of information. But the importance of this matter makes it very apparent, it seems to me that the head of this Bureau, ‘of this great interest of this State, should be a Constitutional ofiicer. I will give some other reasons for that directly. I learn from the present incumbent of this office, which has been filled for the past number of years by appointment, that there are hundreds ofletters constantly being received, and that somebody must be here prepared with proper information to answerthem. That people are constantly making inquiry as to the condition of the State, its products. its soil and its mineral Wealth, and all matters connected with the general advancement of our great Com- monwealth. It is then absolutely neces- sary that somedody shall fill this ofiice competent to perform the duties which would devolve upon such an officer. But it may be well asked what advantage is this ofliee to the State of Kentucky? Now, 'of course, there would be some little ex- pense attached to it; but what can it do for the farmers of the State, or the people 'of the State. that we should tolerate it at all? First, it gives information to the peo- ple, the farmers of the State of Kentucky by holding what are known as Farm- Iers' Institutes in different parts of the State, which should be held under the aus- pices of this Bureau, or this Department of the State Government. What is a Farm- ers" Institute, and What good is derived therefrom‘? A Farmers’ Institute is simply ameeting held under the auspices of this 'Bureau‘ to give information to the people, 1.03 bring before their minds the great questions connected with better methods of farming; with improvements of land: with the use of fertilizers; with the use of better seeds and better methods of cultiva- tion, and all matters connected with a higher and more progressive farming. The discussions brought out at these meetings are very valuable. It teaches the farmers to express theirown ideas to each othenand ~ make the information of each common to all. And another thing: there are ex- perts upon certain subjects who are brought before these meetings to teach special things to farmers. For instance, the subject of dairying is one little understood by the people in our State. In one of these insti- tutes we bring a man to lecture upon that particular subject to the farmers where these institutes are held. He explains all these matters; sets forth how it can be made profitable, and thus introduce a new industry into the State, and the more our industries are diversified the less probabili- ty there will be of having over-production in any one department of the agricultural interests of the State. I cannot take time to discuss these questions, but Isimply wish to make these statements. As I have said. this makes the farming classes more intelligent, puts them upon a higher plane socially and better qualifies them, not only for farming, and for producing these things which are necessary to the very existence of the population of the country. but it better prepares them to fulfill all the duties of citizenship. There is another impor- tant duty to be entrusted to the Commis- sioner. To collect the best seeds of differ- ent kinds to be distributed to some careful persons in different parts of the State that they may be tried. Now, I was talking to a distinguished farmer, a member of this Convention, a few days ago, and he said through this Bureau had been introduced in the section he represented one variety of wheat which had been worth many thou- sands of dollars to that section, and not EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 17 Tuesday,] only to that section, but to other parts of the State, and so it is with other seeds. I mention this as one instance where.this Bureau may be of great advantage to the ‘farmers, and bring to the State far more than the necessary expenses to carry it on. Another matter, co-operating with the Ex- periment Station, it gives information throughout the State as to the use of fer- tilizers. That is an important matter. It is estimated by Professor Scovell, of the Experiment Station, that $500,000 is ex- pended each year for fertilizers, and that at least one-half of this sum is utterly wasted. It is not known by farmers gen- erally that there are but three ingredients in fertilizers which are worth a cent. These are potash, nitrogen and phosphoric acid, and if fertilizers do not contain some one ‘of these they are worthless, as everything else put into them is simply to increase the bulk and to enable them to be handled with facility and distributed evenly over the ground. It is to give this very information that ‘this Bureau is needed, and if it does this, it must have a permanent and intelligenthead 'to conduct these matters and give the nec- essary information to the people. Now, this alone would save not less than $200,000 to the people of the State of Kentucky, and ~those very people, too, who need it worst— the farmers of the State. Why should we make this a Constitutional oflice? The reasons I have already given so briefly and imperfectly would indicate the importance Y of the office. It ought to be a Constitution- al office in order to make it permanent and give greater dignity to it. That it may be understood in the State that this Bureau will be continued. It will be needed just as long as agriculture is needed; just so long as men are to be fed and clothed, and this great industry continues to be the founda- tion of all the industries of the country. We should put it in this Constitution, make it a permanent oflice, so there will be no trouble about it hereafter. It gives more CLARDY. [November 18 . importance and stability to the 'ofiice to fix it permanently in the Constitution. Peo- ple begin to look to it then as a permanent thing, where they can get the information needed. Another thing this office should do is to keep samples of the various pro- ducts of the soil of the State of Kentucky as far as possible, so people can see when they come here what we grow and the general character of the products of our State. What do other States do in this matter‘? I suppose the State of Kentucky expends less for the benefit of her agriculture than almost any other State in thisUnion. I do not say that this offi- cer has been made a Constitutional officer, '1 but in other States they have a Bureau of Agriculture, or a Board of Agriculture, in nearly all the States, which is far more ex- pensive in its operation than this would be. This would simply contemplate having one ' principal otficer, with possibly an Advisory Board appointed by the Governor to act with him, who would have no salary at all, and only be paid actual expenses whenever they would meet to confer with the Com- missioner. Not only should this office he made a Constitutional ofiice, but the incum- bent should be elected by the people. The people have to pay the salary, and the very fact that he goes before them to discuss these matters in his canvass will be a great educational feature. He will then say to the people what he proposes to do, what the office is intended to do, and ask for their support and for their assistance in making‘it of far more importance and of far greater advantage than it has hitherto been. If you will compare such an ofiicer as this, his importance to the people of the State, with some of the other ofiieers of the _State who are now elected, I think you will come to the conclusion that it is, at least, as important as any other secondary ofiicer in the State of Kentucky. Repre- senting as it does _its greatest interest, rep- resenting a common interest in which every true Kentuckian should feel a just and 18 EXEC UTIVE DEPARTMENT. Tuesday,] laudable pride. And I say, properly man- aged, it would save far more to the State than it would cost. Only about $15,000 or $20,000 would be necessary to carry on this Bureau and make it available for all these purposes. For these reasons, I ask you to consider this matter. I know alarge ma- jority of the members of this Convention are not farmers, and they are not supposed to realize fully the importance of these matters; but I think you may take as true what a few farmers say on this subject, and give us your help in this matter without the necessity of any great personal investi- gation We feel that we need this thing, and we believe you ought to accord it to the great State of Kentucky. You admit yourselves that your interests and all the other interests of the State are dependent on this great industry. Let us give it our encouragement. Let us adopt this amend- ment and thus put it in the power of the people to elect a good man to fill this of- fice, and I believe in the years to come it will be shown that we have acted well and wisely. Mr. YOUNG. I rise for the purpose of most earnestly seconding the proposition which has been made by the Delegate from Christian. For the next twenty-five years, according to the natural course of things, Kentucky must be an agricultural State. It will probably take that period for us to develop those resources which will make Kentucky, in my judgment, within that time one of the great manufacturing cen- ters of America. I believe, with the gen tleman who preceded me, that it will dignify this place by making it a Constitu- tional oflice. While I may disagree with him as to the wisdom of the offieer being elected by the people, still if those gentle- men who are so close to the farming popu- lation of the State of Kentucky desire it to be elective, I shall enter no objection. It has been said that he is a benefactor who makes two blades of grass grow where one grew before; and if, by a proper applica- CLARDY—Youne. [November 18 , tion of the great improvements in agricul- ture which have marked the past quarter of a century, we can add very largely to the products and resources of Kentucky farmers, we should not only be willing to spend $10,000, $15,000, $20000, but $100,- 000, if necessary. Take the very instance which the gentleman has mentioned of the introduction of a peculiar variety of wheat. I have examined the statistics, and I am able to say that in many places an increase was made from five to seven bushels an acre. If you will take the wheat pro- duced in the State of Kentucky, or within any twenty-five counties, and add two or three bushels of wheat on an average to the acre, you will produce a source of large wealth to the State. One little thing will show how beneficial this very ofiicer could, under proper direction become. A few years ago when Mr. Long- worth undertook to introduce the culture- of the vine along the banks of the Ohio river while he was on a visit to the State of Virginia, some gentlemen recommended to him the introduction of one new kind of grape found growing wild on the banks of the James river. He brought that grape to Ohio, and it was a failure. A gentleman from Missouri, who was a horticulturist, saw the vine, and thought it might succeed in Missouri. He carried it to that State and under the influence of the wonderful soil in the prairies of'that State, this little vine was planted, and in five years from that date there were ten million Norton Virginias distributed over the country. The result has been that in Missouri this vine, transplanted first from Virginia to Cincinnati, and then carried to the prairies of Missouri, has enabled the State of Mis- souri to produce claret wine, which has never been surpassed by any made in Europe. This is a very small sample of what can be done in different soils by the cultivation and adaptation of the proper plants at the proper place. We must keep our farmers abreast with. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 19 Tuesday,] YoUNe—AsKEw. - [November 18 . the improvement and spirit and develop- ment of the times. It is not unkind to the farmers of Kentucky to say, that owing to the peculiar circumstances with which they were surrounded, it was impossible for them to fully keep up with the improvements of this wonderful period. If we have a Con- stitutional ofl'icer, if we have a man whose duty it is to give this information to the farmers throughout the whole State, to . analyze their soils, to determine what fer- tilizer is best for this particular soil, , to show them the improvements in the varieties - of corn, wheat, grapes, apples, peaches, pears and plums, we will not only bring comfort and peace to the homes of Kentucky, but we will bring wealth. A few years ago, in experimenting with grapes, I developed the idea that if you will put a bunch of grapes in a paper bag, it would produce a better flavor and per- fect fruit. Men laughed at me on this subject for years. They said it was a vio- lation of the laws of nature. It was an impossibility. If you shut out light, and air from the fruit, it cannot mature. Whenever you violate the laws of nature, you destroy the best results from nature I kept on fighting and talking, and what has been the result‘? To-day I expect there are one hundred millions of paper bags used for the protection ‘of grapes in this country, and what has been the result? Instead of having grapes for- two or three weeks, any farmer can by this simple pro- cess, costing may be $1.25 or $1 50 a thou— sand, have his grapes through Qthree months, thus adding not only to his comfort and pleasure, but to the health of ‘his family. Mr. ASKEW. I want to ask you whether the experiment recited from your own experience as to paper bags on grapes and the experience of the gentleman from Missouri, in propagating the Norton Vir- ginia Seedling, do not demonstrate that pri- vate enterprise is superior to governmental aid ‘? And, therefore, that a Bureau of Agri- culture is not as good as private enterprise? Mr. YOUNG. No; because we want the farmers to understand these facts, and i we want some one to tell them these inven- tions. There are a great many things that have to be told to a great many people a great many times before they believe them, and the farmer and the lawyer constitute a large part of this class. You may tell a farmer a thing to-day, and he says that is not the way my father did it, or I have done it, and he will discredit it; but if you keep on telling him, ‘after awhile he will believe you and adopt it. Another circum- stance will further develop this idea. The United States and France have been mak- ing experiments to destroy what is called the phylloxera, a little worm starting at the root of the grape vine, which in the course of two or three seasons will abso- lutely destroy it, and which threatened to make havoc of the vineyards of France and the grape products of America. The United States Government has spent thou- sands of dollars, and France hundreds of thousands of dollars to destroy it. An American scientist, under the direction of the Department of Agriculture, established by the Government of the United States, has discovered a remedy for this great trouble and has to a largezextent removed it. Those of us who grow grapes in the State of Kentucky, know that on an aver- age half or three-fourths of our grapes are destroyed by the rot, yet the discovery of ' remedies for this disease, properly applied by the farmers, would restore full crops of this luscious fruit, and add hundreds'of thousands of dollars to the wealth of the State. I sincerely believe that if we want, as the gentleman from Christian says, to dig- nify this office, we ought to put it in aposi- tion where it is not subject to legislative will or caprice, but place the office in a position where the great agricultural inter- ests of the State may be propgrly cared for, and where our farmers may be educated in all that improves the culture of the soil or _ _ adds'to their comfort and knowledge. We 20 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ‘ opment in this State. Tuesday,] YOUNG—CLARDY. [November 18 . are but in the infancy of agricultural devel- Go to Switzerland and to France, and to the hill-sides of Italy, and see what they have done there. One-half our whole State is mountainous and hilly and a very small proportion of it has been brought under proper agricultural condi— tion. With proper development, with these scientific improvement, and this in- struction to the farmer, we will see these hill-sides and mountain-sides of Kentucky as beautiful and as attractive as the hill- sides of Switzerland or France. We must look after these things now, because with the limited amount of valley land or level land, our agricultural area will be limited, and we must take possession of the moun- tains, and we must bring them under culti- vation and have them produce these things necessary for the comfort and wealth of our people. It will be better, in my judg- ment, to have this office fixed in the Consti- tution, making it permanent and dignified, and requiring the Legislature to maintain it in a manner worthy of the great agricul- tural interests of the State. I am not going to weary you with all I know about farming. I might, in a long speech, convince you that I know as much as the Delegate from ‘Christian, or Bourbon, if it were properly brought out, but I am not going to weary you with that mass of information this morning. I was raised on a farm. I have done everything on a farm that any man can do. I have tried to keep posted con- cerning the farming industry, and I know the period has now come in Kentucky’s history when we need this sort of instruction more than ever before. There are lands in the southern and central parts of Ken- tucky that have never required a fertilizer for a hundred years. This cannot be so in the future. Climatic conditions change the character of cultivation, and the time is coming ‘when these depleted soils must have a fertilizer. As the Delegate from Christian has shown, it will save you probably two or three hundred thousand dollars in fertilizers alone. If we now use five hundred thousand dollars worth of fer- tilizers, within a decade we will use five millions worth, and to have these properly tested, analyzed and applied will be of tre- mendous value to the whole State. There should be some responsible officer to do this work, and his position ought to be as im- portant and stable as that of any other of- ficial under our State Government. The conduct of this ofiice will require a high or- _ der of intelligence and scientific investiga- tion and training. Fertilizers misapplied not only lose their cost, but they are labor lest; they bring discouragement and discontent, and not infrequently injury to the soil itself. In this regard alone, a Commissioner can save his salary one hun- dred times over. If we will save a quarter of a million of dollars a year in Kentucky now, in ten years We would save two million. Look what it has done for the tobacco crop, the wheat crop and the corn crop. Land which we considered in places as almost valueless, under the influence of fertilizing agents will produce six or eight barrels of corn to the acre and twenty bush- els of wheat. I am clearly of the mind that we want some ofiicer that will look after these things, that will educate our people, teach them the importance of all these im- provements, and if they do not regard them when told once, tell them again and again until they realize their truth, and put them in practical operation. I hope this ' question will require very little argument. It is 1e that appeals to the good sense and justice of the Convention, and I hope it will create the ofiice, and thus do not only the right thing, but everything in our power to help the farmers of the State. Mr. CLARDY. I intended to mention this report made by this department, but I closed my remarks and forgot it. That re- port brings outa great many facts. The value of that report to this State, and to those seeking information as to what this State contains, is very great. There is one EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 21 Tuesday,] fact brought out very important to this Convention, and that is there are $227,000,- 000 worth of property untaxed in this State. Here is a succinct account and his- tory of every county in this State, of its products, its timber, its water courses. There are a large number of short pieces in this report written by prominent far- mers and others in the State of Kentucky giving information upon various foods, products and methods of cultivation in this State. All these things go, in addition to what I have said, to show the great import- ance of this department. Mr. HENDRICK. I am very heartily in favor of this amendment. In 1860 the agricultural interests of this country owned seventy-four per cent. of its wealth. In 1889 they owned twenty-four per cent. of its wealth. There has been this remarkable decreasein the proportionate wealth of the different classes of the community since that time. The statistics of the country given us by the Census Department of the United States Government since 1860, dis- close as remarkable a decay in the agricul- CLABDY—HENDRICK. ‘ tural interests of the country as has been , exhibited at any time in all the history of the world in any civilized society. The objection which has been heretofore urged to the erection of a Department of Agri- culture has arisen chiefly from the fact that the reports which have heretofore been made by this Department to the Gov- ernor of Kentucky have been in many re- spects unsatisfactory. They have not been practical; unsatisfactory, frequently, for the reason that the Commissioners them- selves deemed that it was proper to express in highly rhetorical language their opinions to the Legislature and the Governor. But as a matter of fact, there has been very great advances made in agriculture and farming in this country from the in- formation given from these Depart- ments. In addition to the testimony given by the Delegate from the Fourth District of Louisville, I recall this as an [November 18 . a important fact: There is, to-day, at Charlottesville, Va., one of the most impor- tant wine industries of this country. That in- dustry was the result of the experiments of Thomas Jefferson, seconded by the efforts of the Agricultural Bureau of Virginia; and the claret wine made by the manufacturers of Charlottsville, Va., ranks to-day equal with any other, and sells within half a dol- lar a case of that made at Bordeaux, not- withstanding the immense tax put upon it at the custom-house. In addition to this, I have had some personal experience with the Agricultural Bureau of Kentucky. I suppose that my own experience could very well illustrate that good results can be had from it by even a tyro in the agri- cultural profession. I know nothing about farming, except that I worked as a boy on a farm. Three or four years ago I unfor- tunately, perhaps, because I do not be- lieve any farmer in Kentucky, under our present system, can make both ends meet by legitimate farming, came into posses- sion of a small farm. I was compelled to consult the Agricultural Commissioner on the subject of fertilizers, and after con- sulting him, we concluded that I should} try Kainit or German potash salt. The year before, eighty acres of that land had produced nine bushels of wheat to the acre. With three hundred pounds of German potash salt to the acre, that same land pro- duced twenty-nine and three-fourths bushels to the acre. That is one illustra- tion of good which may re- sult to the agricultural interests of the State. Upon a broader plane and speaking of the general interests of the State, the Agricultural Commissioner has been of an immengaadvantage to the agri- cultural interests of the State in this par- ticular. Take the monthly crop reports made by the Agricultural Commissioner, and it seems to me they themselves would amply repay ten times over the cost of the oflice. But further than this, the agricul tural interests of the State of Kentucky are 22 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ‘est, I do not know it. Tuesdayjf I HENDRIoK—AsKEw. [November 18. J more important than any other. They are if it can do an)’ thing to bring it abreast the foundation of our entire industrial inter- ests. There has never been before in the State of Kentucky a recognition of this in- terest in our Constitution. There has been a half-hearted recognition of it by the Leg- islature of the State. And in addition to that, the time has come when no longer the farmers are “ clod-hoppers,” in the ordinary acceptation of the term. Some of the most intelligent, most learned and scientific men of this country to-day are practical agriculturists and in the domain of breeding fine horses and cat- tle. Some of the most profound investiga- tions that have ever been made have been made by those who are engaged practically in this department. In the State of Texas, and in our own State, and sitting before us now, there are men engaged in the breeding of fine horses and cattle who could tell this Convention volumes with reference to that matter, and about which I do not know, except as I learn from reading and conver- sation with these gentlemen. Professor Reilly, of the United States -Agricul- tural Department, absolutely extermin- ated from Kansas the grasshopper plague by investigations which he made for that Department by scientific investi- gation which pursued that insect to the bottom of the ground, discovered the larvae and destroyed it. But as a matter of fact, the farmers of Kentucky, I understand. demand this. This Convention ought to crystalize that wish in this Constitution, make it a Con- stitutional offiee and give them what they want They certainly ought to have it. If there is any other interest in this Con- vention as large as the agricultural inter- If there is any other interest that has suffered more in the last twenty years under the domination of a hostile policy. I do not know it. If this Constitutional Convention .of Kentucky, representing its interests, can do any thing to elevate this branch of industry, ' me that question. with the rest of the States of this Union, and give it power and efficacy, let us not hesitate a moment to do it. These are my sentiments, and they have been from the beginning. I regard it as an opportunity for Kentucky to do something for a class which has been persistently legislated against, not only in Kentucky, but in other departments of our dual-form government for twenty years. I express these senti- ments now, not as new ones, because I have preached them for ten years throughout the length and breadth of this State, and I am earnestly in favor, not only of this amend_ ment, but of any other wisely considered provision which can ‘be placed in this Con- stitution, which will bring back the agri- cultural interests of the country to the position which they held from 1842 until 1861. Mr. ASKEW. Can you point to a sin- gle act published or any law passed in Kentucky, or any act of any government oflicial in Kentucky, against farmers? If so, what is it? Mr. HENDRICK. I am glad you asked I‘distinctly stated that there has been and there could be, in my judgment, in such matters as this no legis- lation against agricultural interests. They are so interwoven with all other interests that it would be impossible to hurt them without hurting others. But to be explicit (and I declined to refer to them by name a moment ago for the reason that I did not propose to introduce into this any shade of political discussion), I referred to the pres- ent tariff law of the Federal Government as affecting the interest of the agricultural classes. Mr. ASKEW. Is not the Secretary of Agriculture under the Federal Govern- ment in perfect sympathy with the policy of that Government‘? Mr. HEN DRICK. Precisely so, and that matter we cannot aid or prevent by any legislation in Kentucky; but we can EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 23 PETTIT—HENBRICK—ASKEW. [November 18 . aid this interest by this identical bill or amendment presented here, which gives these people representing this great inter- est certain information upon which they can act with absolute certainty; giving them the benefit of the experiments of this Bureau of the Government, making it a 'Constitutional ofiice, making it an ofiice upon which they can rely without the aid of legislative enactments. I want to be understood distinctly as saying here that I do not undestand that the legislation of the State of Kentucky within the last twenty-five years, or ever has been inimical to agriculture, and it is perfect folly to say so. That any Legislature should at- tempt to legislate against the farming in- terest is impossible. N 0 man on this floor or in any Kentucky Legislature, no matter what his profession, could possibly come here and do anything against that interest, because it is the dominant interest of the State of Kentucky. There is nota lawyer upon this floor who does not represent an agricultural constituency. and there has not been a single Representative upon the floor of any Legislature of Kentucky who could pos- sibly misrepresent it, because if he did he would misrepresent himself and the largest part of his constituency. But you may make mistakes with reference to the measures you adopt for this particular inter- est. There can be no mistake about this, however, because it is made at the request and suggestion of this very class, for the purpose of giving them additional aid in their own pursuits. Mr. PETTIT. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. If every species of class legislation for corporations or other- wise that has been adopted by the Legisla- ture is not inimicable to the rights and interest of the farming element ‘? Mr. HENDRICK. That is so large a subject that I want to answer it in this way: That I think the Delegate from Daveiss and other Delegates upon this floor have gone to the ultimu thule on this subject. I do not think so. I think there are number- less enactments upon the statute books of Kentucky which, in giving special privi- leges to corporations, such as has been stated upon this floor, are absolutely inim- ical, not only to the agricultural interest, but to every other honest industry in the State of Kentucky. Mr. ASKEW. What bill do you refer to ‘? Mr. HEN DRICK. Without specifica- tion I instance the one which was cited by the Delegate from Hart. Mr. ASKEW. Please instance one. Mr. HENDRICK. I refer also to the one cited by the Delegate from Hart, the Delegate from Daveiss and by the Delegate from Marion; but they are not more inimical to the agricultural interests than they are to any other industry. They are privileges granted by the Legislature of Kentucky to certain corporations, which give them advantages and privileges that no other class can enjoy. It is a species of class legislation which has been denounced. and properly denounced, by us since we have been in political life, and- it will not do to say that such enactments are more inimical to the agricultural interest than any other. ~The opportunity for harm to this interest is from laws which have been enacted by the Federal Congress, which have subjected this interest to burdens which are distributed unequally, and which they have borne without assistance. I might take up statistics and show how this interest pays more taxes, both to the Federal and State Government, than any other interest in all the broad land. Mr. PETTIT. Being more numerous. Mr. HENDRICK. Not only more numerous, but I take it upon the basis of actual assessment, that they pay more to the State Government and Federal Govern- ment than any other. And in all justice, and laying all personal or private advan- tage aside, if there is any class in the State 24 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ~Tuesday,F Mooim—MeDERMOTT—BECKNER. [November 18. of Kentucky that has a right to come here and demand recognition by the crystaliza- tion of its interests in this Constitution, it is the very class coming here now and de- manding this legislation for its benefit. There is no doubt about that in the world, and what I have said with reference to it applies from beginning to end since the year 1860. Take an illustration: In the year 1867 you may take the grain-producing States of the Union. They then got an average of one dollar per bushel for every single bushel of grain they raised. To-day they get an average of sixty-seven cents for every bushel of grain they raise. You may take it in wheat, and they got an av- erage of one dollar and fifteen cents per bushel; now they get seventy-two cents per bushel. You may run down through every agricultural product, and it is from forty to sixty per cent. lower now than it was then, although money has been in- creasing in value since that time. In 1867 greenbacks were not worth their par value in gold, and to-day and every since the year 1879, when specie payments were resumed, they have been worth a dol- lar in gold. When I referred to these facts I did'not intend to go into this general debate. I desire to present these facts as a reason why there could not pos- sibly be any doubt in the mind of any Delegate here for this Bureau and for this Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Stactistics. If we have any interest in the State of Kentucky that is valuable, that. lies at the foundation of our commercial and industrial progress, it is this asked by these people who are the bone and the muscle and the sinew of Kentucky. Mr. L. T. MOORE. ment. I offer an amend- Amendment read as follows: Insert after the word “and” the word “mineral.” Mr. MCDERMCTT. I want to offer an amendment to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Christian - “Strike from the amendment the words ‘Agriculture, Horticulture and Statistics,’ and insert the word ‘industries.’ ” Mr. BECKNER. I desire to offer an amendment. Strike out and insert so that it will read “Agriculture, Labor and Statistics.” Mr. W. H. MILLER. I offer an amend- ment. No person shall be eligible to the oflice of Commissioner of Agriculture, Horticul— ture and Statistics, who is not a citizen of the United States and of this State, and a resldent of this State for five years next preceding his election, at least thirty years of age, and who has not been engaged in the business of agriculture and horticul- ture for at least five years. Mr. COX. This subject has been ably and interestingly discussed by other gentle- men before this Committee. I do not pro- pose to engage in its further discussion at length, or to present facts which are ad- mitted to be true by all the distinguished gentlemen who have addressed the Com- mittee. It is evident to us all that in agri- culture lies the foundation of all our pros- perity. Upon this floor there are very many gentlemen who are able lawyers, and who are engaged in agriculture also. It has been my lot to have shared an humble place among that very pious class of gen- tlemen called lawyers for a good many years; but there is not a lawyer upon this floor who does not recognize the fact that he is dependent for his success in his pro-” fession upon the agricultural classes. I will go further and say that there are at least ninety per cent. of the gentlemen who occupy seats on this floor who have received their seats by the votes of farmers; and we have come here for what ? For the purpose of making a Constitution which will secure all their rights. We are not sent here for the purpose of aiding in other pursuits alone, but in the interest of all who have sent us here. Evidently we are- here by the grace of farmers, we are serving them. Suppose we return to our constitufi ents without having done anythingifor EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25 Tuesday,] COX—APPLEGATE. [November 18 . them, they will ask us, what have you done for us '? We will hang our heads and say nothing. Gentlemen, the proposition to make the oifice of Commissioner of Agri- culture a Constitutional oflice is an absolute necessity that rests upon this Convention, and Ihope there is not a man here who will ignore the rights and interests of that class upon which we all depend. It matters not what the vocation may be, from the minis- ter of the Gospel down to the lowest laborer, all are dependent on the agricultu- ral classes, and I hope when we return home we will not be made to blush when asked by our neighbors and friends, who are delving on farms through heat and cold, what have you done for us‘? If we fail to adopt the amendment of the gentle- man from Christian, we will be compelled to say we have done nothing. It has been demonstrated to the Convention, and I think every member of this body is fully convinced of the great importance of agriculture, not only in Kentucky, but in the United States. It is the foundation of our export trade abroad, and it keeps up trade with all foreign nations. If we do not do something for the benefit of the ag- ricultural classes, I say that they will do right to let us remain at home hereafter. Nearly every gentleman on this floor is indebted to them for the seat he occupies. We are indebted to them for their support; we are indebted to them for that which feeds us, for that which clothes us, and everything we enjoy in life of an earthly character. I do not desire to de- tain the‘ Committee, but desire to impress upon this Convention the importance of making that office a Constitutional office, and not to leave it with the caprice of the Legislature—not to leave it in such a con- dition that the Commissioner of this year may conclude that the office may be abol- ished by the act of the Legislature next year and seek other occupation. N 0, make it a Constitutional office, as perpetual as the Constitution which we will give to the people of Kentucky, and then when you have a Commissioner of Agriculture,~ you will have one competent to fill the position- he occupies; and as the gentleman from Louisville has said, he and his competitor- will go forth before the election through every district of the State and they will discuss before the people the great subject of agriculture, and this will be an educa- tion of the people, in addition to the facts which will be‘ published in the reports of' the Commissioner of Agriculture annually. Thus the people of Kentucky will become educated upon the greatest and grandest subject upon which they can possibly be educated of an earthly kind. Nothing- short of making that office a Constitutional office will satisfy that class of our fellow- citizens who are engaged in agricultural pursuits. Mr. APPLEGATE. After hearing the remarks of the distinguished farmer‘ from the “Swell District of Louisville,” I do not know of any success in the world like the creating of the Commissioner of Agriculture since the discovery of Col- onel Sellers’ “eye water.” I know now why hogs are down to three and a half cents a pound and. wheat’ to sixty cents a bushel, and corn you cannot sell at any price. It is because we have not in our Constitution a Commissioner of Agriculture. But the gentlemen do not agree among. themselves. One ‘of them tells us, back thirty or forty years ago all the property and wealth of this country was owned by the- farmers—back in those good old days when they did not have any Commissioner of Ag- riculture. Now the farmers only own about twenty-three per cent. in these blessed days when we have a Commissioner of Agricul- ture, not only in the State, but a Cabinet Officer of the United States. If that work goes on, if these blessings increase, the prac- tical farmer wont have any thing. The manufacturing interests will have it all. I represent a farming commu- nity. At least nineteen out of twenty 26 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Tuesday,] HENDRICK—APPLEGATE. [November 18 of my constituents are farmers. I Commissioner of Agriculture, and, it is said, myself, am not now engaged in farming, but I was born and raised on a farm, and the people nearest and dearest to me are all farmers, and whatever I do here, it will be to a farming constituency that I must an- swer. And being conscientiously engaged in the discharge of my duties, I propose to oppose this measure, because I do not be- lieve it is in the interest of the farmers to make this a Constitutional oflice. So long as we need a Commissioner of Agriculture, I am willing for the Legislature to keep one. If he is a useful oflicer, as one of the gen- tlemen suggests, and a good advertising agent for the State, let the Legislature keep him and control him. I do not want him to be a Constitutional autocrat who will say to the Legislature: “I was created by the great Constitutional Convention which met in 1890, the most intelligent body which. ever assembled on the American Continent, and you cannot investigate or regulate me. I am the creature of that great body." Mr. HENDRICK. Waiving the ques- tion of the most intelligent body which ever assembled on this Continent, does he not have to answer to the people every four years? Mr. APPLEGATE. No, sir. Mr. HENDRICK. The amendment of the Delegate from Christian county says that he shall be elected every four years. Mr. APPLEGATE. But when the four years have expired, he cannot answer them for what he has done. Under the system we now have, he is appointed by the Gov- ernor and paid by the Legislature, and under their control ; and as long as he ad- vertises the State well, he does the State good service, and it is a profitable ofiice; but the moment he realizes that he is a great Constitutional officer he is above all of them, or on an equality with all of them, that moment you destroy his useful- ness. We stated in the Constitution in those bad times when we did not have any I l the powers of the State should be divided into three departments—Executive, Legis- lative and Judicial; but_now you want to create a fourth department, entirely inde- pendent of the others; you want to create a set of Commissioners. I grant that this Commissioner can be useful, but I deny that it is essential that he should be made a Constitutional ofiicer. I say the moment you make him a Constitutional officer you will have less of his usefulness to the State. You had just as well, in this great age of progression, have a Commissioner of Elec- tricity. When we sit here under the bril- liant light resulting from the invention of some intelligent gentleman; when you see machinery run by it; you see cars pro- pelled by it, why not have a Commissioner to develop that, and watch over the man- ufacturing interests that have grown up in the last few years, and have eaten up the farmers, even although they did not have a Commissioner to look after their interests? Mr. HENDRICK. We do not have it because the electrical people do not ask it. Mr. APPLEGATE. I do not under- stand that the farmers are asking it. I am sure I represent at least a. one hundredth part of the farmers represented on this floor, and I never had one of them to come to me and request me that I should engraft in the Constitution a provision appointing somebody to represent their interests. I believe they are capable of representing themselves in choosing ofliccrs to adminis- ter the affairs of State. Mr. HENDRICK. tobacco county‘? Mr. APPLEGATE. Yes; and it grows corn, wheat and a good many other things. It is truly an agricultural county. Mr. HENDRICK. I will ask you if some of the best crops of tobacco have not been raised from seeds furnished from the Agricultural Bureau ‘.7 Mr. APPLEGATE. I do not know. Mr. HENDRICK. I know that it is it Your county is a EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 27 Tuesday,] ASK Ew-APPLEeATE-CLARDY. [November 18. fact in my county, because I was instru- mental in having the seed sent. Mr. ASKEW. I would like to ask if there are not more voters among the farm-- ers than there are among the electricians‘? Mr. APPLEGATE. Yes, sir. ()ne gen tleman has said that a man who could make two blades of grass grow where one had before grown was a public benefactor. I suppose the logic of that would be that. the man who could provide two ofiicers in the place of one would be a benefactor, They have interrupted me so often that really I do not know where my line of ar- gument is. I am a little like a distinguished gentleman from Europe who arrived in this country on election day. He was landed at Castle Garden, and one politician wanted him to vote for a certain party, and another one wanted him to vote the other side, and he said, “I do not know any thing about this, but one thing I do know is, that I am ‘agin ’ the Government.” There is one thing I do know, I am opposed to en- grafting into this Constitution any more officers than are necessary to administer the affairs of the Government. When 1. K was a candidate before my people the farm- ers asked me what are you going to do for the farmers, and I frankly said to them, I only know of one way of benefiting the farmers, and that is to make their taxes as low as possible, have as few officers as possi- ble, and make them all perform their duties for as reasonable pay as possible, and keep the tax gatherer off the farmers, and then I believe the farmer can take care of him- self, They all concurred in that opinion. What are we to gain by engrafting this into the Constitution? If the farmer element is a great bulk of the population of the State they will send men to the Legislature who are interested in farming and friendly to farming interests. The Legislature of the State, therefore. will have a majority of their friendsand their interests will al- ways be looked after, and I, as the repre- sentative of a farming interest, am willing to risk the representatives of the farmers to protect them. One gentleman said we wanted this office made a ‘Constitutional one because it would dignify him. If no- body but the farmers were going to vote for him I could advocate that, but he will go down to the farming element repre- sented by the gentleman from the “Swell District of Louisville,” and they will go to some of the other districts down there not so “swell” and he will go around with the boys and it will not make any difference whether he can tell a potato from a cabbage- head he will get the vote provided the necessary accommodations are forthcoming to enable them to make up their minds in that way, and then he will go to the dis- tinguished farmers representing the Cov- ington and the Newport and the Maysville Districts, and he will see all the good farmers in town and they will have Dele- gates in the Convention, and they will choose a typical farmer, provided he is all right' politically. It does not matter whether he knows anything about potash, or What are the best fertilizers to put on the soil. These will be small considera- tions. He will get the nomination and then, of course, we must come in and vote for him, This oflice is under very success- ful arrangement now. If it is such a blessed thing to the State as they say it is now, let us keep it there. Do not let us make any mistake about it. You have a Governor now responsible for his appoint- ment, and a Legislature and a Governor to regulate him, and let us keep him where he will be well regulated. You might get a doctor or a lawyer or somebody else in that office, if it is made elective, but if you keep ' it in the hands of the Governor, as it is now, certainly the Governor will never offend the farming community by appoint- ing some one else. Mr. CLARDY. Why would you have the Attorney-General or the Secretary of State or any of these other officers elected, 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Tuesday,] APPLEGATE—CLARDY—YOUNG. [November 18 . or made Constitutional offices? represent any greater interests? Mr. APPLEGATE. Do they represent any particular interest? Mr. CLARDY. Yes, sir. Mr. APPLEGATE. Will you kindly tell me what interest the Secretary of State represents ? lWIr. CLARDY. He keeps the official record of the acts of the Governor. Mr. APPLEGATE. What business‘? Does he not represent all branches of busi- ness—is he not an ofiicer for the whole State, it matters not what part '? Mr. CLARDY. Then the Attorney- General is a lawyer and transacts business for the State. Mr. APPLEGATE. Certainly. requires qualifications to fill that place. Mr. CLARDY. And whether he does any thing for the benefit of the State or not, the farmers have to pay his salary. Mr. APPLEGATE. The farmers '? Mr. CLARDY. Largely. Mr. APPLEGATE. That is true, and it is the farmers who will have to pay the other man’s salary that I am speaking of, and it is for the benefit of the farmers that I am opposing any further Constitutional oflices, which may last we do not know how long. If this Constitution which we are now making goes before the people and is adopted, it will be the last one made in the State of Kentucky for many years to come; and if, as time progresses, it is desired to get rid of this ofiicer, how can we do it? He is a Constitutional officer, and the Leg- islature can not abolish him any more than he can abolish the Legislature. The Gov- ernor can not abolish him. Mr. CLARDY. No abolish the other offices. Mr. APPLEGATE. If you are going to appoint one man to represent one inter- est, why not appoint one for all of them ‘? Why not one for the manufacturing inter- ests‘? Do they He IHOI‘C can UVOH Mr. YOUNG. We have Railroad Com- missioners. Mr. APPLEGATE. They are appoint- . ed by the State; the railroads do not want them. They are appointed to keep the railroads from running away with every thing. They are not appointed in the in- terest of the railroads at all. Do you want this man appointed to keep the farmers from running away with the Legislature‘? If you want one man to represent one in- terest, you might as well have a Commis- sioner for each interest. Mr. CLARDY. I would like to ask you where you would be, what would be- come of you, if it were not for this interest? Mr. APPLEGATE. I do not know. I do not want to take any chance on being left without them. "Where would a great many of the sick people in the State be it it were not for the doctors ‘? Mr. CLARDY. I guess a great many of them would be permltted to die a natural death. Mr. APPLEGATE. Why not appoint some one to watch the doctors‘? Now I am sincere in what I say about this matter. I represent a farming constituency; my neighbors are farmers, and my neighbors in this Convention know that to be true. I do not propose to make any political capi- tal out of making a speech on this subject. If there is any thing that I would con- demn more severely than any other, it is hyprocrisy. I cannot see that we are for- warding the interests of the farming com- munity in any wise by engrafting this on the Constitution. On the other hand, I believe we will be injuring the farming interests, and for that reason I am opposed to it, and I am not afraid to put my vote and seal on the record as against that, and go back to my farming people and answer to them the reasons which have prompted me in doing so. Mr. AUXIER. The gentleman from Pendleton reminds me of what was once said about a member of the church. Some EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 29 Tuesday,] AUxIER, [November 18 . one asked if a certain gentleman was a member of the church ? and the answer was yes; he belongs to church, but you could hardly tell it on him.” He claims to be a representative of the farming interest, but from his speech, I think this Convention could hardly tell that he was ever raised on a farm or that he had any interest in the farming industry. I do not expect to make a speech, but I do want to endorse the proposition advocated by the Delegate from Christian. If there is any class of people from the breaks in the Cumberland Moun- tains through which runs the Big Sandy river ,to where it mingles its waters with the Mississippi at the lower end of our State that needs protection, it is the agri- cultural people of our State. As Iremarked the other day in a speech I made, all we have comes from the soil, from the tiller of the soil. He furnishes us every- thing on which we live. There is no new ofli'ce made by this section of the report. We already have a Commissioner of Agri- culture. The people are paying him a salary and what this section proposes is simplyto make it a Constitutional instead of a legislative office. Now, that oflicer is appointed by the Governor, and his salary is paid out of the Treasury, and the change proposed by this amendment is simply to make the office a Constitutional, and an elective one and not one to be appointed by the Governor; and if there be any ofiice in Kentucky that the people ought to have a right to go to the polls and vote for its in- cumbent it should be the Commissioner of Agriculture. I do not care whether he be a farmer or a merchant or a doctor or a lawyer. Give the people an opportunity to elect somebody, because he represents the whole State. ' Let him ascertain by investigation, by experiment, what particular kind qf cereal, what kind of vegetable, what kind of grape is adapted to our climate. The day is past when it shall be said that the farmer should know nothing but to delve in the ground and plow and hoe, and come home weary at night, knowing nothing but about his immediate pursuit. The day is coming when every thing is to be tried and acted upon by scientific principles. The day is coming when the farmer is going to ena- ble himself to keep up with the other occu- pations in life and protect himself. The day is coming when the farmer will take the newspaper and enlighten himself upon the climate, upon the atmosphere, upon the kind of feed he should use, etc. All those things are important to him, and cannot the State of Kentucky afford to dignify that oflice by inserting in the Constitution a provision that makes that office cer- tain of its tenure, not depending upon the caprice of the Legislature? Can we not afford to dignify the oflice and make it permanent and substantial, and then let our people vote for the man they want to represent them in the interest of agriculture‘? We are providing more Courts for the administration of justice. We are limiting and prescribing the powers ‘of the Governor, and before this Conven- tion adjourns we will limit and circumscribe the power of the Legislature. Other inter- ests are protected, and the greatest interest of the whole Commonwealth is that of agri- culture. Why not protect that‘? As the Delegate from the Fourth District of Lou- isville said, in twenty-five years from now this State will be a great manufacturing State. I hope it will be, but the day will never come when Kentucky will not be an agricultural community. These vast fields of blue-grass in the cen- tral part of the State, and the fine smooth territory of southwestern Ken- tucky, together with the mountains, a por- tion of which section I have the honor to represent, although they are an agricultural people, and on those hills now barren will bloom the product of agriculture, no matter how much that country may be mined. Instead of being forests, as a great por- tion of it is today, I want to see it like Gulnare bloom with fragrance, and I want the exuberance of the soil to be discerned 30 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' Tuesday,] AUXIER. [November 18. like the exuberance of the seed of that beautiful product of the soil, whose flower is only excelled by its fruit. There is noth- ing that should more earnestly engage the attention of the Convention than the sub- ject now under consideration. I represent purely an agricultural people; nine-tenths of the Delegates on this floor represent agricultural people, and we can well afford to devote an hour or two to the considera- tion of this question, and could well afford to elevate this ofiice to the dignity of a Constitutional office. I trust that this Convention will not heed the suggestion made by the Delegate from Pen- dleton, and I hope that we will take it up, and make, it one of our Constitutional ofli- ces, for in doing so we do not increase the taxation on the people in this Common- wealth, but we simply recognize that great class of the people in this Commonwealth, the agricultural class, in this Convention by adopting the resolution recognizing the importance of farming and agriculture, and I should not object to the amendment offered by one of the Delegates to include in it the mineral and labor clause. One more suggestion and I shall have done. I hope before this Convention adjourns that we will adopt a clause in this Constitution that will forever forbid these foreign vampires in London, Liverpool and Glasgow, and other foreign cities, from coming into our Commonwealth and buying up all ‘the rich mineral lands of the mountains of Ken- tucky. I am told that an English com- pany has one hundred thousand acres near Middlesborough, and lately they have pur- chased two hundred thousand acres in Clay county. They sit at their ease in their foreign countries, buying up land, and leaving it uncultivated and undeveloped for the purpose of increas- ing in price. I hope some gentleman on this floor will ofl'er a resolution to cut off from these foreigners the right to come here and invest in hundreds of thousands acres of land, to be held for may be‘ three hundred years, thus prohibiting its develop- ment. What we want to do is to encourage the development of agricultural and the great mining resources of this Common- wealth. I Mr. PHELPS. I move that the Com- mittee rise and report progress, and ask leave to sit again. ' A vote being taken, the motion was carried, and the President thereupon re- sumed the Chair. THE CONVENTION. Mr. COKE. The Committee have had under consideration the report of the Joint Committee on Executive Affairs. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The Convention thereupon adjourn ed. ' ionvention Record ‘ KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1. FRANKFURT, NOVEMBER 1 9. 1 8 90. No.56 Wednesday,] MCDERMOTT—PETTlT—FUNK. [November 19 . The Convention was called to oixler by ‘the President, and the proceedings were ‘opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Hen- 'derson The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings 'Was read, corrected and approved. Leave of A bsence. Indefinite leave of absence was granted ‘to the Delegate from Owen county. There being no reports from Standing or Special Comm ttees, the Convention re- solved itself into COMMITTEE OF THE \VHOLE for the further consideration of the‘ report of the Committee on Executive Affairs, ‘ the Delegate from Logan, Mr. Coke, in .the.v Chair. The Executive Department. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will report the matter under consideration. The CLERK. The matter under consid- eration was section 24 of the report of the Committee on Executive Affairs, and the . amendments thereto. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I desire to offer an amendment. Mr. McDermott’s amendment was read, and is asfollows : Amend section ‘24 by striking out the words “and Attorney-General,” and add to the end of the report of the Committee on Executive Department these words: “The Governor shall nominate and, by and with the consent of the Senate, appoint an At- torney-General, who shall, if he faithfully discharge the duties of his office, hold his ofiice during the term of the Governor. The Attorney-General, if requested to do .so by the Governor or Legislature. shall prepare bills suitable for consideration by the Legislature, and he shall perform such other duties as the law may prescribe. He, and such salaried assistants as the Legisla- ture may allow him, shall represent the Commonwealth and the Executive Oflicers of the State in all legal proceedings, and no other attorneys shall be paid for the duties required of the Attorney-General.” The CHAIRMAN. The amendment of the Delegate from Christian was under con- sideration. Mr. PETTIT. I think there were sev- eral amendments to it. The Delegate from the county of Boyd moved to amend the amendment of the Delegate from Christian, after the word “and” insert “Agricultural and Mineral.” Mr. FUNK. . I have an amendment which I desire to offer. a The amendment offered by Mr. Funk was read, and is as follows: Amend section 24 by adding after the words “Auditor of Public Accounts,” in the first line, these words: “ Commissioner of Labor and Manufactures.” Mr. BECKNER. I desire to make a few remarks about an amendment I offered yesterday. The proposition of the, gentle- man from Christian is to have this Com- missioner styled “The Commissioner of Agriculture, Horticulture and Statistics.” It seems to me that Horticulture is so closely connected with‘v Agriculture that it is unnecessary to have that word inserted. We had as well have “Floriculture.” How would it sound to have it a Commissioner of Agriculture, Horticulture, Pisciculture, Arboriculture, and all the other cultures-— egg culture, horse culture, mule culture, chicken culture? They are all branches of 2 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 3 ____’ Wednesday,] SMITH—BECKNER. [November 1 9 _ agriculture, and should be included in the title if horticulture is to have a place. What I desire is to have the title read “Bureau of Agriculture, Labor and Statis- tics.” If there is any class of people who require protection at the hands of legisla- tive bodies, it is those who labor. They are not so able to take care of themselves as are those who have property; and if a Com- missioner is needed to look out for the interests of any class, it is those who have not the time to come to the sessions of such bodies as this to do something for them in the way of protecting their interests. Mr. H. H. SMITH. Would not this tend to worry the Agricultural Commissioner by adding the labor organizations of the State? Mr. BECKNER. I do not think the Commissioner would be much worried, or if so, he would be paid for all his worry. I do not think if we pay our oflicers they should be worried when they. are looking after interests so vast and needy. M r. H. H. SMITH. Is it not a special branch, and under it would not strikes, etc., occur to disturb the Commissioner‘? Un- derstand, I am for the laborer‘s interests. Mr. BECKNEB. No, sir; I think the Commissioner of Labor might assist in preventing strikes by suggesting things which would be beneficial to those who labor. As I said, the farmer is able to take care of himself. He has his land to make his living out of and to give him credit; but the man who earns his living by the sweat of his face has nothing behind him. Labor was part of the curse put on Adam. The division of land was one of the blessings given to him afterwards as a compensation for the evils which came from the fall. The farmer has a great ad- vantage in having land to make his living from. I say that the people who work, whether on the farm or in the work- shops, ought to have somebody to look ‘after their interests, and I was astonished that my friend from Christian should over- look that fact and propose nothing for them. -If we have it to read Agriculture, Labor and Statistics, we will have done the general public a great service—statistics will cover everything in the Commonwealth The objection of those gentlemen who say it will be for the interest of one class only will be overcome. They have in a num- ber of States a Bureau of Statistics, and the- Federal Government has a Bureau of the same kind, which has done great service. For instance, the Commissioner of the- Federal Bureau instituted an inquiry into the matter of divorce. He published the statistics secured, which will be of inter- est to all who desire to study sociology. If we have an ofiicer picked on account of his fitness and put here at Frankfort, some one who is interested in ‘this matter can ren- der a service which will be appreciated by every one, and be a means of bringing pros- perity to the State. I think it is important to put labor in, because it will ease the minds of those who labor and make them understand that this Convention is not held" in the interest of capital. We have adopted a clause in our Bill of Rights which pro- vides for putting property above the law, beyond the reach of the majority, giving to it a sanctity that nothing else has. That was in the old Constitution, and we have adopted it here too, and we have also do- clared the inviolability of contracts, so that a man having a grip on another can be 'sure no law will be passed impairing the obligas tion of his contract. We have been very particular to provide this in reference to contracts. I want to look at both sides, not only the interests of those having property, but of those who have no rights secured in contracts, no property to be taken care of, those who have to earn their living. These- have to be prbtected the same as those who have means behind them by which to take- care of themselves. I appreciate the im- portance of our agricultural interests, but think it important, when creating this Bureau, to remember the toilers; those who‘ earn their living by the sweat of their- ExEeUTIvE DEPARTMENT. ’ a Wednesday,] MooRE—PHELPs. [November 19 . brows, and have no land to look to, but have to depend upon their own endeavors for a livelihood, which the farmer gets from the soil that the State allows him to held during his life. So I think this should be aeBureau of Agriculture, Labor and Statis- tics, instead of-:a Bureau of Agriculture, Horticulture and Statistics. Mr. L. T. MOORE. If the amendment of the Delegate from Clark is offered, I withdraw mine. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. As the speeches which have been made on this subject come from one side entirely, I desire to be heard for a short time while I present my views of the question. _ I want to say, to remove the prejudice that is placed around me, that I am not lawyer enough to hurt anybody, but I am a pretty tolerably fair farmer. I was raised on a farm. My father, who is now seventy-eight years old. has lived all his life on a farm, and he raised a large family on the farm, and he did it without the aid of an Agricultural Bureau. I have not only been raised on a farm, but I want to say to the farmers on this floor that I belong to a Farmers’ Club, not the Wheel- - ers, but a Farmers’ Club. to-day working in the best interests of the farmers of my county, and I think I know what the farm- ers, at least of my county, want. The principal thing they want is to keep the fingers of oflice-holders and office-seekers out of their pockets. They are tired of the creation of new ofiices under the humbug idea that it is all for the benefit of the farmers, when they realize the fact that they have to pay the fiddler and’ do their own dancing. I know it is avery nice thing to talk about in theory, and my feelings went with my friend, the Delegate from Pike,when he wasimagining the wonderful progress of Eastern Ken-- tucky, under the auspices of the grand Bureau. I imagined I saw it walking up there and waving its magic wand over the hills of Pike county and Eastern Ken- ucky, and that I saw the stones being turned into bread, the Big Sandy into wine, and the frog ponds into honey; but that was in the imagination of the Delegate from Pike. How long have we had that Agricultural Bureau, and what has it ever done? We have had it in existence fourteen years, and it is supported at an expense of thirteen thou- sand dollars a year. Has any Delegate on this floor shown where it has benefited his county one single cent‘? I will yield long enough to give any Delegate time to rise in his place and state what benefit it has been to the farmers of his county, if any Dele- gate desires to do so. Nine-tenths of the farmers of Kentucky to-day would not kn ow there was an Agricultural Bureau in the State, if they did not happen to read of it in the newspapers,.or hear some one who had been at Frankfort speak of coming in and meeting the affable gentleman, Col. WVilson, the present incumbent. I do not know whether my county ever had any seed from that office, except tobacco seed. When 1 was here a few years ago I would get letters frequently from friends to go to the Agricultural Bureau and send them this, that or the other kind of seed. I went over there every time I got a letter, and I would go in and say, “Colonel Davis, my friend, Mr. so and so, wants such a kind of seed,” and the answer would be, “We have not any of that kind; but we have some tobacco seed.” I went time after time, and failed to get what I asked for, until I could not help thinking it was like John Smith’s inn, which always had eggs and bacon, and nothing else. What have you over there to-day?-—one of the biggest cornstalks I ever saw. The people of Kentucky do not know it; but when I go home I am going to tell the people that they have got the biggest corn- stalk over there that I ever saw. You have a great big ear of yellow corn, and besides that. you have the most peculiar corn ooh I ever saw—red on one side and white on the other. I will tell them about that, and if they can improve their system 4 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. v Wednesday] PHELPs—Cox. [November 19 . of farming by knowing those facts, I will even tell them that by the side of the door hangs two great big turnips and some big tobacco. Then what is to prevent them from cultivating their farms and improv- ing their farming system, when I give them that information, without making this a Constitutional office, and continuing to increase the expense above the thirteen thousand dollars which the farmers have to pay now for that institution. You say these reports that go out teach the farmers how to farm scientifically. Last year you printed five hundred reports, and you sent one to each State in the Union, and two or three to each county in the State of Kentucky. If you intend to make this a Constitutional office. let me suggest, to make it available, that you must appoint at least two or three men in each county throughout the State to study these reports, and then go around and tell the farmers what they have learned out of it, for the farmers cannot get the reports them- selves. Two or three reports go to a coun- ty, and it is expected that will make the hill-tops bloom, as the gentleman from Pike says. Mr. COX. I will ask the gentleman if these reports are not published monthly, and are they not published in your news- papers and the newspapers all over Ken- tucky, that the whole farming interests, that the people may know what the reports are, may know the condition of the crops and the prospects for the crops during that year? Mr. J. L. PHELPS. The most I know about that is what I learned in the ofice yesterday, and that is in regard to the re- ports. I have not kept up with that matter. I was told when I went in the office and called for one of the reports of the Commis- sioner of Agriculture that they had been sent out six months ago; but I am glad that my friend has called my attention to that question. I want to talk about these monthly reports, and I want to show the ' the other. Delegates on this floor what good they do. When you plant your corn in the spring of the year, about the time it is a month old, if you happen to be the fortunate one in your county who gets one of these reports, you can look at it and see that a month ago the people all over the State were plant- ing corn. If it is a dr season, and the weather is a little " cold, it will not make your corn come up any bet- ter. A month rolls on, and you have to plow your corn, and you get another re- port, and you see the people all over the State have been doing the same thing. It may tell you how the crops looked a month ago, but does that change the crops of your people? If you want to see how the crops look, go out on your own farm and see for that day, not a month back. I know that there is a great idea in the minds of the pol- iticians and the public men, that they have to pander to farmers. I tell you the farm- ers are tired of being fed on tafi'y; they want hog and hominy. This Bureau will do something for the farmer, they say. You can get tobacco seed from there any time; but the trouble is, when you get and plant it, and when it comes up, you cannot tell the tobacco raised from the seeds ob- tained from Frankfort from that gotten from a neighbor. It takes the same amount of cultivation, the same labor put on it, and when it is ripe you cannot tell one from It is humbugging the farmers instead of a protection to them, and in my section they are beginning to realize it, and are getting tired of it. Let me ask you, do you expect a practical farmer to be elected to the ofiice if you make it a Constitutional ofiicel and make it elective‘? You will never see a practical farmer in the ofiice; he will be apolitician. He may not be a lawyer, but he will be a politician, as sure i as politics in Kentucky are not abolished, and that never will be. Mr. YOUNG. Have we not a farmer for Governor ‘? Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I suppose so. I EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. U1 Wednesday,] PHELPS—WHITAKER. [November 19, presume that farmer, if he has the power to appoint a Commissioner of the A gricul- tural Bureau, can do no better than to give us the great big bridge-builder of Louisville. Mr. WHITAKER. Do you‘ think the next Governor will be a farmer? Mr. J. L. PHELPS I believe the farmers will become so disgusted at the idea that they are babies and need protec- tion that they will hardly think they are eligible for oi‘fice by the time the election comes around. Let me say that the farmers are not so ignorant as you think they are. The farmers read agricultural papers. You have papers devoted to agriculture; you have a column in nearly every newspaper devoted to agriculture; you have books which teach something on agriculture; you have sciences that teach something on agri- culture; you have the Experiment Station, at Lexington, that sends us much more valuable reports, that teach us more than the Agricultural Bureau can ever teach us; and if I am not mistaken, the present worthy Governor recommended to the Legislature, at the first session after he was elected, that this Bureau be connected with the Agricultural College at Lexington, where it may do some good in a scientific way, andmay make that College valuable to the State to teach something that would be a practical benefit to the farmer. The Delegate from Fleming,a new-born farmer, comes fresh from the egg—shell, and under- takes to throw his arm of protection around the farmer. He says he has preached these doctrines all over the State of Kentucky for ten years. I want to apologize to the gentleman from Flem- ing for happening to be absent when he was preaching in my county. I did not hear him. Then, he tells us the Agricultural Bureau in Virginia developed a great wine interest in that State. I want to say, if this Agricultural Bureau is going to drench Kentucky in liquor of any kind to make a man drunk, I am opposed to it on that account. The same Delegate says, as one of the reasons why we should make this a Constitutional ofiice, is that the Fed- eral Government is taxing Kentucky more than its proportionate part. I want to ask that Delegate if he thinks the Agricultural Bureau can stand between the State of Kentucky and the Federal Government and regulate Federal taxation ? If so, I will be for it. I would like to spend a few moments on that question, but as it savors somewhat of politics, athing I do not propose to refer to in this Convention, I will pass that by. The venerable Delegate from Car- roll says that when we go to our homes the farmers will ask what have you done for us ? and we will hang our heads in shame I want to say to my people that I voted against that Bureau—voted against putting hands in your pockets to take from you thirteen thousand dollars a year. I want to say if any of them raise complaint: “ What have you received from that Bureau?” I can take all the farmers in the counties of Rus- sell. and Casey and I will not find ten men in the fourteen years who have received a report or a bunch of seed from that Bu- reau; and if I should, I would not find a man who would say that his corn or to- bacco raised from such seed was better than his neighbor’s. If your Agricultural Bu- reau at Washington City does any thing for the farmer it will supply all the demands. If you want any seed send there; if you want any Agricultural Reports, send there and you get them on a larger and broader scale; but I want to say that in the section of the State where I have been, it would be almost dangerous for a man to sit down and read an Agricultural Report clear through. Men would say that man is los- ing his mind, and he would be in danger of being hustled to the Asylum. If there is a Delegate upon this floor who ever read one of those reports through from beginning to end, I would like to have him hold up his hand. If there is one who ever knew a farmer to do such a foolish thing, I would like for him to tell us who that farmer is. 6 EXECUTIVE ‘DEPARTMENT. VVedn esday,] PHELPS. [November 19. Now, you are going to create an expense, you are going to fasten an ulcer on the peo- ple of Kentucky, for what? the farmer. To enlighten You have had it for fourteen years, and how much light has it shed over Kentucky‘? Has it improved the farms of your farmers ‘? If there is a man here who can tell of any material improvement which has been brought aboutin his county by the Agricultural Bureau. I would like for him to have the boldness and honesty, and fairness to come forward and tell it, because I want to be right on this matter. I have never met with that man who has said that the farming interests have been materially improved by ‘that Agricultural Bureau. No, sir; it is an ofiice for a poli- tician. It is all you can make it, if you put it in the Constitution. It is all it has been and it is all it ever will be in the State of Kentucky and the people are getting tired of multiplying office after oflice for the benefit of politicians. You may say it is for the farmer, but the farmer cannot see how it benefits him unless he gets some- thing from there, and they do not get any- thing. Not only do you have a Commis- sioner in there, but you have a clerk and not only that, but all the expressions you hear from Delegates, and prominent men and every where else over the State about that Bureau, they say it is true it has not done us much good; but put it in the Con- stitution and it will become powerful. I do not see, to save my life how, being put in the Constitution will make that Bureau a greater power for good than if it were continued a statutory office. We have a number of statutory ofiices and I have not known the incumbents to fail to discharge their duties because they were not Constitu- tional officers. I have not known any inferior person to get into office simply because it was not a Constitutional ofiice. But I want to say further, I believe you can put no better man in that oflice than the present incumbent. He is an intelli- gent gentleman, an honest man, energetic and industrious, but, I am afraid, if we keep him there, having nothing to do he will get lazy and will never be able to make a living out on a farm. I do wish that politicians would quit singing these lovely songs about the farmers. and fanning them to sleep in order to put their fingers into their pockets and take out the hard earnings they have worked a life time to secure. The more ofiices you create in Kentucky, if they are not profitable, the poorer becomes the farmer, and more complaint goes up. I remember when I was a poor farmer’s boy working on a farm, once in a while a great statesman or politician came around —some candidate—and I was allowed to go and hear him, and when he began to tell how he pitied the farmers and what he was going to do for them, I did not care to what political party he belonged, I was for him. I thought that if he were elected we would not have such hard work to do, no such plowing, the horses would be fatter. and every thing would be lovely, and I was very anxious that he should be elected: but when he was elected to oflice, I still found that the plow would not go until I followed it, and I found the horses would not “gee’ nor “haw” unless I went with them. No matter who filled the ofiices, the farmers still had to farm, and the plow- ing and the hoeing had to be done. I be- lieve the farmers are getting tired of being humbugged to make ofiices for men who attempt to ride in on the plea of benefiting the farmers. The farmer only asks you to furnish him a market for what he makes, and he will take care of the balance. You have Farmers’ Alliances giving informa- tion in regard to farming; you have news- papers giving such information, and you have practical men in every department of farming who know, and all the farmers ask is for you to keep your hands out of their pockets and they will get along some how or other. EXEC UTIVE DEPARTMENT. 7 Wednesday,] M I LLER—RAMSEY—S MITH. [November 19 . Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to offer a substitute for the amendment pro- posed by the Delegate from Jhristian and the amendments thereto. The subtitute reads as follows: A Commissioner of Agriculture, In- dustries and Statistics shall be elected for the term of four years, and his duties shall the regulated by law. He shall be a citizen .and resident of this State, and shall ‘ have been engaged‘ in some business pertaining to agriculture for at least five years previ- -ous to his election, and not less than thirty _years of age; but the General Assembly shall have the power to abolish the office of Agriculture, Industries and Statistics at any time after five years from the adoption of this Constitution, and if abolished to re- establish it. The Delegate from Scott moves the fol lowing amendment to section 24: That there be inserted after the words “Attorney General” in line two of secton '24 these Words; “A general Statistician whose duty it shall be to collect such statistics .and information as may from time to time ~ be directed by law. Mr. RA .VlSEY. I offer an amendment. The amendment reads as follows: Amend the amendment offered by the Delegate from Christian by striking out the words “Horticulture and Statistics,” and insert in lieu thereof the words “Immigration and Labor” so that the amendment will then read, “Commissioner of Agriculture, Immigration and Labor.” Mr. H. H. SMITH. It is not my pur- pose to make a speech, nor to answer the distinguished theological discourse of the gentleman from Russell, but to give, as quickly as possible, my reasons for support- ing the resolution of the gentleman from ‘Christian. I am not a farmer myself, and I wish to have it understood, supplemental to what remarks I shall make; but I be- lieve there is an interest in this State para- mount almost to all other interests, and that interest is the farmer’s. The gentle- man from Russell tells us that we need no Commissioner of Agriculture. The gen- tleman from Pendl'eton says in four years it will not be a necessary office. Some gentlemen suggested in twenty-five years there would be absolutely no necessity for it, and it would go out of existence by rea- son of having nothing to do. In the State of- New York—and I believe we are a greater agricultural people than the people of New York—they spend nearly one hun- dred thousand dollars a year through the Commissioner of Agriculture, appropriated by the Legislature for the various Agricul- tural Societies throughout the State. The Horticultural Society of Texas has done more for the prosperity of that State than any other organization in the State. They contracted with a syndicate to. build the State Capitol; they have encouraged immi- gration, and through other agencies all over the country, they have brought men and put them on the farming lands of Texas. In fact, sir, they have added one hundred per cent. to the taxable value of Texas in the last five years. In my county, seven years ago, there was not even a Farmers’ Club. There was no organization for the benefit of the farmers of the county. They did not have even a Fair Association. The first organization was the Farmers’ Club. It was soon followed by the Fruit Growers’ Association, which developed the fact that finer fruit and grapes of all kinds could be grown on Muldraugh’s Hill than any place in the world, and to-day hun- dreds of acres of land that were hitherto worthless are worth one hundred dollars per acre, and the receipts for their products last year reaches the enormous sum of one hundred thousand dollars, and I believe it was through the agencies of the Horticultu- ral Association, the Fruit Growers’ Associ- ation and the Farmers’ Club. We have also a Horse and Cattle Association. In the last five years, dating from the organi- zation of that Club, I believe, that the in- crease in value of stock has been over one hundred per cent. That Club has organ- ized and promoted a Fair Company. It is i one of the most successful in the State. 9' 8 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] ; Farmers are induced to raise better stock; they are induced to read literature. They get the poorer farmers who have not the information for proper advancement to- gether with the richer and intelligent far- mers, and they discuss not only subjects relating to their material prosperity, but they get some enlightenment as to what is going on in the outside world. They un- derstand the peculiar wiles of the politician. They cannot be demagogued out of their existence They understand the function of the Governor and they have familiarized themselves with their duty as the governed to the Governors. In my county the far- mers have arrived at that stage of intelli- gence where they do not believe that the lawyers of the State are robbing the Treas- ury and the people. They have arrived at that stage where they do not believe that the government would sink because some Delegate draws five dollars per diem when he is not here. They have arrived at that stage of intelligence that surpasses some remarks I have heard on this floor. Even, sir, they have learned that there are as many demagogues among the farmers as among the lawyers; that human nature is everywhere governed by the same laws. I am proud of the farmers of my county. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. Did they learn these facts from the Agricultural Bureau‘? Mr. H. H. SMITH. Yes, sir; by reason of the Agricultural Bureau in the State this knowledge was made known to this or- ganization, and through them, - rd in that manner they have received this intelli- gence. (Applause) But, sir, when I heard the words of the distinguished Delegate from Marshall and Lyon on yesterday, I had concluded when those words set amid the prophetic splendors of his Oriental elo- quence that the farmers of the State were reconnoitering a hostile position, led on by his imperial personality, to march on this Convention by stealthy parallels, and when I witnessed his sinewy diction and imper- turbable self-control, his commanding pres- ence, I thought he had been fitted for mis- SMITH—PHELPS. farmer [November 19 . sionary warfare and not for the mission he proclaimed on this floor. It was a disap- pointment for me to learn the course the- gentleman had pursued; indeed I was sad and melancholy and, further when I learned that the mature powers of the Delegate from Daveiss had turned their planetary rays on the lawyers of the Convention, I had concluded as a lawyer, not to hurt, that I was on the wrong side of this question, and therefore, I come to give my vote to’ the resolution offered by the Delegate from Christian. I believe that the this State demand that we have a Commis- sioner of Agriculture. They have a great interest, and it will last not only to-day,. but for at least one hundred years. You cannot make the farmers believe by your speeches on this floor that you are the sole guardians of their prosperity and that the lawyers of the Convention and the lawyers of the State are highway robbers and ride on passes alone, as the gentleman from Marshall suggested yesterday, and are in a high wayto tear down the Government of the State. If the Delegate would ex- amine his clothes carefully he would find that monster there. I believe the lawyers of the Convention have the manhood and the earnestness to proclaim the interests of the farmer as early and as vigorously as any other Delegate on the floor. The reso- lution offered by the Delegate from Chris- tian is an important one. The farmers demand ‘it; the prosperity of the State de- pends upon it. So far as the farmers are concerned, intelligence will be diffused; they will have State Conventions of every kind; not only County Conventions, to diffuse information and knowledge, but State Conventions. And, therefore, I give my unqualified approbation to the resolu- tion, with the hope it may pass. (Ap- plause.) Mr. W. SCOTT SMITH. Being a scion of the field myself, I wish to say a few words in support of the amend- ment proposed by the 'very distinguished from the county of Chris- farmers of ' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 9 6 Wednesday,] SMITH—SWANGO—WHITAKER. [November 19 . tian. It the State of Kentucky that her agricultural interests are among her greatest interests, and any interest in these later days without a source of information must ere long dwindle and die. Turn to every indus- try man has any knowledge of and you see the source somewhere from whence he derives the information pertaining to his trade, and if the farmers of the State of Kentucky are left in the open sea without a rudder and without a helm, the Lord only knows what will become of them in the battle for existence among the winds and the waves. The next greatest industry of Kentucky is her educational in- dustry. It has a head, and it is a Constitu- tional ofiice I see no reason why we should not elevate to the position of Consti- tutional dignity, the Bureau of Agricul- ture. For several years it has been strug- gling between life and death like a flicker- ing flame, not knowing how long it is going to exist; and consequently the man having the Bureau in charge has not given it that attention which he would, if he knew how long it would last, but give it Constitutional existence, and I believe the farming interest will be greatly improved, far more than it has been in the last decade. The farmers in my section are greatly benefited by information obtained from this ofiice from the simple fact they are an intelligent class of people, and up with the times. They try to keep abreast of the improvements of the age and time; they give their attention to the best things that come in the way of their profession; the latest improvements in farming receive their most careful attention. Now and then they send away to the Federal Govern- ment for seeds. and I expect they. send to the Bureau here. I do not know about that fact. They send northward and southward and other directions‘after their seeds, and I know they are interested in an improved system of farming, and I know they desire this Bureau should be given this Constitu- tional sanction. It will not cost the State is a known fact throughout- any more, but only place Kentucky along- side of other States, showing whenever we have an industry we have the manhood to give it the prestige it deserves. I believe it is the sentiment of this Convention that ' this ofiice should be raised to that dignity, and thereby raise the calling of the farmer and elevate his position as high as the high- est. Therefore,»being among the farmers myself, representing the farmers and, in reality, a considerable part of a farmer, I expect to cast my vote in support of the resolution as submitted by ‘the very distin- guished farmer from Christian. Mr. SWANGO. I desire to offer an amendment to the substitute of the Dele- gote from Lincoln. The amendment reads as follows: Amend substitute by striking out “he shall be engaged in some business pertain- ing to agriculture,” and insert in lieu there- of “ he shall be actually engaged in farming for at least four" years next preceding his election.” Mr. WHITAKER. As there is no- other opportunity of explaining the rea- sons influencing my vote, I want to give the reason now why 1 shall vote for this measure making this office a Con- stitutional one. I learned from the Dele- gate from Russell, I did not know before, that this has been a legielative office for‘ fourteen years, and in that time there have- been seven Legislatures elected coming di- rectly from the people of the State of Ken-- tucky, and if this office had been onerous, and the amount it incurred fixed itself on the tax-ridden people of the State, they certainly would have instructed the mem- bers of the Legislature that they had elect- ed from the different counties to have re- pealed it and rid them from the expense of that institution; or if they had not be- lieved from experience, the best teacher, that they had received benefi ts from it, it would certainly have been abolished. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. Will you allow me to inform you of one other fact? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, sir. 10 - EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 'Wednesday,] WHI'I‘ AKER—MAOKOY—MAY. [November 19 . Mr. J. L. PHELPS. When I was a member of the Legislature the session be- fore the last,I think that Legislature would have abolished that Bureau had it not been that it was delayed by filibustering when we undertook it. Mr. WHITAKER. A great many things would have been done if they had had the power to do it, but [the people had so much confidence in the oflice that,the Delegates were afraid to tackle it and re- peal it. Mr. MACKOY. If the oflice hasbeen in existence fourteen years under legisla- tive enactment, shall we not be safe in trusting the Legislature, and may we not suppose that they will continue the office so long as it is beneficial ? Mr. WHITAKER. Since I have heard the statement of the Delegate from Russell, when it was doing so much good in the State, I am afraid to leave it to the fluctua- tions and fiekleness of a Kentucky Legis- lature. Therefore, I want to make it a Constitutional office, believing it is a good one, and make it permanent; build up its statistics, so that we will have some place, not only for the people of our own State, but other States to get correct statistics of its mineral and agricultural wealth. It will bring many wealthy people into our State to elevate it to its highest susceptibilities; and for this as much as any thing else, from the fact that I look upon the fact that Legislature after Legislature has been elected, coming fresh from the people, and they have continued this ofiice. I look upon it as instructions to me, and I I think it ought to be instructions to every Delegate on the floor that the people want the ofiice, and wanting it, it should be put beyond the reach of repeal, and of being interfered with by the Legislature at any future time. Mr. MAY. I have not been in the habit of detaining this Convention in the busi- ness before it, but I do wish to say some- thing for the farmer. To hear each gentle- ¢- man tell his own story, every Delegate on this floor at some time in life has been a farmer; but to tell the plain truth, I can not say at this time what I am. Years ago —nearly half a century ago—I was like my friend from Russell, a farmer’s boy, working on the farm, and have heard some of those oflice-seekers he refers to in their campaigns talk about what great things they were going to do for the farmers, and when I come to think about that great army of farmers, I do think there is less done for them than any other people on the earth. I was shocked when I heard some resolutions offered to this Convention to abolish the oifice of County School Sup- erintendent. What would that army of teach- ers do without a head or leader‘? and if that be true that they could not do without a head or leader to see that the objects for which the Common Schools were created are properly carried out, what could this army of farmers do without a head‘? And I will say that this office of Commissioner of Agriculture heretofore has been only a “side-show." It would be proper and right _in this Convention to dignify the office by making it a Constitutional oflice. The act calling us together was to do what the necessities of the times required. and I do think the time has come when it is necessary that we should have a head, or an officer made Constitutional to be called Commissioner of Agriculture, Horticulture or any other name you wish to give it. It seems my friend from Louisville, if he has any hobby, as has been suggested, it is grapes. I would like to see some farmer in this Convention come forward and make corn and wheat or, as my friend from Russell would have it, “hog and hominy,” his hobby. I do think that the agricultural interests of this State have been neglected' I do know at this time in my county, that the suggestions made By the Agricultural Bureau to men there, and the improve- ments by men who have come from other States into our county, have been worth EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 11 Wednesday,] MAY—PHELPS—BOU RLAND. [November 19 . ‘A more than almost any thing ever done. '] 0-day we have some of the grandest nurseries in the State; to-day we produce the finest fruit in the State, and to-day the Pulaski county strawberries have the repu- tation of being the finest sent to the Cin- cinnati market. This was brought about by men who believe in agriculture and who believed in having a leader at the head -of the army of farmers in this State of ours, and I cannot see, ,for the life of me. how any man, who professes to be a farmer, is not in favor of having this made a Con- stitutional ofiice to give additional dignity to it. When we say that there is no necessity whatever for this ofiice we might as well declare that there is little or no ne- cessity for the office of Lieutenant-Governor or Attorney General. The duties of the Commissioner of Agriculture, if properly discharged, would be worth far more to the State of Kentucky than the ofiice of Lien- tenant-Governor or Attorney-General of the State. He will have work to do all the time if he discharges his duty faithfully. For these reasons, and many others, I can give, I am heartily in favor of making this a Constitutional ofiice, and thus give it dignity. An ofiice where the farmers of the State would have somebody to refer to :and look to for statistics, and suggestions, and for advice. I, therefore, heartily in- dorse, and will vote for the resolution offered by the Delegate from Christian. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. Will the Dele- gate from Pulaski answer one question '? Mr. MAY. Certainly. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire to know if the improvement in grape and straw- berry raising was brought about by the Agricultural Bureau or by intelligent men from Ohio? , ' Mr. MAY. It was brought about by the Agricultural Bureau. These foreigners had more discernment gthat the people of my county, and they are now reaping a rich zreward. l I I Mr. BOURLAND. It is not my pur- pose to make a speech this morning, but, as I am one of the few practical farmers in this Convention, perhaps it would not be out of place for me to say a few words about the matter now pending before the Com- mittee. In some respects this is the most remarkable body of men ever assembled on the continent of America. _A very simple proposition has been introduced by the Del- egate from Christian county, to establish an Agricultural Bureau "for the State of Ken- tucky on a permanent basis, and I suppose forty or fifty amendments have been offered by Delegates to that proposition. It is not my purpose to make anything like a set speech, but I want to correct two or three false impressions that seem to have been created by certain things that have trans- pired on this floor. One Delegate has been impressed with the idea that there is an irrepressible conflict between the lawyers and the farmers. The lawyers are the friends of the farmers, and there is no con- flict between us at all, and there is no neces- sity for a conflict. The farmers _in this -Convention ask that an Agricultural Bu- reau or a Commissioner ‘of Agriculture be made a Constitutional .ofiicc. see agriculture elevated, and .the lawyers on this floor have manifested a disposition to come to our assistance and help us to raise it up. We desire that the Com- missioner should be made a Con- stitutional officer. and divers lawyers have been ready to swear by all the gods that it should be so. We desire that this Constitutional officer should be elected by the people, and the lawyers have come to the front, and with full hands propose to go us one better, and say yea, and he shall be a farmer, too. There is no conflict between the lawyer and the farmer, and there is no necessity for building up an idea of that kind. We are all of one great family in Kentucky, and this measure is as much in the interest of one citizen as another. Surely if the agricultural interest of the "We desire to' 12 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] BOURLAND. [November 19. State is built up no class of our fellow-citi- zens can be made to suffer through the ef- fects of the prosperous condition of agri- culture. There is nothing, in my opinion, more important to the people of Kentucky than that agriculture should prosper, and any thing we can do for that great interest will not hinder or retard the prosperity or growth of any other interest, because it is a well known fact that every interest known of our civilization is dependent upon the success of agriculture. The gentleman from Russell would have you suppose that the farmers are silly enough to believe that if they can get a Bureau of Agriculture, and the ofiice made a Constitutional one, that, by reason of that fact our crops would grow without any cultivation. We do not expect that the making of this office a Con- stitutional one will assist us in that direc- tion. We do not expect it to furnish us with a market for our products. “Te do not ex- pect it to convert a billy-goat into a South- clown sheep, nor a scrub-cow into a Short-horn steer, but we do expect, if we can secure this department in the Government for our special benefit, it ' will become a great store-house for useful information, from which we can draw at will; and the result will be a benefit to us and to all those who are engaged in other occupations. The gentleman from Lincoln introduced an amendment to the original proposition, setting forth that the Commis- sioner of Agriculture shall be a practical farmer. I believe that is right; and, while I believe that the interests of agriculture demand that this officer should be a farmer, yet I believe we could well afford to trust the people to elect a man to that position whose interest is identified with the interest of agriculture in the State, and, if it becomes an elective ofliee, I do not believe the gentleman from Russell need trouble himself for fear that a politi- cal demagogue will work ‘his way into that position. The time was when the farmers of the country did follow blindly the leadership of others; but, through the instrumentality of farmers’ organizations in the country, we are beginning to 'edu- cate ourselves, and fit and qualify ourselves for some of the higher walks of life; and I desire to serve notice now that the time has passed when we can be led blindly by pro- fessional demagogues and politicians. If this is made a constitutional office, I be- lieve the people will select a practical farm- er to fill the position—one whose very heart and soul is engaged in the great effort to elevate, educate and benefit those who are engaged in the pursuit of agriculture. I am heartily in favor of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Chris~ tian, and shall give it my most hearty sup- port; but I can not support the amendment of the Delegate from Lincoln, because I believe we can well afford to trust the people of Kentucky, and I think that the farmers will see to it if the office is made elective, that none, except one whose in- terests is identified with the interests of agriculture, shall be selected to fill that office. So far as increasing the expenses of the State are concerned, I believe I am as much opposed to that as any one, but I be- lieve this office can be made permanent by incorporating it in the Constitution with- out any material increase in the burdens upon people; and if there is any necessity for the ofiice at all, and any good is to re- sult from it, then it should be a permanent oflice, beyond the whim of the Legislature. The reason no more information has been collected and distributed by the Bureau is from the fact that the ofiice is dependent on the caprice of the Legislatures as they convene. and we do not know “what the next Legislature may do, whether it will abolish or perpetuate it. Consequently there is no encouragement to collect and store away those things which will be bene- ficial to the agricultural interests of the State from the fact that there is no stability in the offiee. I have felt it was my duty, being a practical farmer, and knowing EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 1a . from Christian. Wednesday,] MAY—BULLITT. [November 19 . some of the disadvantages we have to labor under, to give some reason why I support the amendment offered by the Delegate I am glad to see that the members of the legal profession are in such a giving mood, and I desire to serve no- tice on them, that we expect in the near future to ask them to assist us in another matter. We shall ask them to help us to form a Constitution that will relieve us from some of the grievous burdens imposed on us by reason of corrupt and vicious leg- islation. ‘We shall ask them to relieve us ' from the burdens of unjust taxation, by com- pelling all corporations to bear their just proportion of those burdens. We propose to ask them in the near future to assist us in incorporating in the Constitution a prin- ciple, which will require banks to pay taxes for all purposes that the farmers pay them. We propose to ask them to help us ‘engraft a principle into the Constitution to protect farmers against corporations and the concentration of capital. I want to re- turn thanks to the lawyers for the kindness they have manifested and to the readiness and willingness to give the farmeis the assistance we are now asking. Mr. MAY. ' I do not wish to detain the ‘Convention, but I desire to say that I am glad that I have been able to bring one live, wide-awake farmer before the Convention to give his views on this very important subject, and I now hope if there is another farmer on the floor that he will come from the background and give his views. This afl'air in the Convention reminds me of the old saying, “The rich against the poor and the poor against one another.” The law- yers propose to be our friends—I mean the farmers’ friend—if we will allow them, and goodness knows, if I do know anything in the world, it is that we need friends at this particular time, because if there is any class of people in the State that needs assistance and help it certainly is the. farmers. I hope there is not a wide-awake farmer on this floor who will let this question pass without giving a word in support of it. If there are any who have not spoken, let them come forward and give their views be- fore the question is ‘submitted for a final vote. Mr. BULLITT. I had thought that I would say nothing on this subject, but it seems from the speeches that have been made on the subject that we are ex- pected to grant something expressly given to the farmers. Now, I do not be- lieve that we have right, as the fram- ers of a Constitution fo, a free and equal government, to give any thing to anybody exclusively, but here is a great interest that belongs not to the man that is engaged in an agricultural line, but it belongs to every citizen in the'Common- wealth The farming interest is one of the interests of everybody. The mining inter- est is the interest of everybody in the Com- monwealth, and if these interests need any particular specific set of laws to foster them, it is our duty, the lawyer’s duty, the doc- tor’s, the preaeher’s and everybody else’s . duty to foster them; not in the way of giv- ing exclusive separate privileges to any class, but in the way of fostering the inter- est that belongs to all of us, and in that view, I shall endeavor to give what I may have thought upon the subject. There are three interests that have to be pro- vided for. There is the Geological Survey that has to go on until it is completed. When completed, there will be left in the Geological Department surveys, books and specimens that have to‘ gointo the hands of somebody; and so in the mining interests, when we have succeeded in develping the minerals that must go somewhere also. But the, agricultural interest is likely to be a permanent in- terest. If we appoint a Department, it ought to be with a view that all three of these will ultimately be thrown under one general head; and for the pur- pose of creating a Department to preserve and protect the books and the specimens 14 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMEN T. Wednesday] B URNAM—COKE—MILLER. [November 1 9 .. and all of these trophies that may have been gathered in either one of these Departments, so that they will be protected. For that purpose I believe we ought to create a Department under the provisions of the Constitution, and I know of no better way than to create an Agricultural Department, with a view to ultimately throwing ‘all of these others into the custody and keeping of that Department. Whenever the salary ceases to be sufficient to command a first- elass man to take care of these trophies, they ought t@ be put under the custody of somebody else, so that we will have a gen- tleman to take charge of them who is en- tirely trustworthy; and with these few re- marks, I will leave the matter with the Convention. Mr. BURNAM. The prayer of Ajax was for light. I think we have had corns- cations on this subject enough to illumi- nate the whole matter; and I will move that the Committee rise and report to the Convention this 24th section and all the amendments for a vote. The motion being put, was carried. TH E CONVENTION. The President, Mr. Clay, resumed the Chair. Mr. COKE. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the Committee on Executive Ofiicers, and instruct me to report to the Convention section 24 with all amend- ments and substitutes pending for its action. The report was on a vote received and adopted. ' The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the first amendment to section 24 in the report of the Committee. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the pre- vious question on the pending section and amen iments. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Before that is put I would like to withdraw the amendment that I offered awhile ago, and offer one nearly the same, except that it provides for the election of the Attorney General. He should be appointed, but I yield to your will, which, in this matter, is clearly against me. The PRESIDENT. If there is no ob- jection the gentleman will have leave. Mr. BLACKBURN. Does the motion for the previous question just made cover all the amendments to section 24. The PRESIDENT. YesZ Mr. BLACKBURN. There was only one amendment to section 24 that has been discussed in Committee of the Whole; that was with reference to the matter of Com- missioner of Agriculture. There are other changes in the section from the existing Constitution, which have not been con’ sidered in Committee of the Whole, and the previous question, if voted now, would prevent any one from saying a word upon their amendments. The PRESIDENT. Debate is not in order. That is a question addressed to the judgment of the Convention. Mr. FUNK. I would like to ask unan- imous consent to present this amendment, which simply completes the one I offered before. It is in the same connection and in a different section. _ The PRESIDENT. Therebeingno ob- jection, leave is given. Mr. MCDER \lOTT. I would like to ask for information. If the order for the previous question he adopted, whether we can discuss the matter about the Secretary of State, or any other matter at all ? The PRESIDENT. That is the under7 standing of the Chair. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I ask for the yeas and nays. Mr. FUNK. I second the motion. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Is it in order to change my motion ‘? The PRESIDENT. The Delegate can move the previous question upon any par- ticular substitute or amendment, or upon the whole section and all amendments. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the pre- vious question then, simply upon the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 15 Wednesday,] McDERMo'rT—TwYMAN—CLARDY. [November 19 . amendment of the Delegate from Christian, and the amendments and substitutes therefor. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Lincoln changes his motion, and moves the previous question upon the amendment of the Delegate from Christian, and all amend- ments. The motion being put, was carried. The PRESIDENT. Report the first amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment of Mr. Clardy as follows: Add after the word “ State, ” in the second line, section 24, these words: “ Com- missioner of Agriculture, Horticulture and Statistics. ” The amendment of Mr. Beckner read as follows: \VitS Amend the amendment by striking out the word “Horticulture” and insert in lieu thereof the word “ Labor, ” so it would read, “Commissioner‘of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics. ‘The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark. Mr. McDERMOTT. I ask for the yeas and nays on that. Mr. TWYMAN. I second the call. The Clerk thereupon started to call the roll, when- Mr. CLARDY. I do not see that I have any objection to that being put in, if ‘it will save time. Mr. McDERMOTT. I am withdraw the call for the yeas and nays if he. accepts it. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment to the substitute offered by the Delegate from Christian. Mr. W. EMILLEE. Wodld not the vote first be taken on the substitute I offered and the amendments. The PRESIDENT. The first amend- ment must be perfected, and after that is completed then your substitute will be taken up and perfected. willing to The READING CLERK. The next is the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Fifth District of Louisville, as fol- lows: Strike out the words “Agriculture, Labor and Statistics,” and insert the word “‘Indus- tries.” A vote. being taken, the amendment was rejected. The READING CLERK. The next is the amendment of the Delegate from Lin- coln, which is as follows: No person shall be eligible to the ofiice of Commissioner of Agriculture, Horticul- ture and Statistics who is not a citizen of the United States and of this State, a resi- dent of this State for five years next pre- ceding his election, at least thirty years of age, and who has been engaged in the busi- ness of agriculture and horticulture for at least five years. Mr. EDRINGTON. Is it proper’ to- move to divide that? I have an amend- ment to offer to that. The PRESIDENT That is an amend- ment to an amendment. The matter before the Convention is the original report, and the Delegate from Christian offered an amendment, and the Delegate from Lincoln offers another amendment, and that is as far- as you can go at this stage. Mr. EDRINGTON. I want to strike- out part of that amendment. The PRESIDENT. That is not in order now, unless by unanimous consent. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would like to have unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment, so that the vote can be be- tween the amendment of the Delegate from Christian and my substitute. The PRESIDENT. Leave is granted, there being no objection. The READING CLERK. The next amendment is the one proposed by the- Delegate from Laurel, as follows: Amendi by striking ,out the words “Horticulture and Statistics,” and insert in lieu thereof the words “ Immigration and Labor.” A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. 16 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ‘in Wednesday,] MILLER—CLARDY. [Nbvember 1V9 , The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The READING CLERK. The next is the substitute proposed by the Delegate from Lincoln, as follows: A Commissioner of Agriculture, Indus- tries and Statistics shall be elected for the term of four years, and his duties shall be regulated by law. He shall be acitizen and resident of this State, and ‘shall have been engaged in some business pertaining to agriculture for at least five years previous to his election, and not less than thirty years of age ; but the General Assembly shall . have the power to abolish the oflice of Commissioner of Agriculture, Industries and Statistics at any time after five years from the adoption of this Constitution; and if abolished, to re-establish it. ' The substitute therefor offered by the Del- egate from Wolfe was read. and is as follows: Amend by striking out the Words: “ He shall be engaged in some business pertain- to agriculture,” and insert in lieu thereof the following: “And who shall be actually engaged in farming for at least four years next preceding his election. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would like to have unanimous leave to insert the word “Labor” in place of the word “Industry,” to meet the previous action of the House. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion‘? The Chair bears no obje-tion and the gentleman has leave. A vote being taken on Mr. Swango’s amendment, it was rejected. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the adoption of the amendment just read. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have no objec- tion to substituting those words in my sub— stitute. The PRESIDENT. Still there will have to be a vote. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The Reading Clerk thereupon read the substitute of the Delegate from Lincoln (Mr. Miller), as amended. Mr. CLARDY. I will ask to have my amendment, as amended, read before the vote is taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Lincoln. The amendment was read as follows: Add after the word “State,” in second line of Section 24, these words: “ A Com- missioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statis- tics,” so that it would read: “A Treasurer, Auditor of Public Accounts, a Register of -the Land ()flice, Secretary of State, Com- missioner of Agriculture, Labor and Sta- tlstlcs, and an Attorney General,” etc. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the substitiite of the Delegate from Lincoln. Mr. W. H. MILLER. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. LASSING. I second the call. The result of the vote is as follows: YEAS—QI. Amos. D. C. Hogg, S. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Lassing, L. W. Askew, J. F. Miller, W. H. Beckham, J. C. Montgomery, J. F. Bennett, B. F. Moore, Laban T. Berkele, Wm. Parsons, Robert T. Birkhead, B. T. Pettit, Thomas S. Boles, S. H. Ramsey, W. R. Doris, W. F. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Swango, G. B. Funk, J. T. West, J. F. Hanks, Thomas H. Woolfolk, J. F. Harris, Geo. C. Smith, W. Scott NAYS—58. Auxier, A. J. Jacobs, R. P. Ayres, W. W. Jonson, Jep. C. Beckner, WV. M. Johnston, P. P. Blackburn, James Kirwan, E. E. Bourland, H. R. Lewis, W. W. Brents, J. A. Mackoy, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Martin, W. H. Brummal, J. M. May, John S. , Buchanan, Nathan McChord, Wm. C. Buckner, S. B. McDermott, E. J. Bullitt, W. G. McElroy, W. J. Burnam, Curtis F. McHenry, H. D. Carroll, John D. Miller, Will. Chambers, G. D. Moore, J. H. Clardy, John D. Muir, J. W. Coke, J. Guthrie Nunn, T. J. Cox, H. ‘O’Hara, R. H. DeHaven, S. E. Petrie, H. G. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Farmer, H. H. Smith, H. H. Field, W. W'. Trusdell, George Glenn, Dudley A. Twyman, I. W. Graham, Samuel Hendrick, W. J. Hines, J. S. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. 'ExEcUTIvE DEPARTMENT 17 Amos, D. C. Wednesday,] APPLEeATE—PHELPs. [November 19 . Hines, Thomas H. Young, Bennett H. Holloway, J. W. Mr. President Clay. ABsENT—15. Allen, C. T. Kennedy, Hanson Allen, M. K. Knott, J. Proctor Blackwell, Joseph Phelps, Zack Brown, J. S. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. *Goebel, William Straus, P. Hopkins, F. A. Washington, George James, A. D. So the substitute was rejected. The PRESIDENT. The question is on ~the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Christian. Mr. APPLEGATE. On that I call for ‘the yeas and nays. M r. J. L. PHELPS. I second the call. The result of the vote is as follows: YEAs—GS. Auxier, A. J. Jonson, Jep. C. Beckham, J. C. Johnston, P. P. Beckner, W. M. Kirwan, E. E. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Berkele, Wm. Mackoy, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James May, John S. Boles, S. H. ' McChord, W. C. Bourland, H. R. McDermott, E. J. Brents, J. A. McElroy, W. J. Bronston, C. J. MeHenry, H. D. Brummal, J. M. ' Miller, Will. Buchanan, Nathan Miller, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, J. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Moore, Laban T. ‘Carroll, John D. Muir, J. W. ‘Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. Petrie, H. G. ‘ "Coke, J. Guthrie Pettit, Thos. S. "Cox, H. Pugh, Sam’l J. iDeHaven, S. E. Quicksall, J. E. Doris, W. F. Ramsey, W. R. .lDurbin, Charles Smith, H. H. Edrington, W. J. Smith, W. Scott Elmore, T. J. Swango, G. B. ‘Farmer, H. H. Trusdell, George Field, W. W. Twyman, I. W. Forgy, J. M. West, J. F. Funk, J. T. Whitaker, Emery Graham, Samuel Williams, L. P. V. Hendrick, W. J. Wood, J. M. Hines, J. S. Woolfolk, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Young, Bennett H. Holloway, J. W. ‘ Mr. President Clay. NAYS—IG. Harris, Geo. C. Applegate, Leslie T. Hines, Thomas H. Askew, J. F. Jacobs, R. P. Ayres, W. W. Lassing, L. W. Buckner, S. B. O’Hara, R. H. Forrester. J. G. Parsons, Rob’t T. Glenn, Dudley A. Phelps, John L. Hanks, Thos. H. Rodes, Robert ABSENT-16. Allen, C. T. Kennedy, Hanson Allen, M. K. Knott, J. Proctor Blackwell, Joseph Montgomery, J. F. Brown, J. S. Phelps, Zack English, Sam. E. Sachs, Morris A. Goebel, William Spalding, I. A. Hopkins, F. A. Straus, F. P. James, A. D. Washington, George So the amendment was adopted. ' The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion is exhausted. Report the next amend- ment. ~ The READING CLERK. The next amendment to section 24 is that proposed by the Delegate from Todd, which reads as follows: Amend section 24, line 2, as follows: Strike out the words “Secretary of State,” and after the word “Election,” in line 6, of section 24, add the following: “The Gov- ernor shall nominate and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall ap- point a Secretary of State, who shall be vcommissioned during the term for which the Governor was elected, if he shall so long behave himself well.” . Mr. PETRIE. It will be seen that the object of that amendment relates exclu- sively to the mode of appointing the Secre- tary of State. Section 24, as reported by the Committee, provides for the election of that ofi‘icer for a term of four years, to- gether with the Register of the Land Office and the Attorney General and the Auditor of Public Accounts. My amendment simply strikes out that part of it which re- lates to the Secretary of State, and adds the section of the present Constitution providing for the appointment of that oifi- cer by the Governor of the State, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and upon that I desire to say only a very few words. This is the first time that any effort has been made to make that office elective. Under the present Constitution he has been appointed by the Governor, 18 EXECUTIVE DEPA RTMEN T. Wednesday,] PETRIE and I have heard no complaint about that. I have heard of no one who was dissatisfied with the mode of selecting that officer. In 1849 there was quite a revolution in the manner of appointing officers in this State. Before that, many of these ofiicers were appointed, but under the present (‘on- stitution, the people were allowed to select nearly all of these officers, but were not permitted to select the Secretary of State for some reason which to the Conven- tion of 1849 seemed to be good. As stated, I have heard no dissatisfaction about it; and I have not seen or heard any reason why we should change the Constitution in reference to the selection of that ofiicer. We elect nearly everybody, and the people are satisfied, and there are some reasons why this officer should not be chosen by the people at large, and by a popular vote. The office is an important one, to be sure, to the people and the State, but his relations to the Chief Executive of the State are such that it does seem to me require that he should have the right him- self to select that oflicer He may not oc- cupy the relation of Private Secretary, and I believe does not, but he is in constant as- sociation with the Governor, and in some sense he is'a member of his political family. It would be very unpleasant to the Gov- ernor, it seems to me, if it should happen in the course of time that the people should select some man to act as his Secretary, who has to be in his office, who handles his papers, puts the seal upon such documents as it is required to be on, to have a man who would be unfriendly towards him, or a man whose relations with the Governor were not of a cordial and family-like terms. Such a thing might happen, and it would be exceedingly unpleasant, and it seems to me that inasmuch as we elect nearly all the officers of the State, it would be appropriate to leave the Governor to select the person who is to be associated with him in the business of his ofiice. I have not heard of any anxiety upon the BECKHAM. [N ovember l9 . part of the people to select him, or the Tip- staff to the Court of Appeals, or any other officer beyond those whom they already have the right to select. Mr. BECKHAM. I would like to call the attention of the Delegate from Todd to one difference between the amendment of- fered by him and the one I offered, There is not a very material difference, but I would like to call his attention to it, and get his opinion on the matter. The report of the Committee at the close of the section says : “ And may appoint his Clerk.” I do not understand that your amendment would strike that out. Mr. PETIRE. No, sir. Mr. BECKHAM. My amendment is to strike out so much of the section as re- lates to the ofi‘ice of Secretary of State, and to insert in lieu thereof section 21 of the present Constitution. The only difference between the amendment of the Delegate from Todd and the amendment offered by myself in effect is that his would leave the appointment of a clerk by the Secretary of State, and mine would leave him without that power, and leave the Constitution as it now is in that regard. In other words, his amendment would create another office; mine would leave that office uncreated, or have up such officer. I desire to say, while I am upon the floor, that I most heartily concur with the Delegate from Todd in the reasons given for the selection of this of- ficer as he is now selected, by the Governor. The Secretary of State, in my judgment, is’ something more than a clerk to the Gov- ernor. He is the Governor’s confidential adviser. He is the man of all others upon whom the Governor can rely for sugges- tion and advice, and in whom he can re- pose confidence. He is closer to the Gov- ernor than any other oflicer in the Execu- tive Department of the Government. I , am most decidedly of opinion that his se- lection ought to be left to the Governor, and I think that the amendment I have offered is preferable to that of the Delegate EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 19 Wednesday,] MCDERMOTT—DEHAVEN—JONSON. [November 19 , from Todd only in the difference I sug- gested, that it does not create the office of Clerk to the Secretary of State. Mr. PETRIE. I accept that amend- ment in lieu of mine, which I withdraw. The amendment of the Delegate from Shelby is proper. Mr. McDERMOTT. I have an amend- ment at the Clerk’s desk that embraces both of the amendments. Mr. MCHENRY. I ask for the reading of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Louisville. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent the Chair will consider all amendments on this subject as before the Convention. Re- port the amendment of the Delegate from Fifth District of Louisville. The Reading Clerk read the same, as follows: Amend section 24 by striking out the words “ Secretary of State,” in the second line, and all the words after the word “elec- tion,” in the sixth line, and insert at the end of the report these words: “ The Gov- ernor shall nominate and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate appoint aSecretary of State, who shall be com- missioned during the term for which the Governor was elected,if he shall so long behave himself well. He shall keep a fair register and attest all the ofiicial acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto before either House of the General Assembly, and shall perform such other duties as may be re- quired of him by law. He may appoint his clerk.” Mr. DEHAVEN. I do not propose to take any part in the discussion upon this proposed amendment. There was a good deal of difference in the Committee upon the propriety of making the Secretary of State elective. Amajority of the Com- mittee, however, instructed us to report it in that way, and we have done so I de- sire merely to suggest that the Delegate from Woodford shall have a right to close the discussion, as that was his measure in- stead of mine. I suppose there will be no objection to that. Mr. JONSON. I would like to hear read sections 18, 19 and 20 of this report, before I am prepared to vote upon this question. If I am not mistaken, there has been some change from what were the duties of the Secretary under the old Con- stitution in prescribing the duties of the Secretary under this Constitution. The Clerk read sections 18, 19 and 20 as amended. Mr. JONSON. I had the impression that some such provision as that had been incorporated into the report. and that it had been adopted as a part of the Constitu- tion by this Convention. I see a very seri- ous objection to allowing the Governor, or the Governor by, and with the advice and consent of the State of Kentucky, to nom- inate and appoint any man who, under any possible state of case, might become the Governor of the State of Kentucky. If that amendment had not been made conferring that possible power upon the Secretary of State, I would very heartily have supported the amendment offered by the Delegate from Todd; but with that amendment in. and this possible power lodged in the hands of the Secretary of State, I am opposed to his elec- tion in any other way than in the same way that the Governor is elected. It may be said that this same objection would obtain as against the President pro tem- pore of the Senate elected by the Senate. That is true; but we are not discussing that point, as I understand, now; and while it is possible that under certain conditions that oflicer might be entitled to administer the Government as Governor for a short time, yet I am opposed to putting it in the hands of anybody, except the voters of Kentucky, to elect two men at the same meeting of the Senate who might possibly exercise that same power. I believe that it is a dangerous power, or possibly might be a dangerous power, and insisting upon the right to elect Governor by the people so far as that right can be preserved to us 2O EXEC UTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] BECKHAM—MACKOY. [November 19 , in the election of any officer who, by possi- bility, may ever administer the Govern- ment, I shall oppose the amendment. Mr. BECKHAM. I ask leave to submit this amendment, and ask the Clerk to re- port it. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the substitute will be reported for informa- tion. The Reading Clerk read the same as fol- lows: The Governor shall nominate. and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint a Secretary of State who shall be commissioned, during the term for which the Governor was elected, if he shall so long behave himself well. He shall keep a fair registry and attest all the ofiicial acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto before either House of the General Assem- bly, and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law. Mr. MACKOY. I desire merely to call the attention of the Convention before a vote is taken on the pending amendment to the fact that there are amendments pending to the section under consideration affecting three oflices : those of Secretary of State, of Treasurer and of Attorney Gen- eral, and each amendment provides that each one of these oflices shall be made ap- pointive rather than elective. Under the Constitution as it now is the only ofiice that is appointive is that of Secretary of State, and there are many good reasons, I think, why if that question alone were presented to the Convention, that office should continue to be appointive as it has been through so many years. But there are other considerations than that applying to the other oflices which we must consider now. If we make all of these ofiices ap- pointive, it is possible that there may be objection to the Constitution outside of this Convention ; that when the question is sub- mitted to the people, it may be said: “ You have made too many ofiices appointive,” and it may be ground of objection to the Consti- tution. It is important, therefore, to con- sider which one of those offices should be made appointive if we are going to make any change, and it has seemed to me that of the three ofiices, it is much more impor- tant that the Treasurer should be made an appointive ofiice than either that of the Secretary of State or the Attorney-General. We propose to make the Treasurer ineligi- ble. He can therefore hold his oflice only for the term of four years. In addition to that, the ofiice is not a lucrative one. The salary is not as large as any good business man can obtain by attention to his busi- ness; and the holding of the ofiice has this disadvantage: That if any one accepts it, it is at the risk of getting employment at the close of the term; so that it seems to me that it will be diflicult to secure a good person for that position if we make the ofiice elective. There is this further to be said, that the person who should fill that ofiice should be abusiness man. He should have the qualifications of a cashier of a bank, the integrity and the ability; and if any person should not belong to a political class, it should be the Treasurer of State, be- cause his duties are purely of a business character. They concern simply the safe keeping and the payment of funds belonging to the State of Kentucky and it can not be expected, when you make that office inel- igible, when there is attached to it a salary that is not remunerative, when you take into consideration that he can hold the oifice only four years, it is not reasonable to suppose that a man who is fitted to dis- charge the duties of the ofiice will canvass the State for that position. The result will be that some person will be nominated from the political classes, who ought not to have it; who would be unfitted most likely to discharge the duties of the ofiice; and there might be repeated in this State those things that have happened before. If we lodge that power with the Governor, as contem- plated by the amendment introduced by the Delegate from Ohio county, we throw the responsibility upon the Governor, and in EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 21 Wednesday,] M CDERMOTT—BIRKHEAD. [November 19 . addition to that, under the amendment, we vest him with the power of removing the Treasurer at will; so that if he dis- covers that he is guilty of any misuse of the public funds, that he is using them for speculative purposes, or for his private purposes, or is making any profit out of them in any way, except for the State, it will be wholly in the power of the Governor to remove him. Making the changes that we do in this article, therefore, and requiring that the Treasurer shall not be eligible again, because we think it contrary to wise "policy that he should, it does seem to me that if we are going to make simply one oflice appointive it should be that of Treas- urer, rather than that of either Secretary of State or Attorney General. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Is the question pending before the Convention as to the appointment or election of the three dif- ferent oflicers referred to‘? The PRESIDENT. The amendment reported simply refers to the Secretary of State. As yet no amendment has been read that referred to the other offices. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I certainly am op- posed to this appointive system. I can see no reason why we should take this out of the hands of the people. any other, and I am more than anxious to enter my protest against any such Consti- tutional provision. As to the lodging of all this power in the Chief Executive, it occurs to me that we might make as great a mistake in selecting our Executive as in selecting any other oflicer; and I regard it as a very dangerous power. I think the people of the State are fully competent and qualified to select every State oflicer, and I do not want to abridge the rights and privileges of the people. I want them to reserve and retain that right to select and elect every person that fills an ofiicial posi- tion in the State. As for it being a political office, I can ‘see no reason why we should favor it upon that ground. The I think they are t . just as competent to select that ofiicer as Executive might be influenced for the same reason. He might have personal and political friends and favorites to whom he would give these positions; and I am ex- ceedingly anxious that this Convention shall reject each and every proposition looking in that direction and leave it in the hands of the sovereign people of the State, whom they will have to serve them in these different capacities and posi- tions. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I had hoped that some of the gentlemen who, for nearly two months, have been so eloquently ‘and vig- orously defending the old Constitution would rise in their majestic wrath and hurl all sorts of anathemas at the iconoclasts who are now seeking to change it; but as only two gentlemen have said a word in favor of the old section of the Constitution which provides for the appointment of a Secre- tary of State, I wish, before the debate is closed, to say a few words. I am in nearly the same attitude as the gentleman from Covington. _ I have offered an amendment which requires that the Attorney-General be appointed; but as I am not asking for personal favors or seeking personal prestige—as I simply speak the opinions I have for the good of the State-PI shall not hesitate to give my opinion plainly and firmly in favor of the 21st section of the old Constitution, merely because I may thus endanger my own amendment. If the report of the Committee be adopted, your Secretary of State really ceases to be a useful officer, and becomes a mere Clerk, and you do not need him. Why should you have the people go through the form and expense of electing a man who, under the Committee’s report, is simply to be a petty clerical ofiicer—a mere underling— who is to keep a register and preserve pa— pers? The Legislature can employ a man at $50 a month to do that work as well as this Secretary of State would do it whom you are going to elect with great ceremony. The old Constitution provided for a Secre- 22 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] MCDERMOTT. [November 19. tary of State, to give the Governor enable him to protect the State in time‘? a confidential adviser—a friend who If you take from His Excellency this in- could help the Governor in the dis- dispensable help, I Venture the assertion charge of his great and delicate duties. If you take away from the Executive this confidential adviser and substitute an untrusted stranger, do not have any Secre- tary of State at all ; simply employ a Clerk to keep those books. You must remember that your Governor is not merely an Exec- utive ofiicer. He is in part a Legislative ofiicer. Your Legislature passes a bill and it goes to him and he says, “ I veto it; it shall not be a law, unless you pass it over my veto.” He is thus a part of the Legis- lative Department of your Government, and when you make him that you should give him the assistance of a man on whose judgment perfect reliance may be placed, Whose friendship is beyond question, and who can be of some assistance in the very troublesome questions that come before the Governor when acting in his Legislative capacity. A great many mistakes of Con- stitution makers and law-makers are due to the fact that they do not truly see the dif- ference between the Governor’s Legislative duties and his Executive duties. I say, therefore, let some of these champions of the old Constitution that has been so ably lauded hitherto defend the Governor in this respect for the benefit of the Legislature itself. Even with the assistance of the Secretary of State, has the Governor not been overburdened with work? Has not the Governor vetoed bill after bill, and been sustained by the Legislature, because he was right '2 Are you going to take away that counselor who, in troublesome times when the Legislature is in session, may come to the overburdened Govcrnor’s help and may read his bills, and find information and authorities for his use, and may confidentially and frankly advise him not only as the Chief Executive of the State but also as a friend, and warn him of the dangers that the Legislature has put before him, and that bill after bill that ought not to be- come a law will go through the General Assembly, because the Governor, in his hurry and under the burdens that you have put upon his back, cannot discharge the duties that you require of him. I hope, therefore, that you will preserve the office as it ought to be preserved, in all its dig- nity and usefulness; that you will not turn the time-honored Secretary of State into a mere clerk. If you wish to make him a Clerk, let the Legislature hire him at $50 a month. What is the Secretary of State under the report of this Committee‘? “ He shall keep a fair register of and attest all the official acts of the Governor. and shall, when required, lay the same and all pa- pers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto before either House of the General Assem- bly.” Cannot any ordinary clerk do that? Why have the whole people of the Com- monwealth of Kentucky assemble together to choose a man simply to keep a register and bring papers into this House? As the Secretary was under the old Constitution— as our ancestors made him—he was an im- portant and helpful assistant to the Gov- ernor; as you would make him, he would not be worth any thing. I know that some gentlemen want the people to elect every— body. They are much more SOliCltOU> about the people’s this re- spect than the people are themselves. I have not seen in a single newspaper. nor have I heard it anywhere on the stump. that the people were demanding that they should be allowed to elect this officer. They are not troubled about it. This ofiice hitherto has been well conducted, and they are not asking for the privilege of electing one more oflicer. If they are, let them elect every oflicer in the government, Give hem the splendid privilege of electing your Sergeant-at-Arms, and of electing the rights in EXECUTIVE DEPARTMEN 'l‘. 23 Wednesday,] PETTIT—MCDERMOTT—J ONS'ON. [November 19 . *Governor’s Private Secretary and all the Auditor’s Clerks. I say the people are reasonable about such matters, and they do not wish to be flattered or wheedled; they do not wish to be told that it is for their in- terest alone that these officers are given to them for selection. I speak to-day with reluctance, because I know as well as anybody knows, that a man who talks to you too often or without ~necessity lessens that influence which he would like to have; but I shall not for the :sake of my private prestige be silent when it seems to me we are in danger of making a mistake in so important a matter. Mr. PETTIT. I would like to ask the gentleman a question, and that is this: If the people elect the Secretary of State, wherein does it detract from the dignity of that office or wherein does it change his ‘duties in any particular from what he has hitherto been. the adviser of the _ Gov- ernor. Mr. McDERMOTT. I have just stated ‘that the people elect the members of the Legislature. The members of the House and Senate pass many bills at each session. .Some of these bills are very bad as we know to our sorrow; but all alike are pre- sented to the Governor for his considera- tion. When that heavy burden is put upon him-often a burden more than any -one man can bear—he ought to have near him some confidential adviser—a friend who can help him in the investigations of the questions presented to him, and a man upon whom he can implicitly rely. If the Secretary of State be elected, by one politi- cal party, for instance, and the Governor be of a: different political party, do you think the Governor could go to him and .ask for confidential. advice with any feeling of safety? Mr. PETTIT. I will state to the gen- tleman in many instances it has been very beneficial to the State that that has been :the case—in Indiana, I know, for instance. Mr. McDERMOTT. It may be well in some States that the Chief Executive has to go to an adviser who is politically and per- sonally hostile; but I do not believe that. such a system could work well in this State, or in any well organized Government. I would say further that the Governor’s du- ties in such places may be quite different from those we impose on our Chief. If you wish to make the Secretary a clerk, the manner of his selection does not make any difference; and I should be willing to pay him $50 a month for a little writing and for carrying papers to the Legislature. Mr. JONSON. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. [Reading]: Section 21 of the present Constitution: The Governor shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint a Secretary of State, who shall be commissioned during the term for which the Governor was elected, if he shall so long behave himself well. He shall keep a fair register and attest all the oflicial acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same, and all papers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto, before either House of the General Assembly, and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law. You will remember that I asked the Clerk to read certain sections where the duties of the Secretary had been extended, so that under some possible contingencies he might become Governor of the State of Kentucky; but you come here and say that he is dwarfed by this present Constitu- tion into a mere Clerk. I fail to see the difference in this section and the section that you are commenting upon; and I do see a material increase in his power, and I cannot understand why it is that his im- portance is magnified by this report; and I would like to have information on that subject? Mr. McDERMOTT. The gentleman, it seems to me, is getting the cart before the horse. If that preceding section is im- proper and bad, go back and change it. I did not vote for it, and I am willing to vote to strike outthe words “ Secretary of State ” 24 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ir—v Wednesday,] J oases—M cD ERMOTT—MACKOY. [November 19 .. in the preceding section, and to insert in their place “Attorney—General.” Mr. JONSON. Neither did I vote for it; but it has been done Mr. MCDERMOTT. Then you ought to address fresh arguments to this Conven- tion on that subject, and you may persuade the members to correct the first error. We should not make another. Two mistakes do not make a thing right. I will help you, when the time comes, to have that part of the Constitution changed; but do not destroy the value of an impor‘tant oflicer, essential for the protection of the Govern- or, merely to make a new chance for office- seekers to pester and cajole the people. Besides that contingency of which you speak is too remote. The inability of the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor to act has never come to pass in this country, so far as I know, and for a hundred years more may not happen. If the duties of the Secretary of State at the present time are not wisely prescribed, let us change them, and let the Legislature still further alter the law, so as to make the ofiice of the highest value. Mr. MACKOY. Is it not a fact that the law now providing for the succession to the Presidency of the United States runs through the Cabinet oflicers in the order of their seniority, and if they are not appoint- ed by the President, and if we do not in making this amendment, pursue the same course provided by law in reference to the succession to the Presidency‘? Mr. McDERMOTT. That is true; and the country is not going to destruction be- cause the President appoints his Cabinet ofiicers. Whenever our orators make Fourth of July orations; whenever they make great speeches on the stump, they praise to the skies the Constitution of the United :States, and our great patriotic forefathers who established it. There is rarely a suggestion of a needed change in that great document; we all look up to it; we regard it. as Mr. Gladstone has said, as the greatest in- strument that was ever, at one time, devised by the brain of man; and yet, whenever we come to make a Constitution for a par- ticular State, we take great pride in violat- ing every principle it embodies, and in degrading every wise regulation that it contains. The President of the United States appoints his Secretary. Who rises and asks that that be changed‘? We know that it has worked no hardship to our com— mon country, and what is good for the United States is good for Kentucky. As the gentleman who preceded me has said, it is not probable that we shall suffer any great disaster from continuing that provis- ion in the Federal law, and no great disas- ter will befall us in Kentucky if we let the Governor appoint his Secretary. The peo- ple are no more demanding that this office be made elective than they are demanding that the Secretary of State of the United States be made elective; and for the same reason. The people are not dull. They know very well that to elect an ofiicer is sometimesa very good way to spoil him. The Governor, as you know, often stands as the defender of the people against the en- croachments of the Legislature, against its mistakes and inattention—and he ought to be protected and upheld in his effort to dis- charge the duties of his oflice. Give him every possible bulwark against deception and chicanery. Do not ask him to be more than human. Let him have constantly at his side a wise counselor and a trusted friend. His Secretary of State should be no ordinary politician and should perform no petty, clerical duties, but should always have the ability, the time and the will to counsel and aid the Chief Executive in all his toil and trouble. The people choose the Governor. Do not weaken or degrade their representative Mr. BURNAM. Joint Committee on the Executive Branch when this matter was up the provision, as reported, was advocated with very great In the session of the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25 Wednesday,] BURNAM. . [N ovember 19 , ability by the Delegate from the county of Woodford. I did not then concur with him and voted with the Chairman (Mr. De- Haven) against this being reported to the House. In a number of the States of the Union, the office of Secretary is an elective one by the people; in others it is an appointive office by the Governor. In still other States of the Union it is an office which is elected by joint ballot of the two Houses of the State Legislature. I am not prepared to say that the people would not elect as good an officer as the Governor would ap- point. I am not prepared to say that on a vote by the joint ballot of the two Houses of the Legislature, they would not elect as good an ofiicer as the Governor would appoint; but I state now, as I did the other day in the discussion of another question, that I think this great ofiice of Governor of the State of Kentucky ought not to to be reduced in its dignity and its responsibility ; that there ought to be some- thing about it, in addition to commissioning Notaries Public and ordinary oflicers, by which it can bemade one worthy of the ambition of the best men in the Common- ' wealth of Kentucky, and now when we come to this matter of saying who shall sit with him in the ofiice, where all the mat- ters that come before the Legislature of Kentucky, and which may be made in va- cation, are made the subject of his consideration; when that shall happen, whether he shall not have the power in looking over this broad Commonwealth, to say who shall come and sit with him in this relation, I think that this provision of the old Constitution of 1849 is a wise one. I think it ought to be adhered to. It was stated in that Committee, and I will state it here, in order that the gentle- man from Woodford may amplify and illustrate it, if he is so disposed in his ar- gument, that it was in many respects giving the Governor two votes to various-matters. The Secretary of State probably is one of those men who constitute the Board of Commissioners of the Sinking Fund; he has relations with the Board of Commis- sioners of the Penitentiary, and other matters in connection with the oflice. If you give the‘ Governor the power to ap- point such an ofiicer, you give him two votes in those matters affecting the gen- eral welfare of the State, when he ought to have but one; but I suppose that the Secretary of State, even if he is by law a member of those Boards, will not by reason of his having been appointed by the Governor, be less manly, less independent in the discharge of his duties than if he was elected by the people. I do not hesi- tate to say here another thing: I can see and feel that far more hope of good in the Commonwealth of Kentucky is ac- complished in the long term of years that is to rollover the Commonwealth by the election at the polls of Executive officers than any other class. If it were an original proposition I should stand with the fathers, and say that the Judges ought to be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and not elected by the people; not that the people are not as well qualified as the Governor to select a Judge, but:on ‘account of the disastrous in~ fluence which the mode of his election has upon the Judge himself; but we cannot go back to that. Power once having been lodged in the people never goes back to that condition in which we were before 1849. Therefore, I trust, when that J udi- ciary Committee shall report, we will make- that system a more perfect one, by having these ofiicers elected for a much longer term, and then be made ineligible to re- election. Now let me get back to it: of all these various forms by which this ofl‘icer can be appointed or elected, either by the people, joint ballot of the two Houses of the Legislature, or by appointment of the Executive, I think whichever may be adopted, no very great fear of injury need 26 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ) Wednesday] B LACKBURN. [November 19 _ result; but I think, in order that this office of Governor may be one which the people intended he should be, he should not be stripped of all power whatever, and this is a very small minimum of what ought to be allowed. Mr. BLACKBURN. I would have much preferred if the Chairman of the Committee making this report had spoken to this amendment ably as he has to other amendments that were objected to before this Convention; but since he has assigned me the duty to express to this Convention the reasons which prompted us in making this change, I will do so in such manner as I can. I am not surprised that some Delegates should have mistaken the duties of the oflice of Secretary of State and his official relations to the Governor. I must be per- mitted to express some surprise at the posi- tion taken by the Delegate from the Fifth District of Louisville, when he undertakes to say to this Convention that if the report of the'Committee should be adopted, the office of Secretary of State is degraded to that of a simple Clerk, only entitled, per- haps, to a compensation of $50 per month. to wait, as I understand him, upon the Legislature in carrying papers back and forth. I must say that I was surprised at that sort of information with relation to the duties of Secretary of State. Let me say to him that the report of this Commit- tee does not affect or change the duty of the Secretary of State at all; that he does under the law, if the report of this Com- mittee should be adopted, exactly what he does under the present Constitution of this State. The question is, and we had as well state it frankly and boldly, whether he should be appointed by the Governor of the State or whether he should be elected by the qualified voters. That is the ques- tion without any dodging or prevarication. What are the duties of the Secretary of State? The Secretary of State shall keep a fair register of and attest all of the official acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto before either House of the General Assembly, and shall perform such other duties as may be re- quired of him by law; and may appoint his clerk. Those are exactly the words of the pres- ent Constitution, except this provision “He shall appoint his clerk.” Is there any thing in that Constitution which says he is to be the advisor of the Governor, as the gentleman from the Fifth District of Louisville would indicate‘? Will the adop- tion of this report of the Committee de- prive the Governor of that most invalua- ble aid rendered him under the present Constitution according to his construction of it by the Secretary of State? Clearly not. If he be true and correct in his in- formation, it is the strongest argument that I have heard—stronger than any I can offer to this Covention—why he should not be appointed by the Executive. If the duty of the Secretary of State is to advise with the Executive, if the Governor is to consult with his Secretary of State, to know whether he shall do an official act, I submit it to every fair-minded man in this Con- vention if he should be appointed by the Governor? The gentleman proves too much. I will tell you what the Sec- of State does. He keeps his own records of the oflicial acts of the Governor, and attests the same. Let me say right here, that the Journal kept by the Secretary of State is not the Governor’s Journal ; it is the Journal of the Secretary of State. It is the Secretary of State’s Journal of the oflicial acts of the Execu- tive. Let me remove a misapprehension that seems to have prevailed in the minds of some with reference to the character and custody of the papers that are passed to the Governor. When petitions,remonstrances, letters or other evidences or vouchers come to the Executive ofiice they are directed, of course, to the Governor of the State. They are his then. But after he has considered retary EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 27 Wednesday,] BLACKBURN. [November 19 . those papers, and has put upon them his of- ficial act, eithera pardon granted, remission made or rejected, and they pass to the Sec- retary of State with that ofl'icial indorse- ment, and they pass absolutely into the custody of the Secretary of State, and the Governor has no control of them whatever; and there is a reason for it. As this Con- stitution requires the Secretary of State to keep a fair correct record of the official acts, it is but proper and right that he should have the evidences upon which that oflicial act is based in order to defend his act in keeping his Journal. That you remember was evidenced in a case when Mr. J efferson was President of the United States, and Mr. Madison, I believe, was his Secretary of State. Mr. Jefferson granted a pardon. It was attested by the Secretary of State. Afterwards, the President, for some reason, concluded that he would change and revoke that pardon, and he undertook to do it. The Secretary of State said, “No, sir, that paper is in my hands, signed 'by you and attested by me as Secretary of State.” A writ of quo wtwmnto was gotten out by the beneficiary of the pardon. But was that writ served upon the President of the country? No. It was served upon Mr. Madison, and the Courts determined that it was an accom- plished act, when the pardon had been signed by the President and attested by the Secretary of State, it was accomplished. and the beneficiary under the pardon was en- titled to it and did receive the pardon. There is no question about that. One other matter while we are on that subject. They say that the relations between the Governor and the Secretary of State, if he should be elected by the people, might become very embarrassing and strained. Let me state right here that the only case that has ever been reported to us, or we have ever heard of, grew out of this very appointive system; that was when Mr. Owsley was Governor of the State and Mr. Hardln his Secretary of State. You are all familiar with that long controversy. Mr. Owsley became dissatis- fied with Mr. Hardin as Secretary of State, because he said he did not attend his ofiice regularly, and undertook to remove him. What was the decision of the Court in that case‘? That having been appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate, he had passed from the control of the Gover- nor entirely, and could not be removed by him. That 1 say is the only trouble that ever grew up between the Secretary of State and the Governor that I have any a knowledge of; and it was under this very appointive system the public duties of the Executive ofiice were interfered with; their relations became strained, un- " friendly, and, in fact, hostile; they were never friends afterwards, because the Gov- ernor undertook to remove the Secretary of State. The Courts, as I say, held that he had no such power; that he had passed from the control of the Governor alto— gether, when he had been appointed by‘ him and the appointment confirmed by the Senate. I want to say here, and I will be borne out by any one who will study the question at all, that the only duty of the Secretary of State, as required under the Constitution, or by any Statute law, is to keep this fair record of his official acts, and there his duty ceases entirely: As to the Governor advising with him, about what he has to do, of vcourse he may do so; he may advise with the Attorney-General, with the Treasurer, with any attorney in the city of Frankfort, with any citizen in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. He is not limited in that respect. but there is nothing in this Constitution, or in any law that requires him to consult with the Secre- tary of State, or that requires the Secretary of State to give the Governor any informa- tion about any thing at all What are the duties of the Secretary of State? The Secretary of State, with the assent -of the Governor, may appoint an Assistant Secretary, etc. The seal of this Commonwealth shall be 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Q Wednesday,] k provided and kept by the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State must reside at the seat of government, and shall have such powers and discharge such duties as may be required by law. He shall have the custody of the books, records, deeds, maps and papers belonging to his office, or that may be deposited there- in, and shall arrange and preserve the same. Copies of records and papers in his oifice, certified by him, shall in all cases, be evi- dence equally with the originals. The Secretary of State, as often as neces- sary, may purchase for the use of the Com- mon wealth such books, etc. When a Judge is removed by impeach- mentor address from ofiice. the Secretary of State shall notify the clerk of the Court of which he was Judge of such removal, which notice shall be filed by the clerk in his ofiice The order of removal must also be recorded in the Secretary’s oifice. He shall monthly receive from the Audi- tor of Public Accounts a report of the in- terest paid on any bond issued by the State, to whom and when paid, and record the same in a well-bound book, and carefully file and preserve the reports. And it shall be his duty to report to each General As— sembly within the first two weeks of its session, the amount of each monthly pay- ment so returned. I want to say right here, as it was al- luded to by the Delegate from Madison, that the Secretary of State is appointed by the Governor in only three States of the Union, Maryland, Kentucky and Texas. In four States he is elected by the Legisla- ture; in all the others he is elected by the people at large, as other State officers. The Auditor and Treasurer shall, once in each month. make a settlement of the money at the Treasury of every description under appropriate heads, and file the same with the Secretary of State. whose duty it shall be to report them to the General As- sembly within the first ten days of each regular session. The Governor, Attorney-General, Audi- tor, Treasurer and Secretary of State, or any three of them, shall be a Board with like powers as those named in the last sec- tion for determining the contested election BLACKBURN. [November 19 . of any oflicer, other than the Goveanor or Lieutenant-Governor, elective by- the voters of the whole State, or of a Judge or Clerk of the Court of Appeals. Circuit Judge, Judge of a Common Pleas. Criminal and Chancery, or Criminal or Equity Court. Chancellor of the Louisville Chancery Court, or Commonwealth’s Attorney. A majority of the board shall be neces- sary to a decision, which shall be in writ- ing, and signed in duplicate by the mem- bers concurring therein, one copy to be re- tained in the Secretary’s office, and the 0th» er delivered to the successful party, or sent to him by mail. There he is a member of the Board of Election. Three shall be a quorum to transact business and determine the rights of any candidates to ofiices in the Com- monwealth of Kentucky, except Governor and Lieutenant-Governor. Then under that law the Governor, and as it stands now, the Secretary of State appointed by him, are a majority of the Board of three to determine the rights in contested elec’ tion cases of any citizen in this Common- wealth for any ofiice except that of Gov- ernor and Lieutenant-Governor. The Del- egate from Madison very truly says it is to be presumed that any one appointed by the Governor as Secretary of State would be an honorable man. Let me suggest and ask if he does not think the Secretary of State would appreciate the kindness of the Governor in his appointment as much as the Judges do who are elected by the peo- ple‘? Just the same. The Secretary of State is a member of the State Board of Education, which com- prises the Superintendent of Public Educa- tion, the Attorney-General, Secretary of State, and one practical teacher. He is also a member of the Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners. They are five—the Governor, the Secretary of State, the Audi- tor, Treasurer and Attorney-General. That Board has charge of all fiscal affairs of the State. They manage and control the debt of the State, and arrange for the payment of that debt A majority is a quorum to transact business, the Governor. Secretary EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 29 Wednesday,] BLACKBURN. [November 19 , of State and one other may be a majority ‘of that Board for the transaction of busi- ness. Iregret very much that whenevera change 'is made in the Constitution, itis necessary for us to declare that we mean no disrespect to the one affected by it. I cannot think there is a member of this Convention who would intentionally treat with disrespect any ofli- -cer in the transaction of the business here. Therefore, I hope it will not be necessary for me to declare that such is not my in- tention. The only question is whether it is right or proper that this should be done. This is the only Constitutional office not elected by the people. The Treasurer, the Auditor, the Attorney-General, Superin- tendent of Public Instruction are all elected by the pebple. Why should the Secretary of State be appointed when, as I said be- fore, it is done in only three States in the Union, and in four only is he chosen by _ joint vote of the House and Senate. This report creates no additional expense. It only takes one column in the poll-book and thesame Commissioners to certify to the result of the election. The Secretary of State is a‘ member of ‘the prison system. The same objection ap- plies in all of‘ these cases. Instead of de- tracting from the dignity and prerogative of the oflice, I think that the Secretary of State who certifies to the Governor’s acts had much better be chosen by the electors for the State-at-Large, for if an ofiicial act of the Executive is called into question, he does not appeal to one appointed by him to ‘copy a transcript of his official act, but ap- peals to an oflicer chosen by the free elect- ors of the Commonwealth: Read your Journal to the public, to show the people of Kentucky as to whether this criticism on my action is right or wrong. It seems to me much better for the Governor to have that character of witness, a man not re- ceiving his ofl‘ice from him, but elected by the same vote which elected the Governor, and he stands as a witness for the people. and the Governor to state the facts as they are. I offered an amendment to this section, which I would like the Clerk to read for information. The amendment was read, and is as fol- 1ows: Amend by adding thereto, “and shall cover into the treasury any fees collected by him under the law.” Mr. BLACKBURN. My purposein of- fering that was this: I hope it will be ar- ranged if this report shall be adopted that the Legislature will then fix salary of the Secretary of State at something like a fair and reasonable amount. His salarv, as fixed by law, is fifteen hundred dollars, and he is required to live at the seat of Govern- ment. It seems to me that that provision is unfair to those residing at points distant from Frankfort. One living here and own- ing his home might do well to accept the office, but where one is elected from a point remote from Frankfort, that is not a fair salary for his services. I hope the Legislature will fix it at three thousand dollars or twenty-five hundred dollars. This amendment to the report of the Committee provides that he shall ap- point a Clerk. That is simply to take the place of what is denominated as the As- sistant Secretary of State. I do not think we need that oflice. The Secretary of State does need a clerk in the office to assist him in copying transcript. They are demanded by the people, and he has to perform the work. This Assistant Secre- tary of State receives eight hundred dollars a year and the following fees: “For issuing a commission and also all necessary forms to a Foreign Cominissioner of Deeds for Kentucky, five dollars; commission to N o- tary Public, two dollars; for each commis- sion or respite, two dollars; for each warrant of arrest, two dollars.” Until very recently those fees were charged by the As- sistant Secretary of State, and a like two dol- lars was collected by the Secretary of State 3O - EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] BLACKBURN. [November 19. and covered into the Treasury, but by act dated May 4th, 1888, section 4, chapter 97 of the General Statutes was amended by in- serting after the word “compensation” the words “to be charged by the Secretary of State and retained by him.” Never until May 4th, 1888, did the Secretary of State receive any fees or perquisites from this ofiice. His salary was fixed by law at fif- teen hundred dollars and that was all he got. I was going to ask, if the Convention will indulge me, while I mention one mat- ter where so much unjust criticism has been made on the conduct and management of oflices by those who could have known bet- ter if they had taken any trouble to inform themselves, that every time the Governor granted a pardon he put two dollars into the pocket of the Secretary of State. That is not true. The Secretary of State got no fees or perquisites, he got his salary and the Assistant Secretary got the fees. I do not know what those fees amounted to, but I think they amounted to five, or six or seven thousand dollars a year. I never collected those fees when I was in office. I had nothing to do with them. I think that amendment should be adopted for this reason, that we cut off this fee system and compel the Legislature to fix the sala- rv of the Secretary of State and the pay of the Clerk, so that the people of the State know exactly what the office is costing them. I may say I am opposed to the fee system where it is possible to get rid of it. Take, for instance, this Kuklux Act. There are two offenses denounced by that act, and a conviction under one clause is felony and another is a misdemeanor. Now, suppose an applicant comes to the Governor before conviction or indictment, but certainly be- fore conviction, and the question comes up, are those fees to be charged and collected if that party is pardoned. The party may be convicted of felony, and if so, there is no fees due, because there are no fees in felony cases; but if he is convicted of a misde- meanor, then the Assistant Secretary of State is entitled to his fees. is due to ourselves and the parties who may hold that office to strike down that whole fee system. What is the result of it‘? An applicant for pardon comes to the Govern- or, and presents a petition, and the Gov- ernor is satisfied that there is merit in the case, and the party should be pardoned, Now, I say it and he wants to interpose his pardoning power between the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky and that deserving applicant. He directs the Secretary of State to have the pardon made out, and it is done, and the act is attested by the Secretary of State; and here comes along the Assistant Secre- tary of State, and says: “What about my fees,” and the pardon is held in abeyance by one who claims a two dollar fee on it. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Did ydu ever know of a single instance where that was done? Mr. BLACKBURN. Ido not know. It is a matter about which I cannot say posi- tively; but I want to take away the bare possibility that it ever should be done. We say in the Constitution that where an injury is done to any person he shall have relief, and justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay. I believe, under this a great wrong has been done to the citizen in his property rights. I think whenever the Executive of the State says I will interpose the power of the Common- wealth reposed in me and release you that that should go as free as God’s air, and not be delayed under plea of obtaining a fee for the issuing of a pardon. Let the Sec- retary of State be given a good salary by the Legislature, let him be allowed a com- petent clerk, and I think we could get one for twelve or fourteen hundred dollars a year, and then give the Secrecary of State say three thousand dollars; that makes forty-two hundred dollars, and it will be quite asaving to the Commonwealth and the people of the State, it matters not whether the fees paid to these officers come out of the Treasury of the State or out of EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ; 31 Wednesday,] BLACKBURN—PETRIE—BUCKNEB. [November 19 , the pockets of the citizens. are to be collected let it be the duty of the Secretary of State to collect them and cover them into the Treasury, and then when he draws his salary he draws it on a warrant, and he feels and knows that he is entitled to it because it is allowed him under law and no question can be raised as to whether a public officer is charging or receiving fees which he is not entitled to. As I said be— fore the only change proposed here is to make the office elective instead of ap- pointive. Why is it that the people of Kentucky are not competent to elect a Secretary of State? They elect the Gov- ernor, they elect all the Constitutional ofilcers except this one, why cannot the people elect this oflicer, the Secretary of State? The Constitution and law defines his duties, the people can judge of his quali- fications; there is no question about that in my mind. For one I shall never give my vote in favor of robbing the people of the right of local self-government and making it what they want, a government of the people, by the people and for the people. I sincerely hope the right to elect their ofiieers will not be denied the voters of this Commonwealth. Mr. PETRIE. The amendment pro— posed by the Delegate from Shelby, like my own, embraces a provision of the present Constitution and strikes from the report of the Committee all that part which relates to the election of a Secretary of State and his duties. I think the amendment of the Delegate from Shelby covers all the ground, and I will withdraw my amend- ment and allow the vote to be taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Shelby. Mr. BUCKNER. It is not my purpose to speak on' this subject, nor would I do so_ now, but that I desire to invite the atten- tion of the Delegates before they vote to a practical point which may result from the adoption of the provision of the Commit- tee. The distinguished Delegate from If these fees ' Woodford proposes, as a means of expedit- ing public business and saving money to the Treasury, to get rid of the Assistant Secre- tary of State by substituting for that oflicer a Clerk. Now, I have had some experience; and the distinguished Delegate, I know, when I invite his attention to the fact, will agree with me that the presence of the Secretary of the State would be essential to carry into effect any Executive act what- ever. The absence of the Secretary of State on any occasion, whether for sickness, business or any other cause, would put an end, for the time being, until he returned, to all the Executive acts whatever. Not a commission could be issued; not arequisi- tion could be made for the surrender of a criminal by another State; not an order of the Executive to the Sherifi' to arrest the criminal. Every Executive act would be checked to await the return of the Secre- tary of State. Mr. BLACKBURN. The duties of the Assistant Secretary of State are regulated by statutory arrangements, the Clerk could be assigned such duties as necessary. Mr. BUCKNER. That is true. but the gentleman’s argument was to get rid of ap- pointing the Assistant Secretary of State and appointing a clerk. Then there is another thing. We should approach this matter like every other connected with State affairs as business men. \Ve should direct it as we would our private business or as any corporation or individual would conduct his private affairs. Mr. YOUNG. I would like to call the attention of the Delegate to the fact that the time for adjournment is very near. I therefore move that the session be ex- tended until he can complete his remarks. Mr. BUCKNER. I am nearly through now. Mr. JOHNSTON. I call for the yeas and nays on the motion to extend the session. Mr. 'YOUN G. I withdraw the mo- tion. 32 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] BUCKNER—BURNAM—BLACKBURN. [November 19 . Mr. BUCKNER. We should act as business men in this matter and not other- wise. What would be thought of a gentle- man who would conduct his business on this principle that the head of an institution should appoint under him a person over whom he would have no control whatever. If a business house conducts its business on that principle, that the head of the business had no control over the subordinate, the re- sult would be bankruptcy and ruin. When you come to consider the position of the Executive, as provided for in the report of the Committee, I ask what authority or what control he has under the report of the Committee over any official of the Govern- ment, though nominally they are under him, and through whom only can he suc- ceed in executing the duties of his office, If the Secretary of State choose to absent himself for six months, the Executive has no control over his movements, and if he ordered him back he could snap his fingers in his face and say, “I am not here by your authority; the same people elected me who elected you and I can stay away as long a3 I please.” We should, therefore, simply throw such guards around the duties of the Executive as to give him some authority. I will close, as I see the time has about ex- pired. The hour for taking the recess having ar- rived, the Convention adjourned. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention was called to order by Mr. President Clay. Mr. BURNAM. I move the previous question upon all amendments and substi- tutes in relation to the matter of Secretary of State. Mr. BLACKBURN. I hope the gen- tleman from Madison will withhold his motion for me to make a correction. In stating the matter in regard to J efi‘erson and Madison this morning, I said it was “pardons ” granted. It was in reality a “position ” given, and the President under- took to withhold the commission. Then it was a mandamus instead of a quo warranto, and the Court decided that the employes were entitled to their positions. The vote being taken on said motion, it was decided in the afiirmative. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Shelby was then read. Mr. BRONSTON. I call for the yeas and nays on that. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I second it. Mr. BECKHAM. I would like to have the Clerk read or let me state that my amendment is exactly the same as section 21 of the present Constitution. Mr. BURNAM. You substitute the word “requested” for the word “ required.” Mr. BECKHAM. No, mine says “re- quired.” That was read wrong. The result of the roll-call was announced as follows: YEAS—41. Amos, D. C. Kirwan, E. E. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. Mackoy, W. H. Beckner, W. M. McChord, Wm. C. Berkele, Wm. McDermott, E. J. Boles, S. H. McElroy, W. J. Bronston, C. J. M cHenry, H. D. Brummal, J. M. Miller, W. H. Buckner, S. B. Montgomery, J. F. Bullitt. W. G. Moore, Laban T. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Carroll, John D. Nunn, T. J. DeHaven, S. E. Petrie, H. G. Elmore, T. J. Pugh, Sam’l J. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Glenn, Dudley A. Swango, G. B. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, J. S. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway, J. W. Whitaker, Emery Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. Jacobs, R. P. RAYS—41. Auxier, A. J. Hogg, S. P. Ayres, W. W. Jonson, Jep. C. Bennett, B. F. Lassing, L. W. Birkhead, B. T. Lewis, W. W. Blackburn, James Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. May. John S. Brents, J. A. Miller, Will. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Chambers, G. D. O’Hara, R. H. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Parsons, Rob’t Pettit, Thos. S. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 33 Wednesday,] FUNK—PETTIT—MCHENRY. [November 19, Cox, H. Phelps’ John L_ vent the consideration of the matter here- Doris, W. F. Ramsey, W. R. after. Durbin, Charles Smith, H. H. Edrington, W. J. Smith, W. Scott Farmer, H. H. Trusdell, George Forrester, J. G. Twyman, I. W. Forgy, J. M. West, J. F. Funk, J. T. Williams, L. P. V. Graham, Samuel Wood, J. M. Hanks, Thos. H. ABSENT-18. Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Askew, J. F. Kennedy, Hanson Blackwell, Joseph Phelps, Zack Brown, J. S. Quicksall, J. E. English, Sam. E. Goebel, William Hendrick, W. J. Hopkins, F. A. The PRESIDENT. There being a tie the amendment is rejected. Report the next amendment. Mr. FUNK. I voted in the negative and I move a reconsideration of the vote just taken. Mr. PETTIT. I move to lay that mo- tion upon the table. Mr. FUNK. And upon that motion I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. MCHENRY. If it is in order, I will move to postpone the consideration of that until December 1st. It is a very im- portant matter, and we have had a tie vote. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate will recollect that the matter is not yet adopted by the Convention. The matter is still under consideration on amendment. Mr. BLACKBURN. I make the point that the Delegate from Louisville voted with the minority. Mr. FUNK. I voted “N 0.” Neither side had a majority. It was a tie vote. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman has a right to make the motion. Mr. BRONSTON. There is no rule to that effect, but I think it has been accepted by the Delegates that an amendment does not cut off the right to reconsider any matters which we have gone over: it will have no effect, and that motion would pre- Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Washington, George Mr. PETTIT. I desire to say to the - gentleman from Lexington that I have no disposition whatever to press that matter, and if the gentleman from the city of Louis- ville will withdraw his motion, I will with- draw mine. Mr. FUNK. I will not withdraw the motion. Mr. J ONSON. I will relieve the gen- tleman. I will not vote for this motion. I am not in favor of gag-law, here or any where else. I will have to vote no on this. Mr. MACKOY. Is not the effect of the motion to lay the whole matter on the table ‘2 The PRESIDENT. The Chair will give the status of the question. The Dele- gate -from Madison moved the previous question upon all the amendments and sub- stitutes referring to the Secretary of State, and when the Chair permitted the motion to reconsider, he was not recalling the fact that we were working under the effects of the previous question. The matter is still under the previous question. The previous question is not yet exhausted. Some other amendments have yet to be voted upon, so the motion to reconsider, at this stage, is not in order. The Secretary will read the next amendment. Mr. McDERMOTT. I ask leave to strike from my amendment the words, “He may appoint his Clerk.” I will state that this will make it the same as the old Con stitution. Mr. BLACKBURN. I make the point that this is exactly the same as the one we have just voted upon. The CHAIR. The Delegate from the Fifth Louisville District will state the dif- ference between them. Mr. McDERMOTT. It is not precisely the same. My motion may be divided into a motion to strike out and a motion to in- sert. 84 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] BLAcKBURN—McDERi/Io'FT—BRoNsToN. [November 19. Mr. BLACKBURN. We are under words “Secretary of State,”iin the second the previous question, and debate is out of order. Mr. M cDERMOTT. My amendment probably differs only in that part which moves to strike out certain words. The PRESIDENT. Does it strike-cit different words ‘? Mr. McDERMOTT. It does not. Mr. BLACKBURN. I think the gen- tleman from the Fifth Louisville District remarked “ with this change” when he took out the words about the Clerk, “this is substantially the old Constitution.” The PRESIDENT. The Chair decides the substitute is substantially the one voted on. Mr. McDERMOTT. be divided. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman, as a matter of right, can call for a division wherever a question is susceptible of divis- ion. If you insist on the first part, the Chair will rule out what is to be inserted. The first part of Mr. McDermott’s amendment was read. Mr. BLACKBURN. If it is under the operation of the previous question, one may alter or change the amendment pend- ing before the House. Mr. PRESIDENT. No, sir; but any gentleman has a right to call for a division of the question. Mr. BLACKBURN. If it is susceptible of division, is it not a substitute for section 24, just as the other was‘? The PRESIDENT. The question to strike out and insert is divisible. They may decide to strike omit and insert or not insert. Mr. BLACKBURN. Are the words to strike out in his substitute, or does he pro- pose to do that now ? The PRESIDENT. they are in the substitute. The Reading Clerk read the amendment. as follows: Amend section 24, by striking out the I ask, then, that it line, and all the words after the word “election” in the sixth line. Mr. BRONSTON. On that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. McDERMOTT. I second it, Mr. McHENRY. If we strike out this can we not insert something else? The PRESIDENT. Not at this place but under a different The vote being taken thereupon. resulted as follows : section. YEAS—élQ. Amos, D. C. Applegate, Leslie T. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Berkele, Wm. Boles, S. H. Bronston, C. J. Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. DeHaven, S. E. Elmore, T. J. Field, W. W. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Swango, G. B. Harris, Geo. C. Whitaker, Emery Hines, J. S. Woolfolk, J. F. Hines, Thomas H. Young, Bennett H. Holloway, J. W. Mr. President Clay. NAYS-——41. Auxier, A. J. Jonson, Jep. C. Ayres, W. W. Lassing, L. W. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James May, John S. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Brents, J. A. Moore, J. H. Buchanan, Nathan O’Hara, R. H. Chambers, G. D. Clardy, John D, Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Farmer, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thomas H. Hogg, S. P. Jacobs, R. P. Kirwan, E. E. Knott, J. Proctor Mackoy, W. H. McChord, Wm. C. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J W. Nunn, T. J. Petrie, H. G. Pugh, Sam’l J. Rodes, Robert Parsons, Robert T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. West, J. F. Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 85 Wednesday,] ABsEN'r—l'i. Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Askew, J. F. Kennedy, Hanson, " Blackwell, Joseph Phelps, Zack Brown, J. S. Sachs, Morris A. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. Goebel, William Straus, F. P. Hendrick, W. J. Washington, George Hopkins, F. A. The Clerk therupon read the amendment proposed by the Delegate. Mr. BLACKBURN. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. HOGG. I second it Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point of order that that part has been stricken out. Mr. BLACKBURN. My amendment was to be inserted at the end of the section. Mr. MCHENRY. I call for the reading of the section as it would be with that amendment added to it. The amendment was read in connection with the amendment proposed by the Dele- gate from Woodford, as follows: A Treasurer, Auditor of Accounts, Reg- ister of the Land Office, Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics and an Attorney-General shall be elected by the qualified voters at the same time the Gov- ernor is elected for a term of four years, each of whom shall have been a resident of the State for at least two years next before his election, and shall cover into the Treas- ury any fees collected by him under the law. Mr. BRONSTON. Mr. BLACKBURN. gentleman speaking. previous question. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate is out of order. Mr. BRONSTON. I do not rise for the purpose of entering into any debate. Mr. BLACKBURN. I object. I make the point that we are under the previous question. ' Mr. BRONSTON. I think the better point for the gentleman to make is that he has been speaking for half an hour. (Having arisen.) I object to the We are under the BLACKBURN—HOGG—BRONSTON. [November 19. The vote being taken, resulted as fol- lows: YEAs—41. Askew, J. F. Hanks, Thos. H. Auxier, A. J, Hogg, S. P. Ayres, W. W. Jonson, Jep. C. Bennett, B. F. Lassing, L. W. Birkhead, B. T. Lewis, W. W. Blackburn, James Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. May, John S. Brents, J. A. Moore, J. H. Buchanan, Nathan O’Hara, R. H. Chambers, G. D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Clardy, John D. Pettit, Thos. S. Coke, J. Guthrie Phelps, John L. Cox, H Quicksall, J E. Doris, W. F. Ramsey, W. R. Durbin, Charles Smith, W. Scott Edrington, W. J. Trusdell, George Farmer, H. H. Twyman. I. W. Forrester, J. G. West, J. F. Forgy, J. M. Williams, L. P. V. Funk, J. T. Wood, J. M. Graham, Samuel NAYS—-41. Amos, D. C. Knott, J. Proctor Applegate, Leslie T. Mackoy, W. H. Beckham, J. C. McChord, Wm. C. Beckner, W. M. McDermott, E. J. Berkele, Wm. McElroy, W. J. Boles, S. H. McHenry, H. D. Bronston. C. J. Miller, Will. Brummal, J. M. Miller, W. H. Buckner, S. B. Montgomery, J .F. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, Laban T. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Carroll, John D. Nunn, T. J. DeHaven, S. E. Petrie, H. G. Elmore, T. J. Pugh, Sam’l J. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Glenn, Dudley A. Smith, H. H. Harris, Geo. C. Swango, G. B. Hines, J. S. i Woolfolk, J. F. Hines, Thomas H. Young, Bennett H. Jacobs, R. P. Mr President Clay Kirwan, E. E. ABSENT—18. Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Blackwell, Joseph Kennedy, Hanson Brown, J. S. Phelps, Zack English, Sam. E. Sachs, Morris A. Goebel, Wm. Spaldin , I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Straus, . P. Holloway, J. W. Washington. George Hopkins, F. A. Whitaker, Emery 36 EXEQUTIVE DEPARTMENT. W ednesday,] BUCKNER—GLENN—PETTIT. [N ovember 19 . So the amendment was rejected. During the call of the roll—- Mr. BECKNER. I voted aye under a misapprehension. I am in favor of turn- ing all the fees over to the Treasury, but I do not believe those‘fwords added fit in there. The next amendment was reported by the Clerk, and is as follows . Strike out the word “Clerk” and [insert “Assistant Secretary of State.” Mr. BUCKNER. The portion to which that applies, having been [stricken out, I withdraw it. The amendment of the Delegate from Kenton was then about to be read. Mr. GLENN. I withdraw that amend- ment as the amendment of the gentleman from the Fifth District of Louisville covers that point. ' The amendment of the Delegate from Daveiss was then read to amend section 24 by striking out the words “and may appoint his clerk.” Mr. PETTIT. I voted to make the Secretary of State an elective oflicer and dignify that ofiicial, and I therefore move to strike out the words “appoint his clerk.” I did not see the necessity of making the clerk a Constitutionalpflicer, thinking that if the Secretary of State required a Clerk it could be provided for by the Legislature. However, as this whole section has gone out, I ask unanimous consent to_withdraw my amendment. Leave was given. The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion is now exhausted, and the Secretary will report the next amendment. The amendment of the Delegate from Woodford county was read, and is as fol- lOWS : Amend by strikingout the words “four years” in the fourth line, and inserting in lieu thereof“ six years, and they shall be ineligible for the ensuing term.” )1 r. BECKHAM. ‘I move as an amend- l ment to insert the words at the end of the section as follows: The Governor shall nominate, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint a Secretary of State, who shall be commissioned during the term for which the Governor was elected, if he shall so long behave himself well. He shall keep a fair register, and attest all the ofiicial acts of the Governor, and shall when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes, and vouchers relative thereto, before either House of the Gen- eral Assembly; and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law. Mr. BLACKBURN. Is not that the amendment which the Convention just refused to adopt? The PRESIDENT. The amendment the Convention refused to adopt was to strike out certain words and insert in lieu thereof certain other words. This is an amendment by way of addition, although it corresponds to the other motion, it is not the same because it embraces something else. Mr. BLACKBURN. I would like to know wherein this is different from the substitute of the gentleman from Louisville. I want to make the point. In other words, if the amendment now proposed, is not synonymous with and a literal transcript of the substitute offered by the Delegate from the Fifth District of Louisville, and I ask the ruling on that point. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will decide although this is part of each of the other motions, still in voting upon this .question the question is presented difi'er- ently from that in the other motions; that in each of the other motions there is a motion to strike out and insert and this is simply an addition. Therefore, there is enough difference to allow the Chair to rule it in order. Mr. PETTIT. to that? The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir. Is a substitute in order EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 3'7 Wednesday,] PETTIT—APPLEGATE—MACKOY. [November 19 . Mr. PETTIT. I have a substitute which I desire to offer: Amed the substitute by striking out all after the first word and insert “and there shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at the same time the Governor is elected, for a term of four years, a Secretary of State, whose duty shall be to keep a fair register of and attest all the ofiicial acts of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouch- ers relative thereto, before either House of the General Assembly, and shall perform such other duties as may be required of him by law'” Mr. APPLEGATE. ’ And upon that amendment and substitute I move the pre- vious question. > Mr. MACKOY. I would like to amend by adding “and all fees received by him shall be covered into the Treasury.” The PRESIDENT. That will be in ‘order as an amendment to the first proposi- tion, but is not in order as an amendment to the second proposition ‘ I Mr. MACKOY. I offer that as an amendment to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Shelby. Mr. CLARDY. I want to offer an amendment to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington. I do not remember how it is worded. The PRESIDENT. That can be done only by unanimous consent, as the previous question has been moved and seconded. Who seconded it 1’ Mr. McDERMOTT. I believe I did. Mr. BLACKBURN. I do not think there was a second at all. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that the gentleman did not move the previ- ous question on the amendment of the Del- egate from Lexington. The previous ques- tion is moved only on the amendment of the Delegate from Shelby and the substi- tute offered by the Delegate from Daveiss. Mr. BLACKBURN. Are we under the operation of the previous question? The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion has been moved, but the Convention has not voted upon it. w - Mr. BLACKBURN. I want to ask whether the effect of the previous question starts from the time it is moved ? The PRESIDENT. It does until it is decided. Mr. BLACKBURN. Does it preclude amendments ‘? The PRESIDENT. It does till it is de- cided. Mr. BLACKBURN. Does it preclude debate ‘? The PRESIDENT. Until it is decided. Whenever the previous question is moved and seconded it cuts off debate on amend- ments until the question is disposed of. As a matter of course, if the motion is voted down it is open to amendment or debate. If the previous question is voted there is no more debate or amendment until it is ex- - hausted. Mr. BLACKBURN. We are then in reality under the influence of the previous question‘ from the time it is moved? I ask the yeas and nays on the motion for the previous question. Mr. EDRINGTON. I second it. A vote being taken “thereon, resulted as follows : YEAS—43. Amos, D. C. Kirwan. E. E. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Askew, J. F. Mackoy, W. H. Beckham, J. C. McChord, Wm. C. Beckner, W. M. McDermott. E. J. Berkele, Wm. McElroy, W. J. Boles, S. H. MeHenry, H. D. Bronston. C. J. Miller, W. H. Brummal, J. M. Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Moore, Laban T. Bullitt, W. G. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Nunn, T. J. Carroll, John D. Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. E. Pugh, Sam’l J. Elmore. T. J. Rodes, Robert Field, W. W. Smith, W. Scott Glenn, Dudley A. Swango, G. B. Harris, Geo. C. Whitaker, Eme Hines, J. S. Woolfolk, J. F. Hines, Thomas H. Young, Bennett H. Holloway. J. W. Mr. President Clay. J azobs, R. P. ‘HAYS—41. Auxier, A. J. Hogg, S. P. 38 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] AUXIER—FARMER. [November, 19. Ayres, W, W, Jonsl n, Jep (J, Clardy, John D. O’Hara R. H. Bennett B. F. Lassing L. W. Coke. J. Guthrie Parsons, Rob’t T . Birkhead, B. T. Lewis, W. W. Cox, H- Pettit, Thos- 8- Blackburn. James -Martin. W. H. Doris. W. F. Phelps, John L. Bourland, H. R. May, John S, Durbin, Charles Quicksall, J E. Brents, J. A. Miller, Will. Edrington, W. J. Ramsey, W. R. Buchanan, Nathan Moqre, J. H. Farmer, H- H- smith, H- H- Chambers. G. D. O’Hara, R. H. Forrester, J. G. Smith, W. Scott Clardy, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Forgy, J- M- Trusdell, George Coke, J. Guthrie Pettit, Thos. S. Fun k, J. T. Twyman, 1- W. Cox, H. Phelps, John L, Graham, Samuel West, J. F. Doris, W. F. Quicksall, J. E. Hanks, Thos. H. Williams, L. P. V. Durbin, Charles Ramsey. W. R. Hines, J. S. Wood, J. M. Edrington, W. J. Smith, H. H. , NAYS_._41, Farmer, H. H. Trusdell, George A D G K. E Forrester, J. G. Twyman, I. W. Amqs’ ' ' . Irwan' ' E‘ Forgy, J‘ M. W est, J‘ F. pp egate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Funk, J. T. Williams, L. r.v. gskew’ J- R Mack”, W- H- Graham, Samuel Wood J. M_ eckham, J. C. McChord, Wm. C. Hanks Thos H ’ Beckner, W. M. McDermott, E. J. ’ ' ' Berkele, \Vm. McElroy, W. J. ABSENT—16- Birkhead, B. T. MeHenry, H. D. Allen, (1 (R James, A_ D. Boles, S. H. Miller, W. H. Allen, M. K_ Johnston. P. P_ Bronston, C. J. Montgomery, J. F. Blackwell, Joseph Kennedv, Hanson Buckner’ 5- B- Mmom’, Laban T- Brown, J. S. Phelps, Zack Bulb“, W- G3 Mull‘, J- W- English, Sam. E. Sachs, Morris A. Qumam, Gum's F- NunP, T. J- Hendrick, W. J_ Spalding, I_ A. I (.arroll, John D. Petrie, H. G. Hopkins. F. A. Straus, F. P. DeHaven- 3- E- Pugh, Sam’l J- Goebel, Wm. Washington, George Elmore, T- J- Rodes, Robert ' Field, W. W. Swango, G. B. The amendment of the Delegate from G191“), Dudley A- Whltaker’EmerY Harris, Geo. C. Woolfolk, J. F. Shelby was read, also the substitute there- forby the Delegate from Daveiss county, and the amendment to the amendment of the Delegate from Shelby by the Delegate from Covington. A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Covington to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Shelby, the same was declared adopted. Mr. AUXIER. I demand the yeas and nays on the substitute of the Delegate from Daveiss. Mr. FARMER. I second it. A vote being taken thereon, it resulted as follows: Yeas—42. Auxier, A. J. Hogg, S. P. Ayres, W. W. Jonson. Jep. C Bennett, B. F. Lassina. L. W. Blackburn, James Lewis, W. W. Bourland, H. R. Martin. W. H. Brents, J. A. May, John H. Buchanan. Nathan Miller, Will. Chainlir , G. R Moore, J. H. Hines, Thomas H. Young, Bennett H. Holloway, J. W. Mr. President Clay Jacobs, R. P. ABSENT—17. Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Allen, M. K. Johnston, P. P. Blackwell, Joseph K ennedy, Hanson Brown, J. S. Phelps, Zack Brummal, J. M. English, Sam. E. Goebel, William Hendrick W. J. Hopkins, F. A. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. St'aus, F. P. Washington, George The PRESIDENT. The substitute is adopted, and the question is on the adop— tion of the section as amended by the sub- stitute. Mr. BRONSTON. On that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. HANKS. I second it. Mr. McDERMOTT. Before we take that vote I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment of the Delegate from Covington was adopted. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 39 Wednesday,] MACKOY—BLACKBUBN—PETTIT. [November 19 . The PRESIDENT. That is not in order. We are still under the operation of the previous question. Mr. MACKOY. Can I ask the gentle- man who ofi’ered the substitute a question? The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent you may. Mr. BLACKBURN. I object. Mr. MACKOY. I see there is no quali- fications attached to the Secretary of State in his substitute. Mr. BLACKBURN. I object. I think the Convention can take care of itself on that. Mr. PETTIT. Of course the Secretary of State is bound to be a resident. Mr. MACKOY. Under your substitute- a foreigner might be Secretary of State. Mr. PETTIT. A man is compelled to be a qualified voter and a resident of the State of Kentucky before any one would vote for him. The vote being taken thereon, resulted as follows: YEAS—43. Auxier, A. J. Hogg, S. P. Ayres, W. W. Jonson, Jep. C. Bennett, B. F. Lassing, L. W. Birkhead, B. T. Lewis. W. W. Blackburn. James Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. May, Jonn S. Brents, J. A. Miller, Will. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Chambers, G. D. O’Hara, R. H. Clardy, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Coke, J. Guthrie Pettit. Thos. S Cox, H. Phelps, John L. Doris, W. F. Quicksall. J. E. Durbin, Charles Ramsey, W. R. Edrington, W. J. Smith, H. H. Farmer, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Forrester, J. G. Trusdell, George Forgy, J. M. Twyman, I. W. Funk, J. T. West, J. F. Graham, Samuel Williams, L. P. V. Hanks, Thos. H. Wood, J. M. Hines, J. S. nius—41. Amos, D. C. Kirwan, E. E. - Applegate, Leslie. T. Knott, J. Proctor Askew, J. F. Mackoy, W. H. Beckham, J. C. McChord, W. C. ,- Beckner, W. M. McDermott, E. J. Berkele, Wm. McElroy, W. J. Boles, S. H. McHenry, H. D. Bronston, C. J. Miller, W. H. Brummal J. M. Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Moore. Laban T. Bullitt. W. G. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis E‘. Nunn, T. J. Carroll, John D. Petrie, H. G: DeHaven, S. E. Pugh, Sam’l J. Elmore. 'I‘. J. Rodes, Robert Field, W. W. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Whitaker, Emery Harris. Geo. C. Woolfolk, J. F. Hines, Thomas H. Holloway. J. W. Young, Bennett H. Mr President Clay. J acobs, R. P. ABSENT—16. Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Allen, M. K. Johnston. P. P. Blackwell, Joseph Kennedy, Hanson Brown, J. S. Phelps, Zack English, Sam. E. Sachs, Morris A. Goebel, William Spalding, I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Straus, F. P. Hopkins, F. A. Washington, George Mr. McDERMOTT. Is the previous question exhausted ‘? The PRESIDENT. It is. Mr. McDERMOTT. I move to recon- sider the vote by which the amendment of the Delegate from Covington was adopted. The PRESIDENT. That amendment was voted down when the substitute to which it was an amendment was voted down. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Ohio was then read, and is as follows! Amend section 24 by striking therefrom the word “ Treasurer,” and inserting in lieu thereof the word “an.” The additional section ofl‘ered by the Del- egate from Ohio was then read, and is as follows: The Governor shall nominate, by and with the consent of the Senate, appoint a Treasurer of the State, who shall be com- missioned during the term for which the Governor was elected, and who shall hold his ofiice during the pleasure of the Gov- ernor. The said Treasurer shall execute such bond, perform such duties, and receive such compensation as shall be prescribed by law. r 4O EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wednesday,] McHENRY—BURNAM. [November 19. MCHENRY. I propose to say a very few words on this amendment. I pre- sume both of the amendments can be taken together. Although they are writ- ten on two pieces of paper they are really one. I move to strike out the word “Treasurer,” and then, as a matter of course, to put in the word “an” instead of “a,” so that it will read “ an Auditor,” and I then move the additional sec- tion providing that the Treasurer shall be appointed by the Governor instead of elected by the people. I brought this question up before the people of my county in my canvass. and I scarcely found anybody opposed it. I do not believe, after the experience we have had in Kentucky in regard to our late Treaasurer, that the people care to elect a Treasurer again. I think the money is safer in the hands of an appointee of the Governor. The people of Kentucky elect a man; they never see him. Tate lived in Frankfort here, and they never saw him in my county where we have five thousand voters. We voted for him nine consecu- tive times. The people took him upon trust, because he was nominated by the political party to which a majority of the people belonged. They believed him to be honest and elected him because he was the nominee of their party; and yet the result was that he was a defaulter finally, and was a rascal, I presume, from the time he was first elected. I mean to say we are really not qualified to select a man for Treasurer of the State. The majority of the people do not know and cannot know of the qualifications of the man who is running for the oifiee. In my county there were not fifty men who knew Tate. He never put his foot in the county, and there were not fifty men in the county who had ever seen him. The rem- edy I propose is that we make the Governor of the State morally responsible for the money. I do not mean to make him legal- ly responsible, but only morally. We have never made a mistake in electing a Governor of Kentucky. We have always elected men of high character and integrity, and if such a man is to be held morally re— sponsible for the finances, he will see to it that the Treasury is honestly managed- By this we give the Governor the power that he can turn this Treasurer out whenever he sees proper to do so. My amendment goes to that extent that he shall hold his ofiice simply during the pleasure of the Governor, and if the Governor finds out, not abso- lutely or certainly, or to such an extent as would authorize an impeachment, but if the Governor understands that the Treasurer of the State is dealing in margins, or buying stocks or bonds, or investing in booms, then I take it for granted that the Governor, whose integrity and high character is in- volved, would change the State Treasurer. I want to give him the power to do so, be- cause when your Treasurer goes to specu- latin g on mar ins, buying stocks and bonds, if he is succe ful it is all right, but if he loses money the risk is on the Treasury of the State. It has proved so in three in- stances in Kentucky, Tennessee and Lousi- ana. They were dealing in the same things and they were all unsuccessful. Mr. BURNAM. And in Missouri and Maryland. Mr. MCHENRY. Yes. unsuccessful and lost money, and the people of the State had to pay it. It is no luxury to the people to vote for a Treas- urer. We do not care who is Treasurer, provided the money is honestly managed and kept in the Treasury. I think the people of the State are perfectly willing to forego the privilege of voting for a Treas- urer of the State, if they have better as- surance than they have had that their money will be safe in the hands of the Treasurer. What better provision can we make than I have done in my amendment? I do not know that my amendment is per- fect, and I am willing to accept any thing else that will accomplish the same end. The They were all EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 41 Wednesday,] PHELPs—McHENRY—Cox. [November 19 . Governor is morally responsible, he will select a man he believes to be honest and thoroughly competent. He submits his name to the Senate of Kentucky, and he has to be appointed by and with the advice of the Senate. Let the Governor nominate him, and the people will hold him re- sponsible. Mr. J. L.PHELPS. Willthe gentleman allow me to ask him a question? Mr. MCHENRY. Yes, sir. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. Did not all the Governors of Kentucky believe Tate was honest? Mr. MCHENRY. I do not know that they did. But I do know this: If the ap- pointing power had been in the Governors it is not likely that they would all have ap- pointed him. We all thought he was honest; you voted for him. I take it for granted that Tate would never have held this oflice under all the Governors. I venture to say the present Governor of Kentucky would have found out Tate was engaged in some of these speculations if he had appointed him. ' I believe it would have been the duty of the Governor and any man of high character would have kept watch if he was morally responsible, and we would not had Tate in oflice this long time. The Governor would have found out what the Treasurer was doing. How can we have the money of the State in a better condition than for the Governor to appoint a man who shall give bond required by law, and the Governor has the right to go into the State Treasury, and look and see what is the condition of the funds at any time? As now we make the Treasurer perfectly inde- pendent. The Governor has no more right to go in and examine the money than you or I. _ Mr. COX. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him a question‘? Mr. MoHENRY. Certainly. Mr. COX. Is it not true tEat Davidson was appointed Treasurer of the State of Kentucky, and is it not true that the State of Kentucky lost eighty-seven thousand dollars by him ? Mr. MCHENRY. Yes, sir; he was ap- pointed for life, and was utterly independ~ ent of the Governor. It was a life oflice and it makes all the difference in the world. Here I want the Governor to be able to put him out of office at a moment’s notice. There the Governor had no power to turn out. And right here I want to say, that old man Davidson was an honest man, from all the information that I can find, and the money was stolen by-this man Page, in whom Davidson had confidence. Mr. COX. Was not Page appointed by the Governor? Mr. MCHENRY. Yes; and his was a life oflice too, though Page at the time he was turned out, a defaulter, had been elect- ed by the people after the new Constitution went into effect. Mr. COX. But the defalcation dated back to the time when he was appointed by the Governor. Mr. MGHENRY. I think so, but that does not change the question. I do not mean to say that the people elect dishonest men, but we are more apt to put a rascal in the Treasury Department, where he goes through a political convention log-rolling votes from one end of the State when he lives in another. Then, when by his shrewdness and astuteness he carries the convention, he is elected by the people. He will be elected, however dishonest he is, for the people do not know it. We have this sad experience in Kentucky and in other States, and I do say that if the gentlemen had debated this before their constituents when they were candidates for the position they now hold, I think, they would have found that a majority of the people of Kentucky are in favor of the position I assume, or something similar to it. The people want their money safe, and if anybody can suggest any better way than I have done, I will be 42 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Wedn esdayj] Z MCHENRY—RQDES——JONSON. ‘ perfectly willing to have that put in place of my amendment. This puts behind the Treasurer the high character of the Gover- nor. We always elect good Governors The political parties do not look at the character of these minor officers as they do at the character of the Governor. They do look at the integrity and high character of the Governor, and no man who has not a reputation from one end of the State to another can ever be nominated by any po— litical party for Governor of the State. When we put our money under the sur- veillance of the Governor, he can say, “ I have a suspicion that this man is dealing in margins, or buying stocks or bonds, and the State is taking the risk of whether he wins or loses in his gambling, and I will turn him out. I do not want my character to go down with his. We elected for nine consecutive terms a man who was a scoundrel from the time he was put in until he finally went out of his office by impeachment. I do not know that I can make any further argument on this sub- ject, but I am in as dead earnest about this matter as any vote I will ever give in this Convention, and I come here to- day with my peoplebehind me on this proposition, and I do not know of a single man who did not approbate my position when I was on the stump, and, I believe, if the other Delegates of the Convention had brought up this before their people, they would be with me in this matter. This Tate matter has been up before the people for a good while now, and the political party to which I belong has been censured because of this stealing of money by him." We have'it in our power now to put that oflice in a better position than it ever was, by placing the whole matter under the surveillance of the Governor. Mr. RODES. I move that we adjourn until 9 o’clock to-niorrow morning, The PRESIDENT. The regular time of meeting is 9:30. Mr RODES. I understand that. I move that we adjourn until 9 o’clock. Avote being taken on said motion, it was rejected. Mr. JONSON. journ. Avote being taken on said motion, it was carried, and the Convention thereupon adjourned. I move that we ad- [Ngrember 19 , I ‘ (Delineation Ziecorb. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. V01. 1 .1 FRANKFURT, NOVEMBER 20, 1890. [No. 57. Thursday,] BERKELE—MOORE—FUNK. [November 20 . The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Hen- derson. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read, corrected and approved. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. If there are no petitions, then reports from Standing Committees. Mr. BERKELE. I have a “communica- tion in regard to the fee paid the J ailer of Garrard county. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it will be referred to the Special Committee, ‘of which the Delegate from Anderson is ‘Chairman. Resolutions. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to offer two resolutions, which I desire to have read. The first I wish referred to the Committee on General Provisions, and the second I desire to have put upon its passage. The Reading Clerk read the first resolu- tion introduced by Mr. Moore, as follows: Resolved, That the following clauses, or clauses of similar import, should be en- grafted upon the Constitution now being drafted by this Convention: 1. The Governor, Secretary of State, Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney-General, Su- perintendent of Public Instruction, Com- missioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statis- tics, Judges of the Appellate and Superior Courts may be removed from office for willful neglect of duty, corruption in oflice, habitual drunkenness, incompetency, or any offense involving moral turpitude while in office, or committed under color thereof, by the Senate, sitting as a Court for that pur- pose, under oath or afi'irmation on articles or charges preferred by the House of Repre- sentatives. 2. The Judges of the Circuit Courts, Attorneys of the 'Commonwealth, and Judges of inferior Courts, from which appeals may be taken directly to the Supe- rior Court or Court of Appeals, may be removed from ofiice for any of the causes specified in the preceding section by the Court of Appeals, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. 3. County and district ofiicers in a county may be removed in such manner and for such cause as shall be prescribed by law. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be referred to the Com- mittee on General Provisions. The second resolution offered by Mr. Moore was then read, and is as follows: VVHEREAs, Rooms have been rented under a'former resolution of this Conven- tion for the use of Committees thereof, which are not now necessary for that pur- pose: 1:‘: Therefore, be it resolved by this Conven- tion, That the Committee on Printing and Accounts do ascertain and report to this Convention, at its earliest convenience, what rooms are thus under rent and the amount due therefor. And the question being taken, the reso- 'lution was adopted. Mr. FUNK. I ofl'er a resolution. The Reading Clerk read the resolution offered by Mr. Funk, as follows: Towns and Cities. No Council of a city, or Board of Trus- tees of a town, or Board of Trustees of a school supported in whole or in part by taxation; no Board of Charity, or Sinking Fund Commissioners, or like organized body, shall elect or appoint any of the members of such body while such or for a ydar thereafter; nor the relation of such members, by blood or marriage, to any place of profit or trust, and such attempted election or appointment shall be void for all purposes. The General Assembly shall not have 2 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] power to fix or change the salary or com- pensation of any officer or person holding any place of profit or trust in any town or city, or any of its departments; but the Council of such city or Board of Trus- tees of such town shall alone have power to fix the same; but such salary or compen- sation shall not be increased, directly or indirectly, or diminished during the term of any ofl‘icer or employe. All acts of the General Assembly in conflict herewith are hereby declared null and void. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be referred to the Com- mittee on Municipalities. Mr. COX. I move that the House take up the report of the Committee on Execu- tive Officers for the State at Large. Executive Department. A'nd the question being taken upon said motion, it was decided in the afiirmative. Mr. Beckner offered the following amend— ment: Amend by striking out the word “Treas- urer" wherever it occurs in the 24th sec- tion, and adding to said section the follow- ing words: “ The Governor, Auditor and Attorney-General, or a majority of said offieers, at the beginning of their terms of office, shall selecfi'a Treasurer for the State, in such manner and on such terms as may be most advantageous to the Common- wealth, who shall be a citizen of this State and give bond and qualify and perform such duties as may be prescribed by law, and may be removed by any two of said ofiieers.” Mr. BECKNER. I would like to say a‘ word on that. Some twenty years ago the county of Clark-—that is, the County Court »-adopted the plan of giving out the Treasurership to the highest and best bid- der, reserving the right to reject any and all bids. Previously to that we had been first paying a salary and then receiving a small percentage on daily balances. We found no complaint in the working of this system. One year it brought $1,205 to the county, and afterwards as much as $1,500. The result has been, that instead of having a Treasurer, who had to be hunted up when you wanted him, one of the oflieers of a COX—BECKNER—HANKS. L [November 20 . Q bank was chosen, and when a man has a claim against the county he presents it and it is paid. It has worked very satisfae-- torilyj; in fact, so well that our people have not yet changed it. There is no trouble or bother about it ;. no electioneering for the office. The bids are sent in, and whosoever is the best bid- der gets it. I simply offer that amendment as a suggestion to the Convention. The PRESIDENT. Report the first amendment. The CLERK. The amendment under consideration yesterday by the Convention was the amendment proposed by the Dele- gate from Ohio. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Ohio was read, and is as follows: Amend section 24 by striking therefrom the word “ Treasurer,” and inserting in lieu thereof the word “an.” Also the following additional section offered by the Delegate from Ohio: The Governor shall nominate, and by and with the consent of the Senate, appoint a Treasurer of the State, who shall be com- missioned during the term for which the Governor was elected, and who shall hold his ofiice during the pleasure of the Gov- ernor. The said Treasurer shall execute such bond, perform such duties, and receive such compensation as shall be prescribed by law. ' Mr. HANKS. The proposition pre- sented in this amendment to the Commit- tee’s report is, that the Governor of the- Commonwealth shall appoint the Treasurer of the State. 011 yesterday, in the Conven- tion, we had a very able presentation of the benefits which might result to the State‘ from that course, given us by the Delegate from Ohio. I was unable, at any time dur- ing the course of his remarks, to come to the conclusion that he was serious about the’ matter. It would be very embarrassing to me, and I suppose to many other Delegates on this floor, to advocate a proposition against the opinions of the Delegate from Ohio, when we believed him sincere or in. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Q Th ursday,] HANKS. [November 20. earnest. ’He informed us that the Governor of this Commonwealth was a man endowed with sufiicient information, learning, astute- ness and knowledge to be able to select a man who would not defraud the Common- wealth of Kentucky; that his knowledge of men and things was so great that he would not be mistaken in the selection of a Treasurer or any other official. If this is true, that the Governor is so learned and so astute in that particular, we would do well to allow him to do most that is done in this Commonwealth. I do not see why he . should have associated with him ninety-nine men in making this Constitution. If he is so able and well informed as to the nature of men and the wants of our people, why not make it himself? I believe the time has passed when the people of Kentucky be- lieve that all wisdom and learning is with‘ the Governor. The people are opposed to the one-man power, however learned or pure that man may be. _We have a good Governor; he was elected by the people, and we can as easily elect a good Treasurer. I was surprised when the gentleman in- formed us that every man in the county of Ohio was in favor of the Governor appoint- ing the Treasurer. I represent a little county adjoining this (the Capital) county. There is not a man there who is in favor of it, so far as I know or believe. See how great a difference. There is not a man there who favors the Governor taking charge of the oflicers, or their appointment in this Commonwealth. There is not a man there who is willing for him to go outside of the sphere prescribed for him by the Constitution and laws. They believe they themselves are as capable of selecting the ofiicials of the Commonwealth, including the Governor, as the Executive of the Com- monwealth of Kentucky, and they act on that principle. What is the effect of his argument? We, the people, elect a Gov— ernor; but he must select the other officials, at least the Treasurer; and by the great moral influence he would exert over him, so often or keep him in quite so long. he would do nothing wrong. I am unable to say how that But there is an influ- ence that is greater, in my opinion, than the moral influence of the Governor. ‘You elect your oflicials in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, and require of them an official bond] That will have a better influence than the moral influence. That preserves and protects the rights of the people better than the moral influence of the Governor or any one‘ else in this Commonwealth. I have no doubt our present Governor has selected an efiicient man for Treasurer. I have no doubt the people can and will elect suclra one. If we had an appointive sys- tem, I am not certain (if the Governor had had the appointive power) he would not have selected that very man (‘I mean James W. Tate). By his record, he was at one time a very capable oflicer; but the trouble was, that Tate was elected too much. He was elected too often; and we propose new not to elect the same man Treasurer quite They cannot learn the tricks so well in a short time. But let me say to this Convention, you cannot elect or appoint a Treasurer who, if he wants to, will not steal the and money. I know it; he knows it, every man , on this floor knows it. If he wants ' to, he can steal it. Per- haps the longer he stays there the more he steals. I do not know how much Tate took away with him, if any thing. I was a member of the Legislature,‘ and on the Committee to find out how much he took. The experts were never able to find out how much he got. But if the oflicials had discharged their duty according to law, I am not certain that there would have been any thing lost. I do not say they did not; but I do know, elective or appointive, the laws can be so arranged, if they are not now, that the Treasurer cannot take much, if the other officials of this Commonwealth will perform their duty. He can take just as much and do it as easily when you appoint him, as 4 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] BANKS—COX. [November 20 . when you elect him. Require a good bond of the Treasurer, and you are secure. I believe the voters of this Commonwealth are competent to select their Treasurer. I know full well that they are able to elect a Governor, and, by the way, as was said yesterday, we have universally elected a good one without one exception. If the people of Kentucky are capable of electing a good Governor, I think they are capable of electing a good Treasurer. As Ihave said, I was sincere in believing that the Delegate from Ohio was jesting about it. I cannot imagine his object, if he was sincere. I do not believe that the people of Kentucky will go back to the appointive system. They will not do it. They cannot do it. They ought not to do it. They ought to keep the power to elect all the officers of the Commonwealth in their own hands, and grasp it tight. Keep the right and power to elect and control by legislative enact- ments the actions of all the ofiicers of the Commonwealth. We should adhere to that with great tenacity, because power will grow. The strength of men in power increases. Hold them as it were in the hollow of your hand, so that they can be controlled by the people of the Common- wealth, to whom this Government belongs. Mr. COX. Yesterday evening I pre- sented two questions to the distinguished Delegate from Ohio county, hoping that his answers to those questions would relieve me from taking up the time of this Convention with any thing I might say; but that Dele- gate, as a lawyer, perhaps, stands at the head of the bar of Kentucky, and he an- swered those questions in true lawyer style. Therefore, it becomes necessary for me to call the attention of the Convention to the great subject of the rights and powers of the people. Rights, without the exercise of which, or which, if taken away by Consti- tutional or Legislative provisions, impair the sovereignty of the people, impair that sovereignty which resides alone with the people. We were told by that distinguished Delegate, and we have been told repeatedly on this floor, that it is better for us to give up a part of that sovereignty and transfer it to the Executive Department of this State. We have been told that it is better that the people do not have the right and power to elect their ofiicers, but leave them within the appointing power of the Execu- tive Department. This has been declared in substance upon this floor for the last two ‘ days. I am one of those who believes that all power is inherent in the people, and that all men are created with equal rights. Now, sir, the right to discharge the duties of office is a right that is granted by this sov- ereignty to the incumbent. That individual becomes the agent of the people. He be- comes the servant of the people, and, so far as limitations upon his rights or’ the exer- cise of his official duties are concerned, we should limit them at all proper times and in a proper manner. We should give him no power which is not absolutely and unquestionably necessary for the exercise of the duties devolving upon him, and that will work for the good of the great masses of our fellow-citizens. Now, we were told that this appointing power had worked well. Our attention has been called, in the discussion upon the question of electing the Secretary of State, our attention had been called to the working of the pardoning power, and we have been told that that power was exercised from the origin of our State Government up to this period, and because it has existed for that long period we should not attempt, in any form what- ever, to remove it; should not attempt to take from the Executive Department of the Government that power; but I believe that no difficulty has ever occurred in the Exec- utive office of Kentucky between the Secretary of State and the Governor except that which occurred under the appointing power. Gov. Owsley was elected in 1844. He appointed the Hon. Ben. Hardin as his Secretary. It is not necessary for me to detain the Convention in giving a history EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 5 Thursday,] Cox. [November 20 . of that matter. It is a matter, perhaps, well known to all the Delegates, but I was then familiar with the affairs of our State, and was looking with as deep an interest to the welfare of my native State as I am now, when I am standing on the verge of the dark river, and I say this is the only period in the history of Kentucky when any difficulty ever sprung up in the Execu- tive Department between the Governor and the Secretary, and that was under the appointing power. I urge, I insist, that if a reason has been offered in this Conven- tion for the continuance of that appointing power with the Governor, this is a stronger one against it than any that has been presented. Q But the question now be- fore this Convention is the appointment of a State Treasurer, and our ears have been made to tingle by the eloquence of the dis- tinguished Delegate from Ohio county in declaring the corruption of poor Tate. I have nothing to say against that man. Like a Cain, he has gone and is suffering now, and will suffer while he lives upon earth the terrible calamity which befalls one who fails to discharge his whole duty and attempts to injure, or by avarice at- tempts to defraud, those whom he is serving. Now,,shall we look to that, and that alone? Do Delegates upon this floor not recollect that in about 1848 Mr. Davidson was State Treasurer‘? Mr. Davidson had been in that office for a number of years, and the Governor of the State of Kentucky had failed to take a proper bond from him. When his oflice came to be investi- gated it was found, as I am informed, that he was a defaulter in the sum of eighty- seven thousand dollars; and not one single dollar of that money was ever returned to the State Treasury. The people of Ken- tucky lost that sum of money. And that was under the appointing power—that power which is invoked here by the elo- quence of the distinguished Delegate from Here stands out a loss, an But we are told of the losses Ohio county. absolute loss. which the people of Kentucky may sustain by reason of the defalcation of poor Tate I say that we cannot say now that Ken- tucky will lose a dollar. That matter is all in the Courts. The securities upon his bond are solvent, and we do not know that Kentucky will lose a dollar by Tate. But we know, and the history of Kentucky de- clares, we have lost by the Treasurer who was appointed by the Governor. Not only so, but about that time, Mr. Page was Auditor. The Sheriffs of Kentucky came to Frankfort to pay in their revenue. They were required to hold a quietus from the Treasurer. Not knowing what their du- ties or responsibilities were, they took re- ceipts from the Auditor, and, after awhile, it turned out that the Treasurer’s office was examined and the Auditor’s office was ex- amined, and a, large number of Sheriffs were shown to be delinquents; were shown to have failed to'pay in their revenue as required by law Suits were instituted in the Franklin Circuit Court against those defaulting Sheriffs They had paid every dollar they owed; they had brought it to Frankfort honestly, but in their ignorance of their responsibilities and what was neces- sary to secure them against loss, they had paid it to the wrong man and taken wrong receipts. And many of those suits were decided against the State. They plead the Statute of Limitation, and under that Statute they defeated the Commonwealth, and out of that matter grew a loss to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, as I under- stand, of fifty-two thousand dollars. Here is about one hundred and forty thousand dollars lost to the people of Kentucky under this appointing power, and not one dollar, so far as we know, has ever been lost to the people of Kentucky under the elective power. When the right of the great masses of the people is endangered, let us seek a remedy, and that remedy is found in the exercise of the elective franchise in conformity with statutory or organic law. I say here, taking the history of 6 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursda Kentucky as the evidence upon which we should base our judgment, sitting as a jury to decide this great case under the evidence given in the history of our State, we must unquestionably say that the appointing power has proved a failure, and that we must maintain our rights by securing to the people that sovereignty. that right, that power to which they are justly entitled. Now, I find a strong feeling in this Con- vention to give to the Governor of this Commonwealth vast and almost unlimited power, to make him a sort of autocrat here for four years. Some Delegates are urging that he must appoint Judges of the Courts, that he should appoint all the State ofiicers at this Capital. If that is right, why not take another step down ? Let him appoint our County Court Judges, let him appoint our County Court and Circuit Court Clerks, let him appoint our Magistrates: yes, let him become the mighty ruler in this great Commonwealth. clothed with that power which alone belongs to the people, and which every lover of liberty in America should cherish. Yes. give him one power, and soon he will step forward and ask for an increase of that power. I love our form of Government. I love it for its glory, its beauty and its grandeur. I love it for what it has accomplished; but while I love it, I loathe in the deepest recess of my heart any effort whatever that will go in the direction of taking from the people of Kentucky the right to choose their ofiicers. I hold the taking of such a right from them is an in- novation of the right which every man in this broad land should cherish. Let us, gentlemen of this Convention, maintain our rights. Let us stand up boldly and not let no man rob us of a single right. Now, the Delegate from Clark offered an amendment a few moments ago, which I i would ask the Clerk to report, as I desire l to comment upon it for a moment. I The Clerk again read the amendment I offered by the Delegate from Clark. Mr. COX. The Delegate from Clark, in Cox. [November 20 . presenting that amendment and urging upon this Convention the necessity of adopting it, referred to a very strange cir- cumstance. That circumstance was, in the county of Clark the office of County Treasurer was sold. Why, sir, is that American‘? Does that look like we are Americans, like we are citizens of this great Commonwealth of Kentucky? When we rise here and undertake to vindicate as a right a fraud upon the part of a certain county or any other counties to sell an office? I recollect, and if history is truth- ful, there was a time in the world when ofliees were sold. For ninety-seven years in Rome the ofiice of Emperor was frequently sold, and that great office was held during that ninety—seven years by over sixty Emperors, and pretended Emperors, under that system of sale, which led to the shed- ding of almost an ocean of blood. Do we want that system of sale inaugurated in Kentucky‘? Do we want to say that the sovereign rights of the people shall not be exercised, but that some shrewd auctioneer shall rise up and hold a piece of paper in his hands and say, “ I am going to sell the office of County Treasurer, who will bid most for it?” Is this in accordance with our form of government? No, sir; but it is just as thoroughly and completely in ac- cordance with our system of government as the attempts to take from the ‘people of Kentucky the right to vote and elect their ofiicers. The oflice of State Treasurer is a great ofiice. It is an ofiice of very great importance. and while I dislike to speak of myself, because I know I always have a very small subject when I am talking about myself, I opposed the election of Tate for fifteen years. I did it for the reason that I'knew Davidson and Page had been in office for a long period, and that their books and papers had never been investi- gated, and Kentucky had lost by them. I was opposed to allowing any man to handle the hard earnings of our people without his being brought positively and clearly befor EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 7 Thursday,] a COX—BLACKBURN. [November 20 . :a proper tribunal, and his books thoroughly investi ated and examined. Fre uentl * g c , . for that reason, for man y years, I opposed the renomination of James W. Tate, and preferred that we take some other citizen, and let the proper authorities investigate those-books and papers. Consequently I :am decidedly in favor of electing our State Treasurer, but let the term of his oflice only be for four years, that the proper authori- ties in this Commonwealth may take his books and examine them, and if he has kept :a single dollar out of the Treasury that 'properly'belon gs there,let that fact be known and the money recovered. I insist that it is the duty of this Convention, and I imagine that there is not a Delegate on this floor who does not feel the wonderful burden that is resting on us. We are but the agents of the people, and that burden is to relieve the people from their losses. Lighten the burden of Government as much as possible on the great masses of the people, and if we do that we shall have discharged the trust committed to our hands, and will return home and receive 'kind greetings. I have detained the Con- vention longer than I expected when I arose; but I have done nothing but what I felt conscientiously to be my duty. I am not here, as Delegates have said, to make a record for the future._ There is no future before me; but I am here to labor, as far as ' I, in my feeble ability, am capable of doing, for carrying out the great, principles upon which our Government was founded, and .those principles are to secure to the great _ masses of the people the right to choose their officers, and thereby maintain their inalienable rights. Mr. BLACKBURN. I want to offer a substitute, and in connection with that, if the Convention will indulge me just a moment, in response to what was said to the Delegate from Ohio county that this . would be a safeguard thrown around the money of the people of the State, I want to say this. ' The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will l report the substitute before . the gentleman proceeds. The CLERK. _The substitute offered by the Delegate from Woodford is as follows: A Treasurer shall be elected by the quali- fied voters of the State at the same time the Governor is elected, and for the same term. Mr. AUXIER. Will the Delegate from Woodford permit me to offer this before he proceeds ? q . Mr. BLACKBURN. Certainly. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Pike reads as follows: Resolved, That we dispense with all elec- tions, and provide that such patriots, not exceeding in number ten, as may be by ap- pointment assemble themselves together and select such persons as they may deem proper to hold all the State oifices in this Commonwealth, and save the good people of the State the pains and expense of hold- ing elections. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Woodford will proceed. Mr. BLACKBURN. I was anxious in my effort to obtain recognition because I had seen a disposition to call the previous question on this amendment, though it was reported late last evening. I cannot under- stand why there should be any haste when we are discussing a question like this, a, question of represeniative government. _ These propositions come to this very ques- tion: “Shall the people of this State choose their rulers, or shall another choose those who rule over us?” Can it be the purpose of any Delegate in this Convention to force this question upon us because we are few‘? If so, let me say to that Delegate: “Full many a freeman at home to-day Will feel himself accursed that he is not here, And hold his manhood cheap, whilst any speak, Who fought with us on St. Orispin’s Day.’ There are freemen who love their rights not here on this floor today, but they will read of our acts, and, I take it, will think, seriously about it if we say they are not competent for self-government. That is a question we have been trying to solve for one hundred years, and I challenge any EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. VThursdayj BLACKBURN—RAMSEY. 8 [November 20. Delegate upon this floor to name the people who have stood more firmly in defense of~ their rights, and who have given more equitable and just government to its people than the Commonwealth of Kentucky. And, as a son of this State. I hope she will stand ever, as she has stood for the past- one hundred years, in the forefront of all the peoples and in the sun-blaze of the world, declaring the same devotion to liberty and the rights of her citizens, determined to stand or fall by the declaration that we are , competent for self-government and compe- tent to choose our rulers. I thank the hon- orable Delegate from Carroll for the manly and brave Words he spoke of one who is in exile, an unhappy and miserable man, with no kindly greetings from his fellow-man. I thank him for those manly and brave words he said. That unfortunate man in his prosperity was my friend; in his adver- sity I am his friend. I knew him long. He was unfortunate. He did what he should not have done as a public ofiicer, but I cannot believe him a thief. As to the money the State is to lose by the defalea- tion, I am informed his bond is sufficient to cover all losses. I believe the State has ob- tained judgment 'on the bond. and that the bond is good. What other safeguard can we throw around it than this ‘? The law says: If the Treasurer. or any person acting as Treasurer, willfully misapplies any of the public money, or shall loan or use the same for his own purposes, or for the uses or purposes of another, he shall be guilty of felony; and, upon indictment and convic- tion thereof, confined in the penitentiary for a period not exceeding ten years, at the discretion of the jury. It is no answer to that to say he is a fugi- tive. On page 1244. section 6, of the Gen- eral Statutes: . When, in the opinion of the Governor, Auditor and Attorney-General,or a majority of them, the public funds are in danger by being under the control of the Treasurer, they shall have power to suspend him from oflicial duties until the meeting of the Gen- eral Asssembly, to whom the facts shall be- reported; and the Governor shall, in that case, designate some one to perform the du- ties of Treasurer, who shall take the oaths of office, give bond, with surety worth one hundred thousand dollars, to the Common- wealth for the faithful discharge of the du- ties of Treasurer, and who shall continue in office until the Treasurer is restored to his ofiicial duties, or a successor be elected. or appointed and qualified. Is not that a suflicient safeguard thrown. around it ? If the people of the Common- wealth should make a mistake in the selec- tion of a Treasurer, if we should elect one to that ofiice, who proves unworthy of the trust, it is made the duty of and the power is invested in the Governor, Attorney Gen’ eral and Auditor together, or either of them, to suspend him from his office, take charge- of the people‘s funds in the Treasury, ap- point some one to discharge that duty until. another is elected, or the Treasurer is re- lieved of the charges against him. Mr. RAMSEY. As a further protection, I will ask is there not also a provision now in the General Statutes that provides within the first ten days after every meeting of the General Assembly a Committee of that body shall be appointed to investigate the Treasurer’s office, and if we have not a State Examiner for that purpose ‘? Mr. BLACKBURN. I thank the Dele- gate from Laurel. That is true. There is another statute requiring that the Treasurer shall make a report to the Secretary of State. and the Secretary of State forward it to the General Assembly in the first ten days of the session. Greater security is not the purpose. It is not the effect of this resolution if adopted. But it is: this: It denies to the people of Kentucky the right to choose their oflicers without being asked to be relieved from that duty, without pro- posing to decline the exercise of that right which has belonged to us during our whole lives. It is the purpose of some to take, from the masses of the people the right to choose their officers. the custodian of our money; our taxes when collected and put EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 9 Thursday,] BECKNER. [November 20. in the vaults of the State, that we shall not say who is to have the management of that, but that that power shall be given to another. I deny the proposition. It has not been long since men who had just be- gan to breathe the air of freedom, who had just broken the shackles of the tyrant across the water, fought for seven years rather than be taxed without representa- tion. I hope their sons have not forgotten their devotion to liberty in this nineteenth century. I hope that the representativespn this floor of the sovereign, manly, chival- rous, liberty-loving people of Kentucky, will not yield that right on this occasion, but that we shall carry back, ‘if nothing else, to those who sent us here, at least this: “Your right of self-government is unimpaired, and you can make this Government as you want it; it is our Government, and we are the sovereigns.” Mr. BECKNER. I am as much a be- liever in allowing the people to elect their own officers as anybody in the Convention. I am a follower of Thomas Jefferson in the fullest sense. I believe him to have under- stood more thoroughly the true system of Government in this country than any man who has ever lived. The proposition I made this morning was not to take from the people the right to elect any ofiicer who has any thing whatever to do with their liberties or the administration of public affairs. The Treasurer of this State is simply a disbursing ofiicer: He has noth- .ing to do with the formation of public opinion, except that once in a while, when he defaults, he has a’ very considerable effect on the state of the public mind, and may seriously affect the party to which he belongs. It is his reponsibility to simply hold the public money, and he has no duty to discharge except to keep his accounts, and when a man has a claim which has been duly passed by the Auditor to pay it on presentation. We have a number‘ of officers in the State who are appointed, who have functions much more important than that. Commissioners, and our Auditor appoints Our Circuit Judges appoint Master a Commissioner of Insurance, and there are various other places to be filled by appointment, and where there are duties much more important to the people of the State than the duties of the Treasurer. What I have suggested is a plan which has worked very successfully in the county of Clark, where, instead of paying for the services of the Treasurer, we get some- thing out of that office. Some of my people told me to vote for any thing that will give the money to the State instead of‘ to the floaters. I am not in favor of that, although under the old system, which has been lauded here, the Sheriff who came in by virtue of seniority, generally sold his ofiice; at any rate, many of the Sheriffs did So until this evil was corrected by the pres- ent Constitution; but what I propose is that. the Governor, the Auditor and the Attorney General, three officers who are necessarily men of intelligence, character and discre-> tion, shall elect in some way most advan- tageous and beneficial to the State an officer to receive and hold the public revenues, and pay it out on orders presented to him. I cannot see how that will affect the rights of the people in any way. It will protect their money, secure them advantages which they do not have under the present system, and it will not be a sale of the ofiice. Our- present Treasurer has deposited the money of the State in bank, and gets a percentage- on it for the use of the money, a thing which has not been done before his time, so- that we get out of it some twelve or four- teen thousand dollars per year; but the- Treasurer himself has taken the risk that the bank shall remain good. He took that risk before, because a large portion of the money was always kept in bank; but as- managed'by the present Treasurer, the State gets a large sum of money, four or five times what it costs to pay the Treas- urer. My proposition was to elect the Treasurer on terms agreed upon which wil 10 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] BULLITT—BRENTS—MILLER. V [November 20 . secure a good ofiicer to receive and hold and pay out the money, and at the same time bring an advantage to the State which will relieve the tax-payers, and will affect the political rights of no man in any way, shape or form, and will not affect any politi- cal party, except when the Treasurer makes a defaleation, and then the party in power suffers from the odium brought on it by reason of the defaleation. Mr. BULLITT. This is simply a busi- ness question. 1 think all this gush about the rights of the people to control the mat- ter has but little to do with it. It isa simple matter of business how we shall guard the money that has been gathered for the administration of the government of the State.- The Committee "thought that the best way to guard our money was to make the Treasurer ineligible to succeed himself. According to the information I get from the newspapers, the Treasurers -of the States of Mississippi, Maryland and some other States, as well as the Treasurer of the State of Kentucky, had adopted the habit of using the State money for the pur— pose of securing their succeeding election'. Now, all must admit that this is an evil. These I C U’s, that came into the‘Treasurer‘s oflice of the Commonwealth of Kentucky generally were for the purposeof establishing the popularity of the then incumbent in oflice, and that he used the State money to retain himself in office, and whenever that is done, it necessarily results in an evil. Now, we propose that the best mode of get- ting rid of that custom is to remove that inducement upon the part of any incum- bent. The question suggested ' by the Delegate from Ohio was also before the Committee, but some of the Committee remembered that Master Commissioners have made use of money to secure the elec- tion of the Judge who would appoint them, and the Treasurer might use the same method to secure the election of a Governor. Therefore, the safest and best business plan was to make him ineligible for a second election, or to succeed himself; and that by making him ineligible to succeed him- self we withdraw from him every induce- ment to make use of the State money to re-elect himself. Now, these were the rea- sons that actuated the Committee. The question is a simple question of busi- ness. What method will the Convention adopt for the preservation of the rights of the people in protecting the money of the people? The people may direct that ofiicer to be appointed, or they may conclude that tliey will elect him. The Committee thought it was the best plan to elect him; but if the Convention concludes that the best plan is to appoint him, I say adopt that plan. I am not wedded to this because it is a Com- mittee’s report. ‘We are here for the pur- pose of conferring together and adopting the best business methods for the welfare of the people of the State; and if the people conclude that the best plan is to have him appointed, either by the Chief Executive, or by the Chief Executive and some other oflicers, let it be done. But my judgment is that the Committee have adopted the best method, from a business point of view. for the protection of the rights of the people. Mr. PETRIE. I move the previous question. ' Mr. EDRINGTON. I second it. Mr. BRENTS. I gave notice a few days ago that I wished to make some remarks on the question of ineligibility and re- eligibility. Tliere is an amendment to this section which raises the question- The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion is moved, and debate is not in or- der. The Secretary will report the amend— ment offered by the Delegate from Clark. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would like to have the Chair state what the effect of the previous question is. The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion. as I understand, is moved on the see- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 1 1 Thursday,] CLARDY—BRENTS—MCH EN RY. [November 20. tion and its pending substitutes and amend- ments. Mr. CLARDY. I have an amendment to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Fayette. It was offered yesterday, but it was not given to the Clerk. The PRESIDENT. The Chair consider the amendment as offered. Mr. CLARDY. I proposed to offer it, and the President said I could offer it af- terwards. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hopes that the gentleman will have unanimous consent to ofl'er the amendment now. will Consent was given, and the amendment was read. and is as follows: Amend the amendment of the gentleman from Fayette by striking out “six years” and inserting “four years.” The amendment proposed by the Dele~ gate from Ohio was then read. Mr. BRONSTON. ()n that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. MCHEN RY. I second it. The PRESIDENT. The Chair consid- ers that an additional section, and a vote will be taken on that separate. Mr. BLACKBURN. I think it was written on the face of it that it was an amendment to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Ohio. The PRESIDENT. The Chair has not the printed report, and would like to inquire for information, if the amendment offered by the Delegate from Woodford is not the original text of the report? Mr. BLACKBURN. I think not. Mr. BRONSTON. It is the same thing. Mr. BLACKBURN. It is not the same thing. It makes the officer elective. The PRESIDENT. The vote will be on the substitute offered by the Delegate from Woodford in lieu of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Ohio. Mr. BLACKBURN. I have not looked at my report this morning, and I do not know it is not the same. I do not like to be mistaken about such things. Mr. MCHENRY. Is it not simply a motion to make the Treasurer elective‘? Mr. BLACKBURN. I only intended it to be the converse of your amendment. Mr. MCHENRY. And mine was the converse of the Committees report. The PRESIDENT. If there is any substantial difference between the substi- tute offered by the Delegate from Wood- ford and the Committee’s report, the Chair will rule the substitute in order. Mr. BLACKBURN. It is different. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Woodford, was read, and is as fol- lows: “A Treasurer shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at the time the Governor is elected, and for the same term.” Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to know what the difference is. The PRESIDENT. The Chair took the statement of the Delegate from "Woodford as true, he did not have time to read it, but thinks there is some substantial difference. Mr. BLACKBURN. There is a sub- stantial difference. This says he shall be elected for four years, and the other says for a like term with the Governor. Mr. BRONSTON. Well that is the same. Mr. BLACKBURN. You have not fixed the term of the Governor at all. Mr. MCHEN RY. Does not the gentle- man accomplish the same thing by voting down my amendment ‘? The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks there is a difference between the substitute offered by the I’elegate from Woodford and the report of the Committee, and the vote will be on the substitute of the Dele- _ gate from Woodford. The Delegate has defined one difference, and the Secretary will now call the roll on the adoption of the substitute proposed by the Delegate 12 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] MACKOY—EDRINGTON—MCHENEY. [November 20 . from Woodford for the amendment ofi’ered by the Delegate from Ohio. Mr. MACKOY. I Want to know how the section will read as amended by the amendment of the gentleman from Wood- ford. The Readin g Clerk read what was called for as follows: A Treasurer, Auditor of Public Accounts, Register of the Land ()ffice, and an Attor- ney-General shall be elected by the quali- fied voters of the State at the same time the Governor is elected, for the term of four years, each of whom shall have been a resi- dent of the State for at least two years next preceding his election. Mr. EDRINGTON. section number 2 ? The PRESIDENT. It is in the Com— mittee of the \Vhole, and has never been reported. The amendment of the Delegate from VVoodford was then again read. Mr. MCHENRY. How does that come in with the original section‘? The CLERK. Just as I read it. The PRESIDENT. It is not a Parlia— mentary question as to how it will come or the meaning of it after it comes in. It is a question for the Convention to decide. .\Ir BRONSTON. I desire to make the point of order that that is the same as the report of the Committee. Mr. BLACKBURN. Under the pre- vious question he cannot make the point of of order. The PRESIDENT. The Chair decides that a point of order can be made when the previous question is in operation. Mr. BRONSTON. We desire to vote for the Committee’s report, and we do not want to disturb the harmony of it by the injection of the words ‘of the gentleman from Woodford. We agree fully with him, but it destroys the report by voting these words in. Mr. BLACKBURN. If the Conven- tion will permit me I will withdraw my amendment, and let the vote be on the sub- What became of stitute of the Delegate from Ohio ofl'ered for the report of the Committee. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, such leave is given. The vote being then taken on the adoption of the substitute offered by the Delegate from Ohio for the report of the Committee re- sulted as follows: YEAS—IO. Buckner, S. B. Petrie, H. G. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Mackoy, W. H. Sachs, Morris A. McDermott, E. J. Smith, H. H. McHenry. H. D. Young, Bennett H- XAYS—Ts. Allen, C. T. Harris. Geo. C. Allen. M. K. Hines, J. S. Amos, D. C. Hines. Thomas H. Askew, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Auxier, A. J. Holloway, J. W. Ayres, W. IN. J acobs, R. P. _ Beckham, J. C. Jonson, Jep. C. Beckner, W. M. Kirwan, E. E. Bennett, B. F. Lassing, L. W- Berkele. Wm. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James May, John S. Boles, S. H. McChord, Wm. C. Bourland, H. R. McElroy, W. J. Brents, J. A. Miller, Will. Bronston, C. J. Miller, W. H. Brummal, J. M. Montgomery. J. F. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Bullitt, W. G. Moore, Laban T. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Carroll, John D. Nunn, T. J. Chambers, G. D. O’Hara, R. H. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Parsons, Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Cox, H. Phelps, John L. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, Zack Doris, W. F. Pugh, Sam’l J. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore. T. J. English, Sam. E. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Smith, W. Scott Swango, G. B. Farmer, H. H. Trusdell, George Forrester, J. G. Twyman. I. W. Forgy, J. M. West, J. F. Funk, J. T. Whitaker, Emery Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Woolfolk, J. F. Hanks, Thos. H. Mr. President Clay ABSENT-12. Applegate, Leslie T. Johnston, P. P. Blackwell, Joseph Kennedy, Hanson Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 13 Thursday,] BECKNER—BRENTS—MCHENRY. [November 20. Brown,.J. S. Knott, J. Proctor gentleman moves to strike out “six years” genifickFwAJ- g€a1dm%‘, A- it would be undoubtedly in order. 0 11s, . . . raus, -. . 7 _ Jariies: A. D. Washington, George Mr. CLARDX. I understand this. So the substitute was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report‘ the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that ofi'ered by the Delegate from Clark. Mr. BECKNER. With the leave of the Convention, I will withdraw that. I was just trying to give the Convention a knowl- edge of how we do things in Clark. Of course, I cannot hope to have it come up to that standard. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next vKamendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Fay- ~ette : Amend by striking out the words “four years” in the fourth line and inserting in lieu thereof the following words: “Six years, and they shall be ineligible for re-elec- tion for the ensuing term. To which amendment the Delegate from Christian offered the following amendment : Amend by striking out “six”_ years and inserting “four.” Mr. BRENTS. I make the point of order on that amendment, that the question ‘of ineligibility is provided for in Section 26. The PRESIDENT. If it is the pleasure of the Convention to insert it here they can do it. Mr. MGHENRY. That simply strikes out the word “ six” and inserts “four,” and leaves it exactly the same as it was before. The PRESIDENT. That was not the point of order made by the Delegate from Clinton. Mr. MCHENRY. Well, then, I make it. The PRESIDENT. The Chair thinks the point is good. Mr. CLARDY. Let me show you the difference. It does not strike out the bal- ance of the amendment, only that particu- lar word. Mr. PETTIT. To simplify it, if the The PRESIDENT. If your amend- ment leaves it exactly as it was, you accomplish the same thing by defeating the amendment offered by the Delegate from Ohio. Mr. CLARDY. It does not leave it exactly as it was. The balance of it is left here. Mr. LASSING. I call the ‘yeas and nays on that. Mr. FUNK. I second it. Mr. MCELROY. It seems to me that the amendment of the Delegate from Chris- tian _leaves it exactly as the Committee’s report was. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Allen does not understand that the question of eligibility is brought up by the amend- ment of the Delegate from Fayette, and if the amendment of the Delegate from Chris- tian is adopted as an amendment to the amendment offered by the Delegate from Fayette then the term of the officers would be four years, and they will also be ineligi- ble for re—election. The original report does not render them ineligible. Mr. MCELROY. The Committee’s re- port in the next section makes them ineli- gible. Mr. BULLITT. Only two of them, the Auditor and the Treasurer. Mr. MCCHORD. I would like to have section 26 read for information, at least a portion of it. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Secretary will report section 26 of the report of the Committee. This was done. A vote was then taken on the adoption of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Christian. The re- sult is as follows: YEAS—2I. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Ramsey, W. R. Ayres, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. Bourland, H. R. 14 i EXECUTE E DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] Buchanan, Nathan Clardy, John D. Durbin, Charles. Edrington, W.J. BRENTS. Sachs, Morris A. Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Whitaker, Emery Elmore, T. J. Williams, L. P. V. Hogg, S. P. Wood, J. M. Lassing, L. W. Young, Bennett H. May, John S. mars—~65. Allen, C T. Hines, Thos. H. Allen, M. K. Holloway, J. W. Amos, D. C. Jacobs, R. J. Askew, J. F. Jonson, Jep. C. Beckham, J. C. Kirwan, E. E. Beckner, -W. M. Lewis, W. W. *' Bennett, B. F. Mackoy, W. H. Berkele, Wm. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James McChord, Wm. C. Boles, S. H. McDermott, E. J. Brents, J. A. M cElroy, W. J. Bronston, C. J. McHenry, H. D.’ Brummal, J. M. Miller, Will, Buckner, S. B. Miller, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Burnam, Curtis F. Moore, J. H. Carroll, John D. Moore, Laban T. Chambers, G, D. Muir, J. W. Coke, J. Guthrie Nunn, J. T. Cox, H. O’Hara, R. H. DeHaven, S. E. Parsons, Rob’t T. Doris, W. 1". Petrie, H. G. English, Sam E. Phelps, John L. Farmer, H. H. Pugh, Samuel J. Field, W. W. Quicksall, J. E. Forrester, J. G. Rodes, Robert Forgy, J. M. Swango, G. B. Funk, J. T Trusdell, George Glenn, Dudley A. Twyman, I. W. Goebel, Wm. West, J. F. Graham, Samuel Woolfolk, J. F. Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Mr. President Clay ABSENT—14. Applegate, Leslie T. James, A. D. Auxier, A. J. Blackwell, Joseph Brown, J. S. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, J. S. Hopkins, F. A. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Knott, J. Proctor Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Washington, George The amendment of the Delegate from Fayette was read, and is as follows: Amend section 24 by striking out the word “ 4,” in fourth line, and insert in lieu thereof the Word “ 6; ” and shall be ineligi- ble for re-election for the ensuing term. Mr. BRENTS. I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. DEHAVEN. Mr. MCDERMCTT. Does the previous question prevent a motion to leave the year blank ? The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion will prevent any motion, except the motion to adjourn. I second the call. The result of the roll-call is as follows: YEAs—IQ. Auxier, A. J. Buckner, S. B. English, Sam. E. Field, W. W. Wood, J. M. McDermott, E. J. Woolfolk, J. F. Miller, Will. Young, Bennett H. SAYS—72. Allen, C. T. Hines, J. S. Amos, D. C. Hines, Thomas H. Ayres, W. Hogg, S. P. Beckham, J. C. Holl iway, J. W. Beckner, W. M. Jacobs, R. P. Bennett, B. F. Jonson, Jep. C. Berkele, Wm. Lassing, L. W. Birkhead, B. T. Lewis, W. W. Blackburn, James Mackoy, W. H. Boles, S. H. Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. May, John S. Brents, J. A. McChord, Wm. C. Bronston, C. J. McElrov, W. J. Brummal, J. M. McHenry, H. D. Buchanan, Nathan Miller, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Burnam, Curtis F. Moore, J. H. Carroll, John D. Muir, J. W. Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. O’Hara, R. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Parsons, Rob’t T. Cox, H. Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. E. Pettit, Thos. S. Dorris, W. F: Phelps, John L. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Farmer, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. ' Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Phelps, Zack Sachs, Morris A. Whitaker, Emery Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. West, J. F. Williams. L. P. V. Mr. President Clay ABSENT—16. Allen, M . K. Johnston, P. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Kennedy, Hanson [November 20. EXECUTIVE vDEPARTMEN T. 15 Thursday,] Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. Blackwell, Joseph Knott, J. Proctor Brown, J. S. Moore, Laban T. Hendrick, W. J. Spalding, I. A. Hopkins, F. _A. Straus, F. P. James, A. D. Washington, George READING CLERK. The next amend- ment is that proposed by the Delegate from the city of Louisville, Fifth District. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I askleave to with- draw that amendment, because I expect to offer substantially the same provision as an amendment to section 25. The PRESIDENT/ The Chair hears no objection, and leave is granted to with- draw the amendment. READING CLERK. The next amend— ment is the one proposed by the Delegate from city of Louisville, Seventh District, which reads as follows: Amend section 24 by adding after the words “Auditor of Public Accounts,” in the first line, these words, “A Commissioner of Labor and Manufactories.” I Mr. FUNK. As the Convention has sub- .stantially adopted the greater portion of that amendment, in fact,all I believe,with the ex- ception of one word, and that is “ manufac- tories,” I do not hardly think the Committee would have any objection to having that word added to the report as adopted. I will ask the delegate who offered it (Mr. Clardy‘), if he has any objection‘? The PRESIDENT. The cannot accept the amendment. _ Mr. FUNK. I will withdraw the amend- ment. I . Mr. ASKEW. I withdraw the amend- ment offered by me ' The PRESIDENT. IVithout objection it can be withdrawn. There being no fur- ther amendments, the Clerk will report section 24 as amended. The section as amended was read, and is as follows: “A Treasurer, Auditor of Public Ac- counts, Register of the Land Office, and an Attorney-General, shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at the same gentleman M CDERMOTT—-—FUNK~—ASK cw. [November 20 . time the Governor is elected, for the term of four years each, each of whom shall have been a resident citizen of the State for at least two years next before his election. There shall be elected, by the qualified voters of the"- State, at the same time the Gov- ernor is elected, for the term of four years, a Secretary of State, whose duties shall be to keep a fair register of and attest all the offi- cial acts of the Governor; and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, min- utes and vouchers relative thereto before either House of the General Assembly. He- shall also perform such other duties as may be required of him by law. Mr. BLACKBURN. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Covington (Mr. Mackoy), I believe, was adopted. Mr. MACKOY. There was a substitute offered in place of it, the adoption of which cut that off. Mr. BULLITT. ' “And a Commissioner- of Agriculture”-was not that inserted in this? ’ The CLERK. Yes. “A Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics.” Mr. J ONSON . I have been requested by a gentleman voting against the amend-- ment to the report— The PRESIDENT. The amendment is- not debatable; the previous question is not exhausted. ' Mr. JONSON. I do not arise for the pur-- pose of debating it. I voted for the proposi- tion yesterday to make the Secretary of State elective by the people. I have been re- ' quested by a gentleman to enter a motion to reconsider, with the announcement that he voted against it. I make the motion now, and under the rules it is to lie over, I believe. _ .. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman cannot make the motion, as the previous question is not exhausted. The only way in which that section can be reconsidered is after the previous question is exhausted to reconsider the vote by which the section, as. amended, was adopted, and then retrace your steps until you get to that amendment, and reconsider the vote by which that amendment was adopted. 16 EXECUTIYILDEPAR'LMEN T. Thursday,] I MACKOY—PETTIT—B LACKBURN. [November 20 . Mr. MACKOY. Before that is put—I know it is out of order, and can only be in- troduced by consent of the Convention—— but I should like to have it read. Mr. PETTIT. I object. Mr. MACKOY.. I do not think the gentleman will object if he hears it. It is to add to section 24 these words: “The Secretary of State shall have the same qual- ifications as the other officers named in this section.” There are no qualifications at- tached to the office now at all. The PRESIDENT. Is there any objec- tion to the amendment being new received and voted upon? DELEGATES. Object! Object! The PRESIDENT. There is objection, and the amendment is not in order. Mr. BLACKBURN. My recollection is clear, and several around me agree with me, that when I offered an amendment iproviding that the Secretary of State shall cover certain funds into the Treasury, it was voted down. The Delegate from Coving- ton afterwards offered it, and it was adopted. Mr. MACKOY. I can explain that to the gentleman. It was adopted as a part of that amendment, and there was a substitute to the amendment as amended, which was adopted. The PRESIDEN T. The Chair will state that the statement of the gentleman from Covington is in accordance with the J our- nal, and is correct. Mr. BRONSTON. I rise to a Parlia- cmentary inquiry. I understand the Chair ‘to say that we are now proceeding under the previous question as to that section. I would like to call the attention of the ‘Chair to the fact, and I also understood him to say in order to get at the motion made by the Delegate from McLean, that you would have to retrace your steps entirely until you reached that section. I will ask the Chair if it is not a fact that on yesterday when the amendment as to the Secretary of State The question is on the- :adoption of section 24 as amended. was adopted we were not 'operating under a different previous question from that under which we are operating to-day‘? if that was not considered as a separate matter‘? The PRESIDENT. If the gentleman will refer to the Rules he will find that a member has a right under Parliamentary usage to move the previous question upon amendments and substitutes, or upon the whole matter. Mr. BRONSTON. The point I make is this: That the Chair was mistaken, in his assertion that in order to reconsider the action of this Convention as to the Secre- tary of State that we would have to retrace all these steps. that having been acted upon by the Convention under a previous ques- tion applying only to it, and it can be re- considered alone. The PRESIDENT. It might have been done, but not now under the operation of the previous question. The gentleman did not take advantage of his opportunity at the right time. After the previous question was exhausted on yesterday, it was then in order to make that motion, but the gentle- man did not make the motion at the proper time; and it is not in order to make that motion until the previous question is exhausted. Mr. BRONSTON. I think the Chair is correct in that; but I think the Chair is ‘ mistaken in holding that that motion can not be made after the previous question is exhausted without retracing the steps. The PRESIDENT. Thegentleman is evidently mistaken in that. As a matter of course, after a section is adopted, you cannot reconsider an amendment until you first reconsider the vote by which the sec- tion as amended was adopted. You will have to retrace all the steps, as you will find by referring to every authority on the subject. Mr. JONSON. In order to meet that objection of the Chair, I will now move to reconsider the vote by which this previous question was ordered. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 17 Thursday,] BRONSTON—BURNAM——~BECKHAM. N ovember 20 . The PRESIDENT. That motion is not in order after the previous question is partly executed. Mr. BRONSTON. I merely want to understand clearly the ruling of the Chair so that confusion will not arise hereafter. I understand the Chair to hold that if this _Convention adopts this report of the Com- mittee as to section 24, that none of these matters can be reconsidered, except upon a motion to reconsider, and if that motion ‘carries, you have to retrace step by step until you reach the particular matter. The PRESIDENT. That is the ruling of the Chair. Mr. ASKEW. I would like to have the section reported as amended, so we can vote ‘upon it. DELEGATES. Object! Object! The PRESIEDNT. There is objection, .and it cannot be reported. Mr. BRONSTON. I will call for the yeas and nays. Mr. BECKNER. I second the motion. Mr. BURNAM. I want to ask unani- mous consent of the House, before this vote is taken, to let the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Covington be adopted. Mr. McHENRY. I object. The PRESIDENT. There is objection, .and the only thing in order is the roll-call. Mr. MACKOY. I wish to say that I think we ought to get this section in good shape. The PRESIDENT. Is there objection‘? Mr. McHENRY. I object. Mr. BECKHAM. I would like to in- Iquire if this section is now adopted that the only method to make the ofliee of Secretary of State appointive will not be to move to reconsider the vote by which this section was adopted? The PRESIDENT. The Chair will an- .swer that the only way to bring up any of these amendments thathave been voted upon is to first reconsider the vote by which the s ection was adopted, and then a motion to reconsider the amendments will be in or- der. Mr. BECKHAM. And the only way. to turn the fees into the Treasury is to recon- sider the vote by which this amendment was adopted. Mr. PETTIT. The General Assembly can do that. The PRESIDENT. In order that the Chair may not be misunderstood, he will state that in order to reconsider any amend- ment of the first degree, it is first necessary to reconsider the .vote by which the section was adopted. After that reconsideration is ordered, then it is in order to reconsider the vote by which any amendment of the first degree was adopted. If it is an amendment of the second degree, the amendment of the first degree, to which it was joined by the vote of the House, has to be reconsidered first, and then the amendment of the second degree. The Clerk then proceeded to call the roll, and the vote resulted as follows: YEAS—52. Allen, C. T. Jonson, Jep. C. Auxier, A. J. Kirwan, E. E. Ayres, W. W. Lassing, L. W. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Birkhead, B. T. .Mackoy, W. H. Blackburn, James Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. May, John S. Brents, J. A. Buchanan, Nathan Chambers, G. D. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox. H. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. English, Sam. E. Farmer, H. H. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. McElroy, W. J. Miller, Will. Moore, J. H. O’Hara, R. H. Parsons Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Trusdell, George Graham, Samuel Twyman, I. W. Hanks, Thos. H. West, J. F. - Hines, J. S. Williams, L. P. V. Hogg, S P. Wood, J. M. Holloway, J. W. Mr. President Clay HAYS—37. Allen, M. K. Hines, Thomas H. 18 EXECUTIVE DEPAfiTMENT. Thursday,] BLACKBURN—MCHENRY—BURNAM. [November 20. Amos, D. C. Jacobs, R. P. Askew, J. F. Knott, J. Proctor Beckham, J. C. McChord, Wm. C. Beckner, W. M. McDermott, E. J. Berkele, Wm. McHenry, H. D. Boles, S. H. Miller, W. H. Bronston, C. J. Brummal,J. M. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Buckner, S. B. Muir, J. W. Bullitt, W. G. Nunn, T. J. Burnam, Curtis F. Petrie, H. G. Carroll, John D. Rodes, Robert DeHaven, S. E. Sachs, Morris A Elmore, T. J. Swango, G. B. Field, W. W. Whitaker, Emery Woolfolk, J. F. ‘ Glenn, Dudley A. Young, Bennett H. Goebel, William Harris, Geo. C. ABSENT—11. Applegate, Leslie T. Johnston, P. P. Blackwell, Joseph Kennedy, Hanson Brown, J. S. Spalding, I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Straus, F. P. Hopkins, F. A. Washington, George James, A. D. The PRESIDENT. The balance of the Report of the Joint Committee upon the Executive Department is before the Committee of the Whole. The Convention has now disposed of the only section which has been reported by the Committee of the \Vhole to the Convention, which was sec- tion 24. Mr. BLACKBURN. If it is in order I would move that the Convention resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of considering the balance of the report. Mr. M oHENRY. There are only two more sections here, and why cannot we dis- pose of them in the Convention? But I shall offer no objection to going into Com- mittee of the Whole. The PRESIDENT. The Committee of the Whole has only reported two sections, sections 10 and 24; and the other sections are now pending before the Committee, and the House does not have jurisdiction of the report until the Committee of the Whole first reports it back to the Convention. Mr. MCHEN RY. I second the motion to go into Committee of the Whole. 1 The motion being put, was carried ; and the President designated Mr. Coke as Chairman of the COMMITTEE OF THE \VHOLE. Mr. BURNAM. If the Clerk will look back to the record, he will find that a very large number of sections of the report of the Joint Committee on Executive Affairs have been adopted and passed by the House, and those that were adopted I would like to have reported. The READING CLERK. All the sec- tions of the report, except sections 10, 24. 25, 26, 27 and 28 have been adopted by the Committee of the Whole. Sections 10 and 24 have been adopted by the Convention. Sections 25, ‘.26, 27, 28 are still before the Committee of the Whole and unacted upon. Mr. CLAY. I want to rise to a point of order: that although those sections have been adopted by the Committee of the Whole, none of them have been reported to the Convention except sections 10 and 24. The CHAIRMAN. That is the status. Under the resolution adopted the other day, the next section in order will be considered. Mr. PETTIT. I have an amendment that I desire to offer, just simply to take its place on the table, so as not to be cut off by the previous question. The amendment was read. and is as fol- lows: “ The Governor shall not, during his term of office, be elected a Senator to the Senate of the United States” to be inserted in sec- tion 15. The CLERK. The next section is sec- tion 25. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I wish to offer amendment to that section, and as it refers to the oflice of Attorney General, which is also mentioned in section 26, I will ask that both of those sections be taken up together. The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule we take them up separately. If there is no ob- jection it will be so considered. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 19 Thursday,] FUNK—TWYMAN—HINES. November 20 . The Reading Clerk read the sections, as follows: The Attorney General shall years Section 25. have been a practicing lawyer before his election. Section 26. The Auditor of Public Ac- counts and Treasurer shall be ineligible to be elected or to hold said offices for the suc- ceeding four years after the expiration of the term for which they shall have been elected. The duties and responsibilities of these officers, and those of Attorney Gen- eral, Register of the Land Oflice and Secre- tary; of State, shall be prescribed by law. That inferior or State officers not specifi- cally provided for in this Constitution may be appointed or elected in such manner as may be prescribed by law, for a term not exceeding four years. The amendment of Mr. McDermott was read, and is as follows:. Strike out section 25, and strike out the words “ Attorney General” in the fifth line of section 26 and substitute in section 25 of the Report of the Committee these words: “The Attorney General, if requested so to do by the Governor or the Legislature, shall prepare bills suitable for the consider- ation of the Legislature, and he shall per- form such other duties as the law may pre- ' scribe, or as the Legislature or the Go\'—. ernor in his official capacity may ask him to perform. He, and such salaried assistants as the Legislature may allow him, shall represent the Commonwealth and the Ex- ecutive officers thereof in all legal proceed- ings, and no other attorneys shall be paid for duties required of him. The Attorney General shall have been a practicing lawyer years before his election. On any bill or question presented to the Governor in the discharge of his duties, he may ask for the written opinion of the Attorney General, and the Governor may in writing call the attention of the Attorney General to any violations of law that require prose- cutions in the Courts, and the Attorney General may in writing call the attention of the Commonwealth’s Attorneys to any violations of law. The Commonwealth’s Attorneys shall be subject to the direction of the Attorney General in the discharge of their ofiicial duties.- The CLERK. The following amend- ments are pending to section 26, presented before the one just read. The Delegate from the Seventh District of Louisville has offered the following amend- ment to said section : Amend by adding after the wvords “and those,” in the fifth line, the words “Com- missioner of Labor and Manufactories, and.” Mr. FUNK. I will withdraw that, as it has been virtually adopted in another sec- tion. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection’ the gentleman has leave to withdraw it. Mr. TWYMAN. I offered an amend- ment, that was reported the other day, to section 26. I desire to withdraw that, and substitute this. The Delegate from Larue offered the fol- lowing: Amend section 26 by striking out so much thereof as makes the Auditor of Pub—- lic Accounts ineligible for a succeeding term. The Delegate from the county of Clinton moves to amend section 25 by striking out lines 1, 2, 3, and the words “been elected,” in line 4. The Delegate from the county of War- ren (Mr. Rodes) offered the following: Strike out the first paragraph in section 26, ending in line 4 with the word “elect- ed,” and insert in lieu thereof the following: “The Auditor of Public Accounts shall each be eligible for re-election to a succeed- ing term, but not for a third term until one full term thereof has elapsed. Mr. T. H. HINES. I desire to offer a substitute for the 26th section. M1. RODES. I desire to strike out the word “ each ” in my amendment. It is a mistake. . ' ' The CHAIRMAN. It can be done. The substitute of the Delegate from Franklin was read, and is as follows: The Treasurer shall be ineligible to re- election for the succeeding four years after the expiration of the term for which he shall have been elected, and the Auditor of Public Accounts shall be ineligible to re- election for th‘e succeeding four years after he shall have held the ofiice for two terms; 20* EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. I I Thursday,] DEHAvEN——-BRoNsToN-BRENTs. [November 20 . if he shall have been elected for two suc- cessive terms. The duties and responsibili- ties of these ofliicers and those of Attorney General, Register of the Land Office and Secretary of State shall be prescribed by law. Inferior State officers, not specifically provided for in this Constitution, may be appointed or elected in such manner as may be prescribed by law for a term not exceed- ing four years. Mr. DEHAVEN. I think that it is but just to the Convention to state that a portion of the 26th section was the subject of a good deal of controversy in the Com- mittee room. A majority of the Commit- tee, however, have agreed upon this report as it now stands, and in my own judgment I see no reason why the Auditor should not be re-eligible at least for a second term. I think the reasons, however, apply with great force to the Treasurer. I think if elected for four years that he should be ineligible for a second term in order that others may follow after him, and look into the state of his accounts, but I do not think the same reason applies to the oflicc of Auditor. Mr. BRONSTON. I want to offer an amendment to the substitute offered by the Delegate from Franklin. It was read, and is as follows: The Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Treasurer and Secretary of State, Register of Land Ofiice. Attorney-General and Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics shall be ineligible to re-election for a succeeding term. Mr. BRENTS. Section 3 of the report of the Committee on Executive Depart- ment makes the Governor ineligible for the succeeding four years after the expira- tion of the term for which he was elected. Section 26 makes the Auditor of Public Accounts and‘ the Treasurer ineligible to be elected, or to hold office for the succeeding term for which they shall have been elected. At the proper time, I propose to offer an amendment to strike out section 3. If my amendment prevails, the Governor will be eligible to re-electionfand will not be disqualified by a Constitutional provis- ion, but will be subject to the will of the people, who are the sovereigns in this country. I have offered an amendment to strike out lines 1, 2, 3, and the first two words of line 4 of section 26, and if that amendment prevails, the Auditor and Treasurer will be eligible to re-election. I am not fond of speaking, and it is only a sense of duty to myself and constituents that prompts me to speak upon this occasion. I have positive convictions, and, in my opinion, a vital principle is involved; and I earnestly hope every Delegate will give it his serious consideration. ' There are two antagonistic ideas in conflict: re-eligibility and ineligibility. One is right, and the other radically wrong; and I hope the right idea will prevail in this Convention. I Want the Constitution adopted by this Convention to be consistent with itself. 1 do not want a part of the officers made re- eligible and a part ineligible. Let one idea prevail and a consistent Constitution adopted, then the question can be tested, and if a wrong step has been taken the peo- ple can and will force a return to true principles of Government. There is no reason why a mistake should be made with the experience of a century before us. The question now under consideration is in re- gard to two of the State officers; but I will avail myself of the opportunity to discuss the principle involved, and will have more to say about the Chief Executive than the other Executive ofiicers, and when done I will not care to say more on the subject. Can I refer you to any document that more clearly, precisely and truthfully de- clares the right of men and the true prin- ciples of Government, than the Declaration of Independence of 1776? I will read an extract from it: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights Governments are instituted among men, deriving their EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 21 Thursday,] BRENTS. [November 20 . just powers from the consent of the gov- erned; that whenever any form of Govern- ment becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and or- ganizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. It is declared that all men are created equal, and that they possess inalienable rights; that Governments are instituted to secure these rights, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, and that the people have the right to alter or abolish their Government and institute a new one. After.the independence of the Colonies was acknowledged, the patriots of the Revolutionary war, adopted a Constitu- tion for their Government in which they followed the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence, and com- menced the Constitution with, “We, the people of the United States,” thereby de- claring it the people’s Government. That Constitution made the President and every elective oflicer eligible to a re-election. Before the Constitution was adopted and. became the organic law of the land, the same question was raised that has been brought into this Convention. The Con- stitution was opposed, because the Presi- dent was made eligible to a re-election. That objection was ably and correctly an- swered, and to the satisfaction of the peo- ple. I will read from that answer. It will be found in the Federalist, No. 72, and commencing on page 310: The last (re-eligibility) is necessary to enable the people, when they see reason to approve of his conduct, to continue him in the station, in order to prolong the utility of his talents and virtues, and to secure to the Government the advantage of perman- ency in a wise system of administration. Nothing appears more plausible at first sight, nor more ill-founded upon close in- spection, than a scheme which, in relation to the present point, has had some respect- able advocates. I mean that of continu- ing the Chief Magistrate in office for a cer- tain time and then excluding him from it, either for a limited period or forever after. This exclusion, whether temporary or per- petual, would have nearly the same effects, and these effects would be for the most part rather pernicious than salutary. One ill effect of the exclusion would be a diminution of the inducements to good be- havior. There are few men who would not feel much less zeal in the discharge of a duty, when they were conscious that the advantage of the station with which it was connected must be relinquished at a deter- minate period, than when they were per- mitted to entertain a hope of obtaining by merit'ing a continuance of them. This po- sition will not be disputed, so long as it is admitted, that the desire of reward is one the strongest incentives of human conduct; or that the best security for the fidelity of mankind is to make interest coincide with duty. Even the love of fame, the ruling passion of the noblest minds, which would prompt a man to plan and undertake exten- sive and arduous enterprises for the public benefit, requiring considerable time to ma- ture and perfect them, if he could flatter himself with the prospect of being allowed to finish what he had begun, would, on the contrary, deter him from the undertaking when he foresaw that he must quit the scene before he could accomplish the work, and must commit that, together with his own reputation, to hands which might not be unequal or unfriendly to the task. The most to be expected from the generality of men in such _a situation is the negative merit of not doing harm, instead of the positive nierit of doing good. Another ill-effect of the exclusion would be the temptation to sordid views, to pecu- lation, and, in some instances, to usurpa- tion. An avaricious man, who might hap- pen to fill the oflice, looking forward to a time when he must at all events yield up the advantages he enjoyed, would feel a propensity, not easy to be resisted by such. a man, to make the best use of his oppor- tunities while they lasted, and might not scruple to have recourse to the most corrupt expedients to make the harvest as abundant as it was transitory. Did our ancestors make a mistake by adopting the principle of re-eligibility? I will let James Guthrie, the President of the Constitutional Convention of 1849, answer. I read from a speech made by him in the Con- vention on the 18th day of October, 1849: My reading of the history of Democracy in America, and the lessons which it gives us, persuade me that the intelligence of the 22 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ATlmrsdayJ BRENTS. people will induce them to select for all their offices men capable from their experi- ence, and their talents, their knowledge. their information and their integrity for the particular office in question. Take the galaxy of distinguished individuals who have filled the Presidency of the United States, elected by the people themselves, and a better example of the intelligence and capacity of the people to select for that high and distinguished office cannot be pro— duced in the annals of the world. A great principle is involved in this ques- tione—a great principle of‘ ‘responsibility. Responsibility to whom‘? To the people‘? The term of office is the great responsibility to which I look The reward the people are to bestow after he has served his term, when he and his friends mav be greeted with the proud certificate that a re-election will give him, for the able and efiicient manner in which he has discharged the duties of his trust, will give to the ofiicer a stimulus to increase his intelligence, to guard his integrity and his impartiality in the distribution of the public justice of the country. It is to that reward he should look. It is to the approbation of a free, intelli- gent, and patriotic people that the patriot looks as the brightest reward for the services and dangers he has encountered in the ser- vice of the people, sure that that approbation, following an upright, virtuous, correct, and impartial conduct is better calculated than any other, to make him live in the pages of history. This is strong, clear and emphatic lan- guage, used by one of Kentucky’s ablest statesmen, and whose memory all Kentuck- ians cherish with pride. Nearly all the States in this Union make their Governors re-eligible. Can any one say that any harm has come to the nation because the President is made re-eligible? The people have an unwritten law—-a law unto themselves, which is much better than if contained in a Constitution, as their liberties are not abridged. Nor the indi- vidual prescribed and declared unworthy of an endorsement. They have proven that they can be trusted. Has any harm come to any of the States because their Gov- ernors have been made re-eligible? Let the growth, prosperity. the wealth and grandeur of those States answer. Com- pare Kentucky with those States, and then answer and say if Kentucky has gained by making her Governors ineligible. I must return: I wish to further invite your atten- tion to the fundamental principles of gov- ernment, as declared by our revolutionary sires, Is Thomas Jefferson good authority with you? He was a great statesman, and no man had a better conception of the true principles of government, or had more confidence in the people. In his first Inaugural Address in declar- ing the essential principles of government, he included, among others, the following: Equal and exact justice to all men of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political. " A jealous care of the right of election by the people. ' ‘*1 Absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the 'viz‘al principle of Repub- lics, from which there is no appeal but to force, the vital principle of despotism. *9 The diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of pub- lic reason. 0. J eiferson also said that “ error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.” “Equal and exact justice to all men.” None were prescribed and de- clared unworthy or unfit to be re-elected by the people. “A jealous care of the right of election by the people.” The people were to have a free choice and not denied the right to re-elect an officer with whom they were well pleased, whose services they desired above all others. A majority were to rule, and education and not ineligibility was to be relied en to cure the evils that existed. Nathan Gaither, the Delegate from Adair county in the Constitutional Convention of 1849, said in a speech de- livered on the eighth day of November. 1849: Call your oflicials to account as soon and as often as possible before their powers cor- rupt them, and if they have done well re- ward them by re-election, if they desire it. If I understand the practical operation 0 f the theory of those who contend for the in- eligibility of the sherifl’ and constable TNovember 2O . v EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 23 Thursday,] BRENTS. [November 20 . amounts to this: You elect him and put him in office, and say this is your only chance, and so go on and be a great scoun- drel, and like the small-pox, which must have its various stages, and its confluent and distinct character, so must be your progress in rascality in office Certain that we shall cast you off as soon as you are pitied and discovered. Then we will bring forward others to take the infection. I want a better remedy than that. Nathan Gaither was a distinguished citi- zen of Kentucky; a pure man, who ad- hered to J efl'ersonian principles with as much tenacity as any man in the State, and was loved and honored by all who knew him. Men are fallible, and we cannot expect perfection in government, but may expect that evils will exist under any form of gov- ernment. In proposing a remedy for evils, we ought to be very careful that we do not make a mistake, and make matters worse. Justice Story, I suppose, will be accepted as good authority. I therefore réad his opinion respecting the fundamental law of the land. It must perish, if there be not that vital spirit in the people which alone can nour- ish, sustain and direct all its movements. It is vain that statesmen shall form plans of government, in which the beauty and harmony of a republic shall be embodied in visible order; shall be built upon solid sub- structions, and adorned by every useful or- nament, if the inhabitants suffer the silent powers of time to dilapidate its walls, or crumble its massive supporters into dust 5* ‘3* \Vho can preserve the rights and liberties of the people when they shall be aban- doned by themselves? Who shall keep watch in the temple when the watchmen sleep at their posts ?—[The Constitution, page 28.] He does not believe that all evils can be cured in ‘a Constitution. He recognizes that the people must be trusted, and that the vital principles to sustain the Govern- ment must exist in them. The danger in this Convention is in at- tempting to do too much, instead of trust- ing the people. A man, who rose from the humblest walks of life to be Chief Magis- trate of the United States, and whose name is enshrined in the hearts of the American people, said this was a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Yes; it commences with the people. They are the sovereigns, and none can set them- selves up as the rightful rulers by virtue of Divine authority or their superior wisdom. Government is by the people. They not only commence it, but they carry it on and control it. They select agents to perform certain duties, and give them limited terms of oflice, and say to them, at the expira- tion of the terms of oflice, that they must ‘return their commissions to the people, in order that they may renew them; or select new agents to serve them. Any thing short of this is an infringement upon the sovereignty of the people. , Government is for the people. It is not for a few or the oflice-holders, but for all the people, and to protect their lives, liber- ties and property and to promote their peace and happiness. ' It should protect and shield the humblest and weakest citizen in the land, and all above him will most certainly be protected. This is my idea of government, and I will stand by it here and elsewhere and defend it against all attacks from whatever source they may come. i . It was said in the House of Commons in a debate on the Irish question, that the laws madefor Ireland were good laws, and that the people of Ireland had no right to complain. Sir William E. Gladstone, the great Eng- lish statesman, in reply said: “It is not a question as to whether the laws are good laws or not; that the true question is, who made the laws, and that the people to be governed by the laws had a right to make them ?” That great statesman was right, and the people ought to have the right to retain a good officer as well as the right to select their agents for the first time. There is not a Delegate in this Conven- 24 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. * Tlfiirsdayj] BRENTS. [November 2th- tion who will say that the people are not capable of self-government, or that they ought not to be trusted to select their own agents. On the contrary, all will say that the people are capable of self-government and have the right to choose the oflicers. If this be true, what right have we to pro- hibit and prevent the people from indorsing~ and retaining a good oflicer if they desire to do so ‘? What right have we to say to the people that they shall not re-elect an officer that they have tried and found honest and capa- ble and in whom they have the utmost con- fidence‘? Is it right, is it self-govermnent to say to the people that they shall not re-elect a man with empe'rience, but that they shall select from men wit/102d enpericuce'? Is it con- sistent to say that the people are capable to decide whether or not a man who has never been tested, and wit/load errperience, will make a good Governor; but are not capable to decide whether a man has made a good or bad Governor‘? It seems to me that if the people are capable to decide in the first instance. there should be no doubt about their capacity to decide in the second instance. I wish to notice some reasons I have heard given for making the Governor and other officers ineligible to a re-election. It is said that’ rotation in oflice is the true rule, and with so many good and capable men in the State, that one term is all that one man ought to have, and that it would give others a chance. In reply, I say in the first place that rotation is the true rule, but it is not our right to rotafe; that right belongs to the people. It is our business to give the peo- ple the chance to determine the question in their own way. In the second place, the oifices belong to the people, who have the right to select their own ofiicers for their own good and to promote their own wel- fare, and we have no right to make places for the office-seekers. It is said that if ofiicers are eligible to re-election that they will use the ofiices and the power given them to secure a re-elec- tion. This is based upon the presumption that the power of office corrupts, demor- alizes and renders men unfit to hold oflice for longer than one term, and that the peo- ple have not sufficientintelligence to decide whether an oflicer has been faithful to his trust or not; or that the people themselves are corrupt, and that a corrupt man in of- fice can, by improper means, influence them to continue him in ofiice; therefore we must act the part of wise guardians to save the people from themselves. Those who use this argument forget that the officehold- er may be an aspirant to another office, and will have the same opportunity to use the influence of his office to secure an election to the office to which he aspires as to secure a re-election to the ofiice which he holds: and they further forget that a bad man in‘ ofiice, without any hope for re-election, and with no responsibility, is a dangerous man,. and will do much harm during his first term. The hope of reward by a re-election is the best incentive to a faithful discharge of the duties of an ofiicer. The ofiiceholder can look forward to the time when the peo- ple will say, “Well done, good and faithful servant.” The National Government has tried re-eligibility. and so has nearly all the States, and no harm has come of it. Are Kentuckians less capable of self-govern- ment than the people of other States ?' They can stop an incompetent officer at‘ the end of one term, and a good officer at one or two terms, as they may determine. I am a native Ken- tuckian, and I love the old Commonwealth and her people, and remember with pride her great statesmen of the past, and I remember how the people in 1849 rose in their might, and wrested from the few the oflices, and restored them to the people, and I would feel humiliated if this Convention should declare that the people of Kentucky had made no progress, but had retrograded, and it was necessary to turn the hands of EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25 Thursday,] HINES—BUCKNER—MCDERMOTT. [November 20 . . time back more than forty years. I do not believe this Convention will do it. It warmed my heart the other day to hear Delegates, who served in the Convention of 1849, stand upon this floor and appeal to us to take the advice of the people, and to do nothing unless they wanted it, as the Convention of 1849 did. They made a grand, noble and brave fight for the people. Let us add to their work by enlarging the liberties of the people, and all will-be well. Mr. T. H. HINES. There was a mistake in the amendment which I sent up, and I wish to send up a memorandum to cor- rect it. The CHAIRMAN. it can be done. Mr. BUCKNER. I have an amend- ment that I desire to offer to section 25. It was read, and is as follows: Amend section 25 by adding thereto the following: ‘ He shall be the Chief ()fiicer of the De- partment of Justice, to whom all Prosecut- ing Attorneys of the Commonwealth shall report, and over whom he shall exercise supervisory control in all criminal and penal prosecutions ; and the General Assem- bly shall enact laws to enforce this provi- sion. The CLERK. The next amendment to said section is the one offered by the Dele- gate from city of Louisville, Fifth District. Mr. McDERMOTT. I would like to have that amendment passed until the ques- tion under debate is disposed of. I will ask that my amendment be passed to the bottom of the list. Mr. COX. I object. their order. Mr. McDERMOTT. If you want the strict order, I will ask for the reading of the other amendments, as there are other amendments which precede mine. The CHAIRMAN. All the amend- ments have been read, and the Secretary is reading the amendments in their order. Mr. McDERMOTT. There were other amendments ofi'ered before mine, and they ought to be voted on first. Without objection, Let them come in The CLERK. There are no other amendments to that section. Mr. McDERMOTT. But, by consent, sec- tions 25 and 26 are being considered to- gether. The CHAIRMAN. They are being con- sidered together; but I do not understand that you have to vote upon them together.- Mr. McDERMOTT. That is the effect of it. I did not want to interrupt this de- bate by bringing up debate on an entirely different and foreign matter. Mr. BLACKBURN. While that might be true, if the amendment is to section 25, it ought to be considered with section 25,. rather than to consider amendments to both sections together. Mr. MCDERMCTT. Section 25 simply says: “The Attorney-General shall be a practicing attorney—years before his elec- tion.” Section 26 also relates to the Attor- ney-General, and voting in this way does not at all interfere with the harmony of the proceedings. If the Delegate Wants to be particular as to form, however, I will withdraw that part of my amendment which relates to section 25, and add it alone to section 26. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no ob- jection, the gentleman has leave. The amendment of the Delegate from Hart was again read. Mr. BUCKNER. With the permission- of the Committee, I would withdraw that as an amendment to section 25, and make it apply to section 26. so that it may be considered in connection with the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Louis- ville. . The CHAIRMAN. There is no objec- tion, and such leave is granted. The question is on the adoption of section 25; there are no amendments to it. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I move to fill in the blank by inserting the word “eight.” Mr. DEHAVEN. I move to fill in the , blank by inserting the word “six.” 26 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. RAMSEYZPHELI’S——CLARDY. Mr. RAMSEY. 'I move to insert the word “four” in the blank. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I think the rule is in filling blanks that the vote is taken on the longest time first. I wish to call the attention of the Convention to what my amendment is. It simply means that the Attorney-General shall have been a prac- ticing lawyer for eight years before he is eligible to that important ofiice. The amendment was adopted—yeas, 50; nays, 17 . My. RAMSEY. I desire to withdraw my amendment. I offered it under a misap- prehension as to what the blank to be filled referred to. The CHAIRMAN. Leave is given to withdraw it. A vote being taken on the section as amended, it was adopted. Section 26 was then read. Mr. CLARDY. I would like to ask unanimous consent, as it has been already adopted in the other section, to have the “ Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics” to come in this section, and the section following: .‘The Attorney-General, Register of the Land ()fiice and Commis- sioner of Agriculture, Labor and Sta- tistics.” The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate will please put his amendment in writing. The amendment of the Delegate from Larue was read, and is as follows: Amend section 26 as follows: Strike out so much thereof as makes the Auditor of Public Accounts ineligible for a succeeding term. Mr. TWYMAN. I desire to say but a few words in reference to that amendment. There are several substitutes and amend- ments pending to the same section looking to ‘the same end, which is sought to be ac- complished by this amendment. I am well satisfied, and I do not believe any Dele- gate on this floor can give a good reason why the Auditor of Public Accounts should be allowed to serve only four years. His duties are clerical and difiicult to learn. I have been informed that it requires nearly two years for one to become aproficient Auditor of Public Accounts. Being of that character, and not responsible in any way, I can see no reason why he should be made ineligible after four years. There are amendments which make him ineligible after eight years. I am perfectly willing to accept that. But to make him ineligi- ble after four years would be to elect a strange'man in a strange office, who would not become proficient, perhaps, until two years of his term had passed by. I cannot see why the Committee reported thus in reference to that ofiicer. While I am in favor, in many instances, of making him ineligible, in this instance I think there should be an exception to the rule. His duties are of such a peculiar character and so varied, that it requires large and ex- tended experience to be a successful Aud- itor. I inslst, therefore, that this Conven- tion adopt that, and I will heartily sup- port the idea of making him ineligible af- ter eight years. Mr. RODES. In order to harmonize some apparent conflicts, I would suggest to the gentleman from Larue that he ac- cept the amendment I have offered ; I un- derstand him to be willing to accept it, in order that the vote may be taken upon the proposition now. I will ask the Clerk to read my amendment. Mr. MACKOY. There has been a sub- stitute offered by the Delegate from Frank- lin which I will ask to have read. The amendment of Mr. Brents was read again. The amendment of Mr. Rodes was also read again. The substitute of Mr. T. H. Hines was again read, and is as follows: The Treasurer shall be ineligible to re- election for the succeeding four years after the expiration of the term for which he shall have been elected; and the Auditor of Public Accounts shall be ineligible to re- election for the succeeding four years after he shall- have held the office for two terms EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 27 Thursday,] MILLER—BECKNER—Cox E. [November 20. if he shall have been elected for two suc- cessive terms. The duties and responsibilities of these officers, and those of Attorney General, Register of the Land Offiee, Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics, and Secretary of State shall be prescribed by law. Inferior State officers, not specifically provided‘ for in this Constitution, may be appointed or elected in such manner as may be prescribed by law for a term not exceed- ing four years. A The amendment thereto of Mr. Bronston was again read, and is as follows: The Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Treasurer, Secretary of State, Register of Land Ofiice, Attorney General and Com- missioner of Agriculture, Labor and Sta- tistics shall be ineligible to rc-eleetion for a succeeding term. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the Committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. Mr. BECKNER. I desire leave to with- draw the amendment just read of the Dele- gate fro'm Lexington (Mr. Bronston) at his request. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, such leave is granted. The question being put on the motion of Mr. Miller, it was carried. THE CONVENTION. The President, Mr. Clay, thereupon re- sumed the Chair. Mr. COKE. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the Joint Committee on Execu- tive Afi'airs. They have directed me to report progress, and ask leave to sit again. Upon a vote being taken, the report was adopted. Mr. KNOTT. I hope I may have the at- . tention of the Delegates while I read the following letter: The President, and each member of the Constitutional Convention, and their wives, or sweethearts (as the case may be) are respectfully and cordially invited to partake of a Con. Con. lunch with us on Thursday, Q November 27th, 1890, from 6 P. M to 6 A. M. if necessary. The Clerks and all con- nected with the Convention are included.’ “The Kentucky Convention March ” will’ be ready and will be performed on the piano on the occasion. We have no axes to grind. This is social in evefy particular, humble as we are. We only wish to con- tribute our small portion towards the hospi- tality for which Frankfort is or should be noted. Respectfully, L. D. AND MARY REYNOLDS HOLLOWAY. Opposite Governor’s Mansion. Mr. PRESIDENT. I hope that every Delegate of this Convention will be _present on that occasion, if in the city. They will find alunch as sumptuous, hospitable and bounteous as this invitation is cordial. I hope we will all put ourselves to some little inconvenience, really to be. there to ac- knowledge the honor that this good lady has done us in dedicating to this body a piece of music that she has just composed and had published. Mr. JONSON. Will permit a question ‘? Mr. KNOTT. Certainly. Mr. J ONSON. The invitation is ad- dressed to those who have wives and sweet- hearts. Suppose a gentleman should be in the unfortunate condition of having neither wife nor sweetheart '? I will ask if some other gentleman’s wife or sweetheart may be substituted? Mr. KNOTT. That would be with the gentleman himself. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the Committee do now take a recess until 3' o’clock. 4 The motion, being put, was carried. the gentleman AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention was called to order by the President. _ Mr. AUXIER. I desire to withdraw an amendment I offered. The PRESIDENT. We are not in Committee of the Whole. We are now in Convention. The amendment, was ofi'ered in Committee of the Whole. 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday] A UXIER—DEHZVENT-BLQCKBURN. [Novembers20 .~ Mr. AUXIER. No, sir; it was in the Convention. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the gentleman can withdraw his amend- ment. ~ Mr. DEHAVEN. I move that we re- solve ourselves into Committee of the WVhole for the further consideration of the report of the Committee on Executive De- partment. And the question being taken on said motion, it was decided in the afiirmative. The Convention then resolved itself into COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. Mr. Coke in the Chair. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move that the Com- mittee of the Whole rise, report to the Convention the Report of the Committee, with the vhrious amendments pertaining thereto. and ask to be discharged from its further consideration. Mr. BLACKBURN. Before that is put, I would like to offer this amendment. The CHAIRMAN. Does the Delegate wish it read ‘? Mr. BLACKBURN. No, sir. Mr. BUCKNER. Do I understand the motion to be to report every section of this report back to the House‘? The CHAIRMAN. The motion is to report back the whole matter and ask to be discharged from its further consideration. Mr. BUCKNER. Will that have the effect of preventing any .further amend- ment ‘? Mr. DEHAVEN. No, sir; my object is to get it back to the Convention. Mr. BUCKNER. I desire to say that I have a few amendments which I wish to offer. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to offer a substitute. - On motion, the Committee rose. THE CONVENTION. The President resumed the Chair. The PRESIDENT. The Committee of the Whole has not reported yet. Mr. COK,E. The Committee of the Whole has had under consideration the Re- port of the Committee on Executive Ofii- cers for the State at Large. They instruct me to say to the Convention that they have had the same under consideration and re‘- port back the whole report and the pend— ing amendments and substitutes, and ask to be relieved from the further considera— tion of the same. And the question being taken on the adoption of the said report, it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a substi- tute for section 17 on the Clerk’s desk which I desire to offer. I do not care to have it read. The PRESIDENT. Under the rule which requires the Convention to act sep- arately on each independent section or proposition. the Clerk will report the next section. The first section of the report of the Committee was then read. and is as fol- lows: The Supreme Executive power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Chief Magistrate, who shall be styled the Gov- ernor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. And the question being taken, the section was adopted. The section 2 of the report was then read, and is as follows: ’ The Governor shall be elected for the term of four years by, the qualified voters of the State, at the time when, and places where, they shall respectively vote for Rep- resentatives. The person having the high- est number of votes shall be Governor; but if two or more shall be equal and highest in votes, the election shall be determined by lot, in such manner as the General Assem- bly may direct. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, section two will be considered as adopted. Section three of the report was read, and is as follows: The Governor shall be ineligible for the succeeding four years after the expiration of the term for which he shall have been elected. Mr. BRENTS. I have an amendment. I EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 29 Thursday,] MILLER—BnENTs—Hocc. [November 20. The amendment offered by Mr. Brents was read, and is as follows: Amend the report of the Committee -on Executive Department by striking out all of section three. , The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the amendment of the Delegate from Clinton. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the previous question upon the section and its amendments. And the question being taken upon said motion, same was carried. Mr. BRENTS. I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. HOGG. I second it. YEAS—(i. Blackburn, James Montgomery, J. F. Brents, J. A. O’Hara, R. H. Hines, J. S. Phelps, John L. NAYS—7 3. Allen, C. T. Holloway, J. W. Allen, M. K. Jonson, Jep. C. Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. Auxier, A. J, Lewis, W. W. Ayres, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. Beckham, J. C. Martin, W. H. Beckner, W. M. May, John S. Bennett, B. F. McChord, Wm. C. Birkhead, B. T. McDermott, E. J. Boles, S. H. McElroy, W. J. Bourland, H R. Bronston, C. J. McHenry, H. D. Miller, Will. Brummal, J. M. Miller, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, J. H. Buckner, S. B. Moore, Laban T. Bullitt, W. G. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Nunn, T. J. Carroll, John D. Parsons, Rob’t T. ‘Chambers, G D. Petrie, H. G. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Pettit, Thomas S. Phelps, Zack Cox, H. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Quicksall, J. E. Durbin, Charles Ramsey, W. R. Edrington, W. J. Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. ' Sachs, Morris A. Farmer, H. H. Smith, H. H. Field, W. W. Smith, W. Scott Forrester, J.G. Trusdell, George Forgy, J. M Twyman, I. W. Funk, J. T. West, J. F. Glenn, Dudley A. vWhitaker, Emery Graham, Samuel Wood, J. M. Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, Thomas H. Hogg, S. P Woolfolk, J .F. Young, Bennett H. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—21. Amos, D. C. James, A. D. Applegate, Leslie T. Johnston, P. P. ‘ Berkele, Wm. Kennedy, Hanson Blackwell, Joseph Knott, J. Proctor Brown, J. S. Lassing, L. W. Doris, W. F. Spalding, I. A. English, Samuel E. Straus, F. P. Goebel, William Swango, G. B. Hendrick, W. J. Hopkins, F. A. Jacobs, R. P. A vote being taken on the section, it was adopted. Section four of said report was then read, and is as follows. He shall be at least thirty-five years of age, a citizen of the United States and of this State, and have been an inhabitant of this State at least six years next preceding his election. Mr. WOOD. I offer an amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Wood, ‘which is as follows: Amend by striking out the word “five,” in the first line, after the word “thirty.” Mr. WOOD. I see no valid reason Why a man shall be thirty-five years old before he can be the Chief Executive Ofiicer of the State. I can see no good reason why we should require him to be older than other States require, with, I believe, one solitary exception. I believe in the forty-two States of the Union there is only one State which requires the Governor to be thirty-five years old before he can fill that office. That is the State of Missouri. All the other States,’ I believe, with about six or seven exceptions, require the Governor to be thirty years of age, and the great‘ State of California, and two or three other States, have provisions in their organic law only requiring the Governor to be twenty-five years of age, and I believe some of the States make him eligible when he shall have arrived at his majority. I believe the present Governor of that wonderful and Washington, George Williams, L. P. V. 30 EXECUTIVE DEP ARTMENT. Thursday,] MACKOY—WOOD. [November 20 . mighty State of Pennsylvania, entering just now on his second term, who seems to be the only man who can lead his party to a State victory. is, I believe, still in his thirties. Mr. MACKOY. He is forty. Mr. WOOD. It was my pleasure to be at the Federal Capital at Cleveland’s inau- guration, and I saw Gov. Pattison there marching at the head of his State militia. He then looked to be twenty-five or thirty years of age. There is only one State re- quiring the Governor to be thirty-five, as I said, and that is Missouri. I certainly have no selfish motive in this matter, as I have passed the meridian of life and now have no further political ambition. I make this ap- peal in behalf of the promising young men of Kentucky. I have no aspirations to that high office, but it seems to me that it will be a strong incentive to the young men of Kentucky, that the highest ofiices of the Commonwealth are open to them at thirty, and the experience of all ages of the world shows some men are capable of discharging the duties of life at thirty as some others are at fifty. If a man has closely and properly applied himself in early life, and is in every way amply quali- fied for the high office of Governor at thirty, it seems to me the people should have a right to choose a man of that age, and not be cut off by the Constitutional law of the State. Some of our greatest men who have gone before us appeared high up on the ladder of fame, even earlier than that. Of the men who officiated in the Constitutional Convention of 1849, two or three of them, Hood, Garfield, Silas M. Woodson, since Governor of Missouri, and others, were under thirty years, and there was the brainy Preston and that legal ‘genius, Kavanaugh, who were consid- ered the leading men in the Convention in framing the Constitution under which we have lived and prospered for forty long years, were young men, perhaps less than thirty years of age. It seems to me that if men, by their own energy and by their own close application, have qualified themselves to figure largely in framing the fundamental law of this great State, cer- tainly they could discharge the Executive ‘duty marked out by the Constitutional and statute law of the State. Some of our men who have made their mark high on the scroll of fame, who have stood highest in the National Councils, were prominent before they were thirty. Take your own stainless and immortal John C. Breckin- ridge. We find him elected to Congress and a leader at twenty-eight, and, later in the National Councils, as U. S. Senator—a leader at thirty. We find him then perfect- ly familiar with all National questions then agitated. We find him tendered the mission to Spain at thirty-three, and we find him the second officer of the Nation at the age of thirty-five. Would any man say he was not qualified to efliciently discharge the duties of Governor at thirty ‘? There is the brilliant Menefee, the self-made man who educated himself. Who struggled against the wave of poverty. He was a leader in Congress before he was thirty. There was Henry Clay, that Grand Com- moner, the greatest man in history Ken- tucky has ever produced. He was a leader in Congress before he was thirty years of age. He was next a Senator at thirty; not only a Senator, but a leader upon all the great national questions then discussed be- fore that august body, who could pacify and quiet the troubled waters of a nation. There was the illustrious Ben. Franklin, who stood at the head of journalism at the age of twenty-four. Some of the leading men of Parliament were under thirty-five years of age. There was Lord Chatham, with that peculiar look of his, could drive an adversary to defeat before he was thirty. Alexander conquered the world before he was thirty-five, and other men in olden times conquered kingdoms before they were twenty years of age. Then it seems to me that if we have young men in the EXEeUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 31 Th ursday,] great State of Kentucky, who have quali- fied themselves for the position of Governor at the age of thirty, they should not be prescribed from holding that ofiice by Con- stitutional provision in this progressive age and nineteenth century. I think this would be a great incentive to the young men, and it would add largely in 'making some of our young men apply themselves while they are young. Drive that wicked idea that men should “sow their wild oats ” from eighteen to thirty from the minds of the people; let that period be occupied in earnest efi'ort and labor to prepare them- selves for future honors and usefulness, and let us say to them, “ qualify your- selves in early life, and the highest honors of the State are open to you when you are thirty.” It seems to me we should have this clause inserted, that at the age of thirty they shall be eligible to that position. I see no reason why Kentucky wants to stay behind all the States in the Union ex- cept Missouri, the only exception in the forty-two States. Some allow their young men of twenty-one years to be eligible to the office of Governor, and I trust this Conven- tion will strike out that word and let your citizens be eligible for Governors of the State at thirty, and say to our young men, “ If you are qualified while you are in your young, strong, athletic manhood, the people have a right to choose you Governor.” Mr. BECKNER. I want to help the Delegate from Taylor out with an instance which he has probably forgotten. John Young Brown was elected to Congress be- fore he was twenty-five. Mr. W'OOD. I did not refer _to him, as I might incur the displeasure of other candidates for Governor. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the pre- vious question. . The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con- sent, the Delegate from Russell is allowed to offer an amendment. The PRESIDENT. Report the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Taylor. BEcKNER—MILLER—PHELPs. [November 20. *The Reading Clerk again read the amend- ment. Mr. PHELPS. nays. Mr. WOOD. I second it. The result of the roll-call was as follows ; I call for the yeas and YEAS—45. Allen, C. T. McChord, Wm. C. Auxier, A. J. Miller. Will Beckner, W. M. Montgomery, J. F. Bennett. B. F. Muir, J. W. Birkhead, B. T. Nunn, T. J. O’Hara, R. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Phelps. Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Ramsey, W. R. Blackburn, James Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Buchanan, Nathan Chambers. G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Smith, H. H. Farmer, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Forrester, J. G. Swango, G. B. Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, Geor e Funk, J T. Twyman, I. . Hines, J. S. West. J. F. Hines, Thomas H. Whitaker, Emery Jonson, Jep. C. Williams L. P. V. Johnston, P. P. ‘Wood, J. M. Martin, W. H. Mr. President Clay. Ma), John S. NAYS—38 iiAnen, M. K. Hanks, Thos. H. Amos, D._ C. Harris, Geo. C. Askew J. F. Hogg. S. P. Ayres, 'W W. Holloway, J. W. Beckham, J. C. Jacobs, R. P. Boles. S. H. Kirwan. E. E. Brummal, J. M. Lewis, W. W. Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Clardy, John D. DeHaven, S. E. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Field, W. W. Glenn, Dudley A. Graham, Samuel Mackoy, W. H. McElroy, W. J. MeHenry, H. D. Miller, W. H. - Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. Petrie, H. G. Quicksall; J. E. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett B ABSENT—17. Applegate, Leslie T. James, A. D. Berkele, Wm. Kennedy, Hanson Blackwell. Joseph Knott, J. Proctor Brown J. S. Lassing, L. W. Doris, W. F McDermott, E. J. English, Sam. E. Spalding, I. A. 32 EXECUTIVE 'DEPARTMENT Thursday,] MCDERMOTT—SMITH—RAMSEY. [November 20. Goebel, William Straus, F. P. . Blackburn, James May, John S. Hendrick, W. J. Washington, George Boles, S. H. McChord, Wm. C. Hopkins, F. A. Bourland, H. R. McElroy, W. J. So the amendment was adopted. Brents, J" A' Mme!" Wm‘ w Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. The CLERK. The Delegate from the Brummah J. M. Nunn T‘ J. county of Russell moves to amend by in- Buchanan, Nathan Parsorls, Rob’t T_ serting after the word “age,” “nor over Buckner, S. B. Petrie, H. G. seventy a: Burnam, Curtis Pettit, Thos. S. ' . l , . . , . . Mr. PHELPS. Since the last amend- goax’ldgLJ D lligeg'fissgmli J. ment has been adopted, I withdraw that. Edrington, W_ J , Ramsey, W, R, The vote being taken on the section as llglmore, JH gtodes, wIééibert amended, it was adopted. ,armer’ ' ; mnh’ ‘Scott- The PRESIDENT. Report the next ' L" gvlg'tmjf‘pl" w‘ section. Forgy, J. M. Wood, J. M. The Readin g Clerk then read section five, as follows: He shall commence the execution of the duties of his oflice on the fifth Tuesday suc- ceeding the day of the general election on which he shall have been chosen, and shall continue in the execution thereof until his successor shall have taken the oaths or af- firmations prescribed by this Constitution. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the section will be considered as adopted. The section six was then read and is as follows: N 0 member of Congress, or person hold- ing any office under the United States, or minister of any religious society, shall be eligible to the ofi‘ice of Governor or Lieu- tenant—Governor. The amendment proposed by the Com- mittee of the Whole was read and is as fol- lows: Strike out the words “or minister of any religious society.” Mr. McDERMOTT. I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I second it. The result'of the roll-call was announced as follows: YEAS—55. Amos, D. C. Hines, J. S. Askew, J. F. Hines, Thomas H. Auxier, A. J. Hogg. S, P. Ayres, W. W. Holloway, J. W. Beckham, J. C. Jacobs, R. P. Beckner, W. M. Jonson, Jep. C. Bennett, B. F. Mackoy, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. Martin W. H. ‘A.- 7 Graham, Samuel Young, Bennett H. Hanks, Thos. H. Mr. President Clay. Harris, Geo. C. HAYS—29. Allen, C. T. MeHenry, H. D. Allen, M. K. Miller, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Carroll, John D. Muir, J. W. Chambers. G. D. O’Hara, R. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Phelps, Zack DeHaven, S. E. Quicksall, J. E. Durbin, Charles Sachs, Morris A. English. Sam.E. Smith, H. H. Field, W. W. Swango, G. B. Glenn, Dudley A. Trusdell, George Johnston, P. P. Whitaker, Emery Kirwan, E. E. Williams, L. P. V. Lewis, W. W. Woolfolk, J. F. McDermott, E. J. ABSENT—16. Applegate, Leslie T. James, A. D. Berkele, Wm. Kennedy. Hanson Blal kwell, Joseph Knott, J. Proctor Brown, J. S. Lassing, L. W. Doris, W. F. Moore, Laban T. Goebel, William Spalding, I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Straus, E‘. P. Hopkins, F. A. Washington, George So the amendment was adopted. Mr. RAMSEY. I have a substitute I desire to offer to sections 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, the effect of which is to abolish the ofiice of Lieutenant-Governor, and provide that his duties shall be performed by the President of the Senate, and for that reason I desire to offer an amendment to this sec- tion, and that is to strike out'the words “Lieutenant-Governor” in the latter part of section 6. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. T as Thursday,] DEHAvEN—HARRIs—CLARDY. [November 20 . The PRESIDENT. Those sections are considered as independent propositions, and let it . be read when those sections are reached. I Mr. RA‘MSEY. I now offer to strike out the words “Lieutenant—Governor.” A vote being taken on the said amend- ment, it was decided in the negative. The section as reported was then adopted. Section 7 of the report was read, and is as follows: The Governor shall, at stated times, re- ceive for his services a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the term for which he was elected. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it will be considered as a opted. Section 8 of the report was read, and is as follows : He shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of this Commonwealth, and of the militia thereof, except when they shall be called into the service of the United States; but he shall- not command per- sonally in the field, unless advised so to do by a resolution of the General Assembly. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the said section will be considered as adopted. Section 9 of the report was read, and is as follows: ' He shall have power to fill vacancies that may occur by granting commissions, which shall expire when such vacancies shall have been filled according to the provisions of this Constitution. \ The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the said section will be considered as adopted. Mr. DEHAVEN. Section 10 has been adopted by the Convention. The PRESIDENT. That is right. The Clerk will report section 11. Section 11 was read, and is as follows: He may require information, in writing, from the officers in the Executive Depart- ment upon any subject relating to the du- ties of their respective oflices. _ The PRESIDENT. Without objection s" id section will be considered as adopted. exceeding four months.” Section 12 has been adopted. The Clerk will report section 13. The 13th of the report was read, and is as follows: He may, on extraordinary occasions, con- vene the General Assembly at the seat of , government, or at a difi'erent place, if that should have become since their last adjourn- ment dangerous from an enemy or from contagious diseases; and in case of dis- agreement between the two Houses with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not exceeding four months. When he shall call them‘ together it shall be by proclamation. stating the objects of the call, and none other shall be considered. The READING CLERK.’ The amend- ment of the Committee of the Whole was to strike out the word “them” in the seventh .line and insert the words “ General Assembly,” and in the eighth line strike out the words “ the objects of the call, and none other shall be considered,” and insert “subjects to be considered, and no other shall be considered.” The vote being taken on the amendment of the Committee of the Whole, the same was adopted. The section as amended 'was then adopt- ed. Mr. HARRIS. It striks me that a small portion of that might be stricken out—that “since their last adjournment.” It reads: “ He may, on extraordinary occasions con- vene the General Assembly at the seat of government, or at a different place, if that should have become, since their last ad- journment, dangerous from an enemy or from contagious diseases.” Suppose it was dangerous at the time they adjourned, he ought to have the right to convene them at a different place. I move to strike out those words. Mr. CLARDY. I would be glad if one of the Committee which reported this would explain what they meant by “not It says, “and in case of disagreement between the two Houses, with respect to the time of adjourn- 34 1 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday] ALLE N—PETRIE— BULLITT. \ [November 20 . ment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not exceeding four months.” If he adjourns them at all at the end of the session, it appears to me it should be until the next regular session. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. When this section was under consideration in Committee of the Whole, I offered an amendment, which was rejected at the time, and I suppose it comes up again. It is to insert after the word “ Houses,” in line five, the words “at any session,” so that it will read, “in cases of disagreement between the two Houses at any session.” The PRESIDENT. The amendment will have to be renewed in the Conven- tion. Mr. C.T. ALLEN. I renew it now. Mr. PETRIE. I think the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Caldwell was carried in the Committee of the Whole. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Simpson, was read, and is as follows: Strike out-in the third line these words: “ Since their last adjournment.” A vote being taken on said amendment, the same was adopted. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Cald- well: Amend section 13, line 5, by inserting after the word“ houses,” the words “at any session.” Mr. L. T. M CORE. That section ap- plies alone to sessions called by the Gov- ernor. Mr. MACKOY. This is true, and for that reason'it seems to me the motion of the Delegate from Caldwell county is cor- rect, because, looking at what comes be- fore, it seems to me that it is evident, with- out the amendment, the power to adjourn would exist only’ at extraordinary sessions, and would not exist at any other time. I presume that it is the intention of the Con- vention that this power should exist in the Governor whenever disagreement arises, whether at an extraordinary or regular session, and if so, the Convention will see the amendment is proper. The vote being taken 011 said amend- ment, it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. CLARDY. I desire to offer an amendment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows: Amend section 13 after the word “not” in line seven, by striking out the words “exceeding four months,” and inserting the- words “next regular meeting.” Mr. CLARDY. The object of the amendment is to obviate that obscurity- If the Governor of the State has to adjourn the Assembly, this would give him author- ity if they have no more business to adjourn them until the next regular session, but under this he could not adjourn them beyond four months. Of course, under the amendment he could adjourn them for a shorter time, but if he thought necessary he could adjourn them until the next reg- ular session. Mr. BULLITT. It seems to me that this is extending too high power to the- Governor. The Legislature, if it should not agree, the Governor ought not to have the right to prorogue it as the Crown head of the British Parliament. The Legisla- ture ought to determine that question itself, and the Committee tho ught it highly proper that the Governor might adjourn the extraordinary session he called without transferring the legislative power to the Executive Department, or without any serious injury; but if you transfer to the Governor the right to prorogue or adjourn the Legislature, the Legislature will become powerless to do its duty. This Convention ought not to hamper the department of Government so that it will not have suffi- cient vigor to execute the laws. What we want is to organize a Government which will have force and power to execute the law and the trust we repose in them.‘ I think it is highly improper to delegate to EXECUTI VE DEPARTMENT. 35 Thursday,] VVHITAKER—MILLER—MCCHORD. [N ovember 2O . the Governor the power to adjourn the _Legislature because one branch wants to adjourn and the other does not at a regular session, but the Committee thought there would not be too much danger in allowing the Governor to prorogue the session he called together. M r. WHITAKER. If the Governor should adjourn them for four months, and that time did not expire at the regular ses- sion, would not the Legislature have a right to convene at the end of four months ? Mr. BULLITT, I suppose so. They have changed the right to prorogue the Legislature to apply to any session of the Legislature, and now by the amendment of the Delegate from Christian he desires to allow him to prorogue or adjourn the Leg- islature over until the next regular session; so you virtually transfer the Legislative power over to the Governor. Mr.WHITAKER. If the two branch- es of the Legislature are in such condition that they cannot do any business, ought not they be prorogued until that time? Mr. BULLITT. Who is to judge of that, the Governor, the Courts or the Leg- islature ? ' Mr. WHITAKER. cannot. - Mr. BULLITT, We entrust Legisla- tive power to the Legislature, and ought we say the Legislative Department shall be under the control of another department? Mr. WHITAKER. If they remain in that condition could they ever adjourn‘? Mr. BULLITT. Are we to suppose that the Legislature, elected by the people, will be any less true to their trust than the Governor, elected by the people? - Mr. CLARDY. 'Dl‘his does not apply to the Legislature ,if they are capable of ad- journing themselves. Mr. BULLITT. Who knows? Here is a question that might arise between the Legislature and the Executive, and who is to decide they shall adjourn? The two Houses might disagree. One House may The Legislature ‘as to the time of adjournment. think they ought to hold over a little while longer, and, if we want to curb the Legis- lature, let us curb it to the length of its term and not transfer any of its power over into the Executive Department. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. I desire to offer an amendment. . The amendment reads as follows: Amend section 13 by striking out these words: “and in case of a disagreement between the two Houses with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn ‘them to such time as he shall think proper not exceeding four months.” . Mr. W. H. MILLER. The section” as it reads now is just such a section as necessarily should exist in the Constitution. If it is the sense of the General Assembly that there should be an adjourned session and they should disagree as to the time at which it should be held then the Governor is to adjourn it over for four months, not exceeding four months, and then they are'to re-assemble again. He assumes no power over the Legislature at all and does not undertake to control it in its desire to have an adjourned session, but this simply provides that the Governor may to that extent fix the time for the two Houses which have disagreed, and it seems to me it is exactly as it should be as the Commit- tee has reported it. Mr. MeCHORD. I understand the amendment as offered by the Delegate from Caldwell has been adopted by the Convention. If that is true, then it will be within the power of a bare majority of either House to adjourn the General As- sembly at a regular or called session, which, it seems to me, is not wise to place it purely within the power of a majority of either Assembly. That can easily be done.v Sup- pose in the midst. of a regular session a bare majority of either House should pass a resolution that the General Assembly should adjourn. If it pass one House, it goes to another. Then they have disagreed Conse- quently, under the circumstances the Gov- 36 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] BURNAM—COKE—ALLEN. [November 20 . ernor interposes his power and he adjonrns them for four months. Therefore, in that attitude, it lies within the power of either House to adjourn the House for four months with the aid of the Governor. Mr. MACKOY. Is not the word “may” here instead of “ shall?” Mr. MCCHORD. It would be within the power of the Governor and a bare majority of either House. Mr. MACKOY. That is not mandatory. Mr. MoCHORD. No, sir; he may do it. Therefore, it gives the Governor and a bare ma'jority of one House too much control over the General Assembly, and this he may do at a regular or called session. Mr. BURNAM. This section 13 corre- sponds with section 13 of the old Consti- tution. It says that the Governor may, on extraordinary occasions, convene the Gen- eral Assembly at the seat of Government, or at a different place if that should have become, since their last adjournment, dangerous from an enemy or from contagi- ous disorders; and in case of disagreement between the two Houses, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not exceeding four months. There was nothing said in that, nor is there any thing in the mind of the Committee, who have reported this to the House, having reference at all to the ordinary sessions of the Legis- lature, and I cannot but think that the vote which the House has taken sustaining the proposition of the gentleman from Caldwell is unwise, and it would be doubly so if the proposition entertained by the Delegate from Christian should be recog- nized as one this House should adopt. It may be that the Legislative Committee will report here that the Legislature may not assemble oftener than once in four years, and if there should be called a special ses- sion of the Legislature by the Governor of Kentucky, and they disagreed between themselves, who has the power to convene them beyond the time of the next Gen- eral Assembly‘? It is giving him absolute power over the Legislature of this Com- monwealth. I think this provision should stand as it is, and I trust some gentleman who voted for the proposition of the Dele- gate from Caldwell will move to reconsider it, and let us go back where we were to the extra session called by the Governor. Mr. CLARDY. I have now secured the object I had in introducing this amend- ment, and that was to have an explanation. I am satisfied it would be unwise to adopt my amendment, and I desire to withdraw it. Mr. COKE. I voted in the afiirmative, and I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment of the Delegate from Cald- well was adopted. The PRESIDENT. Any gentleman has a right to move to reconsider. There was no roll-call. Mr. COKE. I move to reconsider the vote by which that amendment was adopted. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. The idea in my mind at the time I ofl‘ered that amendment was this: Sometime the two Houses of the Legislature might disagree as to the time ‘ of adjournment, whether in extraordinary or in ordinary session, and it might be pos- sible the two Houses would sit here week after week, month after month, wasting the substance of the people, depleting the Treasury, and somebody ought to be em- powered to give relief to the people. And when there.is a disagreement as to the time of adjournment, when that time arrives, if it ever should arrive, somebody ought to be able to say you shall adjourn, and I offered that amendment to meet that contingency in the action of the Legislature. Mr. JONSON. I will say to the Dele- gate from Caldwell, if the Legislature de- sires to remain here and squander money, I think I know enough about the temper of this body to assure him that there will be EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 37 Thursday,] 0 SACHS—DEHAVENfAUXIER—BUCKNER. [N ovembe 20. engrafted in this Constitution a provision limiting the length of the session, and that there will be attached to that this idea: that when the session prescribed by the Constitution has terminated by the length of days prescribed, gentleman may remain here at their own expense as much longer as they want to, and I believe they will do away with it. Mr. SACHS. The idea that struck the Delegate from Madison struck me also on reading the old Bill of Rights, and the section as reported by the Committee, it seems to me, that it applied to extraordi- nary sessions. It starts out that way. It was evidently written to apply to ordinary sessions, and if these amendments are adopted it not only destroys the symmetry, but the sense of the whole session It has been in existence as it now stands since 1849. It had always worked out right, and there is no objection to it, and I_ see no reason why we should, to put it mildly in a manner at least, stultify ourselves by putting in an amendment Which_would be inconsistent with the evident intention of the whole thing. Mr. DEHAVEN. Much of the trouble we are involved in grows out of a misap- prehension. This section, as originally re- ported, only referred to extraordinary ses- sions. This is the precise provision in the present Constitution. There is another provision of the Constitution which regu- lates the adjournments when the Legisla- ' ture is here in regular session, and that is that neither House,.during the session of the General Assembly, without the consent of the other, shall adjourn for more than three days, norv to any other place than that in which they may be sitting. We already have a provision in the Constitution regu- lating the adjournments of the Legislature when in regular session, but when they are called together in extraordinary session this section repoiited by the Committee will control them. I think, as reported by the Committee, and as it has stood for forty years, it is as good as we can make it. Mr. BECKHAM. I desire simply to supplement what has been said by adding that it is perfectly clear that this provision was intended to apply to extraordinary sessions of the General Assembly, not only from the language of the section, as re- ported, but it is the identical language of the Constitution of 1849; and not alone that, but it is identical with the Con- stitution of 1799, and substantially identi- cal with the Constitution of 1792. It is clear, as a matter of history, that it is ap- plicable alone t) extraordinary sessions of the General Assembly. Mr. AUXIER. I move the previous question on this section and all amend- ments. A vote being taken thereon, the previous question was ordered. 2 The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Caldwell wasthen read. Mr. ALLEN. I withdraw that amend- ment. 2 Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. Since that is withdrawn, I withdraw the amendment I_ oflered. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. The Clerk then read section fourteen, as follows: He shall take care that the laws be faith- fully executed. Mr. BUCKNER. I have an amend- ment to offer. ' The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend section fourteen ‘by adding the following: And for the accomplishment of this end he shall have power to suspend from office any Executive or ministerial ofiicer who may fail and refuse to discharge the duties of this oflice, and to fill the va- cancy thus occasioned. 38 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] Mr. BUCKNER. I wish in a few words to explain what I conceive to be the necessity of some amendment similar to that. I am not particular about the words, but something should be done when we place an officer in a_position and hold him responsible for his duties, whilst not giving him power to execute his duties. This section has been, I believe, without alteration in all the Constitutions of the State. It is in the present Constitution. When it was inserted, there was a mean- ing in it. The Governor had large powers of appointment and removal. and if an ofiicial, through whom alone he could see that the laws were executed, failed or neg- lected to discharge his duties. he could re- move him from olfice and appoint some- body else. We have required in all the other sections of the report, and in another section of the Constitution, the duties of certain officers are given. We give in this report authority to the Governor to call on the heads of the Executive Departments for reports of any matter concerning the duties of their ofiice; but where is any power given him to enforce the execution of that, or enable him to perform his duties? But where is any power given him to enforce the execution of that, or enable him to perform his duties‘? In- stances have happened in this Common- wealth where the Governor has sought information from the heads of the depart- . ments, and they have passed his request silently by, and he had no power to enforce it. It seems to me we should strike out this section altogether, or else give him som 0 power to discharge the duties imposed by that section. As an instance of this, we all know, of course, that a Governor cannot execute the duties of his oifice, except through minis- terial officers appointed by the Constitution, and if those officials neglect or refuse to discharge their duty, how can the Governor discharge his duties? Apply it to _any other business. If a person establishes a com- BUCKNE R—ALLEN—BRONSTON. November a0. mercial house, he gives to the head of the establishment power to enforce the rules. My distinguished friend from Christian county. in managing his farm, has a head to whom he gives authority to control during his absence, to direct the employes. But no authority is given to the Executive Department of Government to control a sin- gle ofieial. with the exception of his Private Secretary, and only then can it be done by removing him from office This is placing not only him, but the people, at a great disadvantage because there can be no object in having a head of a Department unless he can execute the duties of his office and see that the laws are enforced. He can have the authority to displace temporarily, if not permanently, every ofiicial who fails or refuses to discharge the duties without which the laws cannot be executed. I simply throw out this suggestion to show the importance of this and that we should only do that through his oflicials and he or some other authority in the _State should either give the Executive the power or else not require of him the duties pre- scribed by this section. Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I offer an amend- ment to the amendment offered by the Del- egate from Hart. I‘he amendment was read. and Is as fol- lows: Amend the amendment offered by the Delegate from Hart. by adding these words: Until the next session of the General As- sembly, which shall sustain or reverse his action as it deems best. Mr. BRONSTON. 1 had hoped very much that some member of the Commit- tee or some one on the “floor, would answer the suggestion of the distinguished Delegate from Halt. and I should not undertake to do it myself, but that I cannot permit such an infringement upon the Republican Gov- ernment as that suggested by the Delegate, to pass without enterirfg my protest. I have the very greatest confidence in the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 39 Thursday,] "ecutive power of the people to select a Chief Ex- ecutive, but I doubt very much the power ‘of the people, or rather the ability of the people, to submit to" the exercise of such power as would be concentrated in his hands by the amendment proposed. It places in the arbitrary power of the Executive alb- most every subordinate officer in the Com- monwealth of Kentucky, save, possibly, the judicial oflicers, and I question very much whether, from the comprehen- sive language of the amendment they would not be subject to the Ex- powers. A statement of the proposition seems to be enough to destroy it. I differ from the Delegate from Hart ‘that there is any great lack of power in this ‘provision of the present Constitution where- it says that “ he shall see that the laws are ‘faithfully executed.” He can do that by calling the attention of those tribunals having power to remove the respective of- ficials to the fact that they have failed to discharge their duties. By calling the attention of the Legislature "to those officials that it has the power 'to remove; and by calling the attention of the Courts to the officials that they have the power to remove; but certainly I never wish to see the time come in the history of affairs in the State of Kentucky when one man will have the power with one stroke of his pen to remove every subordinate, execu— tive and ministerial oflicer in ‘the Common- wealth and ' supply his place by appoint- ment. Mr. “ZACK PHELPS. As this is a mat- ter of considerable importance, I think there should be a record of the vote, and I call for the yeas and nays on it. vMr. JOHN L. PHELPS. I second it. Mr. PETTIT.‘ The amendment proposed by the gentleman from Hart is a very im- portant one. It gives almost regal power to the Governor of the State of Kentucky, and "yet, as has been well said by the Delegate from Hart, if the Governor has imposed upon him the duty to see that the laws are PHELPS—PETTIT—SACHS. [November 20 . faithfully executed, some power should exist somewhere to execute those laws. It seems to me that there is a middle ground between the proposition made by the Delegate from ' Hart and what has been suggested by the Delegate from Lexington. As to the amhnd- ment offered by the Delegate from Cald- well, it may be that the Legislature will only assemble every four years, and to leave that matter to the Legislature would be, under those circumstances, inexpedient. For these reasons, I move that this proposi- tion be referred to the Joint Committees having this matter under charge to report at another time. Mr. SACHS. I think the trouble in this matter arises on account of difference of opinion as to what are the duties of the Governor. I think possibly an exceedingly conscientious man would have an idea that as Governor he is responsible for the man- 'agement of the general affairs of the State, as was illustrated by the Delegate from Hart. He seemed to think that the Gov- ernor occupied a position like a private citizen would with regard to his general business affairs. He illustrated it by the management of a farm. If that were exactly correct then perhaps there ought to be some power within the control of the Executive of the Commonwealth that would enable him to regulate these affairs, for which he seems to feel himself responsi- ble. We are met at the threshold by the idea advocated by the Delegate from Lex- ington that that would be placing in the hands of _the Chief Executive a kingly power which would be foreign to our idea of Government. That is true. If the Governor were, like a King, responsible for the management of the affairs of the kingdom he neeessaril y and logically should have that power. But I. say it comes to the mind of the Delegate from Hart simply by reason of a very conscien- tious idea of the responsibility he is under. The Governor of the State occupies a posi- tion which is co-ordinate or equal with the 40 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] SACHS—BUCKNER—AUXIER—BECKHAM. [November 20 . other elective oflicers of the State He can not be held nor should he be considered re- sponsible for the acts of the people who are selected to fill positions by the same sover- eign'voiee and sovereign power that calls him to fill his position. So far as these other oflicers of the State are concerned they are his equal; they are all the servants of the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, so that I say they decide the idea that he is not conscientiously bound to see that these othgers do their duty, believing that he is not responsible for those over whom he has no control. I favor this sec- tion 14 as it now stands and as it has stood since the adoption of the Constitution of 1849, believing that that is broad enough to accomplish the purposes suggested by the Delegate from Hart, believing that un- der that the Governor of this Common- wealth can call into force and being all necessary powers of the State as they are vested in the Courts or in the Legislature. 1 say that the power is as broad as it can be: “He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” That simply means‘if the Governor of this State finds that in certain quarters those over whom he has no control, who are elected by the same sovereign power which places him in office, are not doing their duty, then, under this authority, he can direct the attention of the proper tribunal to it, and see that the trouble is remedied as speedily as possible. That is all that can be done under our form of government. To put into the hands of one oflicer the right to suspend another from office until he can be tried would be effectually to put it into the hands of one oflicer the right to try his equal without a hearing. I say this section as it stands is broad enough to ac- complish its purpose, and if the Governor of the State wishes to do his duty conscien- tiously; if he wishes to fulfill in every re- spect all that can be asked of him by the sovereign power, which placed him into position, all he has to do is to call on the authority elsewhere provided by this Con- stitution and the laws to enforce what is right and proper. . Mr. BUCKNER. I would simplysay in reply to that statement that the Gov- egnor of the Commonwealth, on more than one occasion, called on officers, and his‘ suggestions have been silently passed by. My object was simply to call attention of the Delegate that power should somewhere to see that your laws are exe- cuted. If the Governor is to be held re- sponsible, give him authority; if it rests with any other department, leave it to them. Mr. AUXIER. I move the previous question. Mr. BECKHAM. I hope the gentle— man will withdraw that for a moment. Mr. AUXIER.- I will withdraw it for you. Mr. BECKHAM. I cannot believe that the distinguished Delegate from Hart has carefully considered the extent and scope of his amendment. Placing the power in the Governor to remove every Executive and every Ministerial Officer in Kentucky when he thinks it ought to be done is to return to the days of Kings. It is a return to kinglypower which I believe Kentucky does not want. I cannot believe my dis- tinguished friend has carefully considered the scope of his amendment. Who are the Ministerial ofiicers of Kentucky? There is not a Sherifl“ from the Big Sandy to Padu- cah, there is not a Clerk of a Court in all the State who is not comprehended ian that broad language, Executive and Ministerial Officer. I am sure that this gentleman would not lodge any such power as that in the Executive of Kentucky. The tendency of power always and everywhere is to add to and magnify itself. This is illustrated in all the records of our race. Have we forgotten that it is not yet two hundred years since, at the hands of an English Judge and the dictation of an English King, Elizabeth Gaunt went to the stake, reside- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 41 Thursday,] A LLEN—BURNAM—PETTIT—BRONSTON. November 20 . and Alice Lisle went to the block. This certainly is regal power, and it may be safe in the hands of our present distinguished Executive, but human nature is the same in all the ages of the world, and I, for one, enter my most earnest and solemn protest against lodging this power in the hands of any single human being. Mr C. T. ALLEN. amendment. Mr. BURNAM. I only rise on account of a statement made by the distinguished gentleman from Lexington, in which he said he was expecting some gentleman of I withdraw my the Committee to reply to this proposition, When the Committee reported this Bill to the House, the question was asked what is the meaning of this section which says the Governor shall see that the laws are faith- fully executed? and the reply was made that he should avail himself of all the powers and authority given him by the Constitution of Kentucky as Chief Magis- trate of the State to see that they were en- forced. Now, the eighth section says he shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of this Commonwealth, and of the Militia thereof, except when they shall be called into the service of the United States; but ,he shall not command person- ally in the field unless advised so to do by a resolution of the General Assembly. Undoubtedly in a case _of insurrection, in a case of lawlessness beyond the power of the posse comitatus called by the Sheriff to keep the peace, it is within the power of the Governor, and has been used and exer- cised by the approbation of the people that the military should be sent to such a place and that the law should be there faithfully enforced. If a man has been tried, con- victed and sentenced to be hung, and his case has been appealed to the Appellate Courts of Kentucky, and the time fixed for the execution lapsed, and the Court of Appeals affirms the judgment, then it is the duty of the Governor to appoint the day on which the law should be en- forced, and so in a thousand other cases- it is his sworn duty to see that the statutes adopted by the Legislature of Kentucky are enforced and that peace is secured; and, therefore, it seems to me that this section ought to remain. It is not only in the statutes, in the Constitutions of 1792, and 1799, and 1849, but I think, it is a proper- provision and should stand here; and I am prepared to say that I agree with the gen- tleman who preceded me, that the law, with the power he has, can be enforced, and should be, without any extension. Mr. BUCKN ER. The proposition which I have made, I think, has been miscon- ceived in many particulars, but I have at least drawn the attention of the gentleman to the necessity for some change. i There- fore, I ask leave to withdraw my amend-- ment. The amendment was withdrawn, and a vote being taken on section 14the same was adopted. Section 15 was then read by the Reading: - Clerk, as follows : Sec. 15. A Lieutenant-Governor shall be chosen at every regular election for Gov-. ernor, in the same manner, to continue in otfice for the same time, and possess the same qualifications as the Governor. In voting for Governor and Lieutenant-Gov-- ernor, the electors shall state for whom they vote as Governor, and for whom as- Lieutenant-Governor. Mr. PETTIT. I rise to a. parliamentary inquiry. I have presented an amendment in the nature of an additional section,which would be section 15; is it now in order, or will it await the action upon the whole re- port? The PRESIDENT. By consent, it will be taken up after this section. Mr. PETTIT. But it comes in‘ just be- fore this section. Mr. BRONSTON. I have an amend-— ment. > Mr. RAMSEY. I have a substitute, which is on the table. 42 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Thursday,] CoKE—PETT1r—NUNN—. [November 20 . The amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington was read, as follows: Add after the word “Governor,” in the fourth line, the following : “ He shall be in- eligible for the succeeding four years after the expiration of the term for which he shall have been elected.” Mr. COKE. I would like to call the at- tention of the Delegate to the third section, which says, “ The Governor shall be ineli- gible for the succeeding four years after the expiration of the term for which he shall have been elected.” Mr. PETTIT. The gentleman from Logan misapprehends the amendment I have offered. My’ amendment pertains to the ofiice of Governor, and I think it would be more proper to consider it after section fourteen and before section fifteen, which pertains to the ofiice of Lieutenant Governor. * The PRESIDENT. Is there objection to going back, and allowing the gentleman’s amendment to come in. The Reading Clerk read Mr. Pettit’s amendment as follows: Insert as section fifteen of the report the following: “ The Governor shall not, during his term of oflice, be elected to the Senate of the United States." Mr. NUNN. I desire to offer an amend- ment to section 15. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Nunn, as follows: Amend section 15 by striking out all after the word “Governor” in the fourth line. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the additional section moved by the Delegate from Daveiss Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to sug- gest that it has been decided time and time again that a State has no right prescribe qualifications for an officer of the United States That is a matter which belongs to the United States, the Congress of the United States alone having jurisdiction. If it were incorporated into this Constitu- tion prescribing the qualifications of Sena- tor, it would be unavailing. Mr. MCHENRY. point of order. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I do. That it is in contravention of the Constitution of the United States. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will decide that that is not a Parliamentary question, but a question for the Convention to consider. Mr. PETTIT. I will say that upon all propositions which have come before this Convention making ineligible every ofi‘icer Do you raise that -who has to be elected under these provisions of the Constitution, I have voted to make them ineligible for re-election, and to-day by a vote of 6 to 74 this Convention wisely determined that the Governor of Kentucky should not be made eligible for a succeed- ing term. I believe that this provision ought to run all along the line of our elec- tive State oflicers, including the Judges of the Courts, for the purpose of making it the pleasure of those oflicers that they discharge the duties imposed upon them without any other motive in view than its intelligent and faithful performance. That the office is for one term alone; that the only way they can hope for recognition at the hands of the people is for a conscientious discharge of the duties of that office for a single term. I believe in dignifying the ofi‘ice of Gover- nor of the State of Kentucky, and by the amendment that we have adopted here this afternoon we have given him powers that are almost kingly. They have just been referred to by the gentleman from Madi- son, and it shows that they are powers which ought only to be placed in the hands of an honest and upright man, and a man who has the entire confidence of the people of the Commonwealth. I would place no allurement before that official in his high position to tempt him in any way. I would place him in the ofiice of Governor with an eye single to the faithful discharge EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 43 Thursday,] PErTIr—BaENTs—MARTIx. [November 20.. of his high trust for the space of four years, and nothing should be open to him until his term shall expire. We can recur with profit to our experience in Kentucky. Scarcely elected as Governor, but, in the estimation of the people of the State, he is regarded as an aspirant for the Senatorship of the United States. Almost considered as a stepping- stone to that exalted position. I believe by d‘- the adoption of this amendment, which is in the Constitution of California, if not other States, it would result in great benefit to good government, add greater dignity to that ‘high office, with no occasion for questioning of motives, and free from the possibility of scandal in our State. We would have an official in this exalted posi- tion with no blandishments or allurements before him beyond the discharge of his duties faithfully and well. It removes an- other serious objection. We know under our Constitution the Lieutenant-Governor, in the vacancy of the Governor, assumes the Governorship, and at the time of the election of the United States Senator by the General Assembly the Lieutenant-Gov- ernor presides over the deliberations of the Senate of Kentucky, and he is placed in an attitutde where it is ‘an advan— tage for him to have the Governor so elected, thereby stepping to the higher position. That is putting power in the Lieutenant Governor which enables him A to wield an influence in the Senate of the State, which ought not to be wielded by any official over a body of which he is its highest ofiicer. It is a dangerous power, and I believe here is the place for its abridgment; and in the manner pro- vided in my I amendment. ‘One word in regard to the position taken by the gentleman from Lincoln: I do not regard that the Constitution of the United States controls us _wholly in a matter of the election of a United States Senator, except under some general. pro- vision in the Federal Constitution.‘ Nor will our Constitution make any require- after the words “ United States ments that are contrary to the provisions of the Constitution of the United States, but here we have a perfect right to say who shall be eligible to be Senator of the United States from our State, as well as to say that the Governor shall not be eligible to a second term. It is our great right of local self-government. Mr. BRENTS. Why did you not add Senator,” the words “or any other ofiiee ?” Mr. PETTIT. I did not do so from the fact that it would be too sweeping and because I thought that the position of Governor was the one which most likely was liable to create the abuse. I need not refer the gentleman to a scandal in Ken- tucky, which occurred over one Senatorial election in Kentucky. He knows it too well. I need not revert to it. All the principaliactors have “passed over the river, and are now resting on the other side.” But it is a well-known fact that a distinguished gentleman residing in the city I represent (Owensboro)-a man honored for his ability, honesty and integrity—was de- feated for the United States Senator- ship by an unfortunate scandal, and he would have passed to his grave in mortifi- cation and shame, but the scandal against him made its appearance on the surface afterwards, when the people of Kentucky, always true to their instinct of honesty and fair play, arose in their power two years later, and elected him with an ava- lanche of ' votes to the United States Senatorship. I refer to that distinguished man, one of the “noblest works of God,” Thomas C. McCreary. I did not intend to allude to this subject, and would not have done so except for the gentleman’s inter- ruption. Mr. MARTIN. I have an amendment to offer. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend by ‘adding to the seetion pro- posed by the Delegate from Daveiss the 44 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. g Thursday,] MoHEnRY--MILLnR—FoRREsTER. [November 20. words “nor President of the United States; nor should he be allowed to resign his ofliee.” Mr. MOHENRY. You might add “or die‘), Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the previous question. Mr. FORRESTER. Ihad sent up an amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: “That if the Governor shall declare him- self and become a candidate for the United States Senate, he shall thereby forfeit his ofiice as Governor.” Mr. PARSONS. I move we adjourn. Mr. BRONSTON. I second it. The vote being taken, the motion was carried, and the Convention adjourned. ionventicn Records. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL Convennon. Vol. 1.] FRANKFORT, NOVEMBER 21, 1890. [No. 58 Friday,] BURNAM—HINES—PHELPS. [November 21. The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Hen- derson. The Journal of yesterdays proceedings was read and approved. ' The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. ~“ Petitions, Etc. Mr. BURNAM. I have a communica- tion from the Judge of the mdison Com- mon Pleas Court in regard to the Judiciary, which I ask to have referred to the Com- mittee on the Judiciary. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the communication will be referred to the Committee on Judiciary Department. If there are no other petitions, reports from Standing Committees will be in order. There being no reports from Standing Com— mittees, reports from Special Committees. Motions and resolutions are in order. Resolutions. Mr. J. S. HINES. I have a resolution. The resolution was read, and is as fol- lows: Resolved, That taxation without represen- tation is unjust and contrary to the genius of our republican institutions, and to greatly reduce the representation in the General Assembly of this State would be an in- fringement upon the right of representa- tion. 2. The representation in the Senate and House ought to remain as under the present Constitution of the State. The PRESIDENT. The resolution will be refered to the Committee on Legislative Department. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to offer .a resolution, and have it referred to the Committee on Corporations and the Com- mittee on Railroads and Commerce. The PRESIDENT. Does the Delegate ask a report of the resolution? Mr. W. H. MILLER. Yes, sir. The resolution is as follows: Resolved, That the Committees on Cor- porations and Railroads and Commerce be, and they are hereby, severally instructed to investigate the subject of elevators and warehouses, and, if necessary, prepare and report to this Convention provisions in regard thereto. Hr. WEST. I have a communication from the County Clerk of Lee county in regard to J ailers. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it will be referred to the Special Commit- tee, of which the gentleman from Ander- son is Chairman. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. On Tuesday- he eighteenth of November, Mr. McDer- mott introduced the following resolution: Resolved, That the Printer be instructed to print seven extra copies of the Conven, tion Record each day, and that one of said copies, exactly like those put on the desks of the members, be given each morning to the representatives of the newspapers now reporting the proceedings of this Conven- tion. ' I voted in the negative on that resolu- tion, and I find that I have been reported as voting in the afl‘irmative. I desire to be correctly reported as to that. I also find that every Delegate who voted in the nega- tive is recorded in the afiirmative. Mr. PETTIT. I will call the attention of the gentleman to the fact that he is mis- taken in regard to that matter. I thought I had discovered the same error, but found 2 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMEN T. Friday,] that the vote was on a motion to lay the resolution upon the table. Mr. J. L. PHELPS. If that was the motion, I am incorrect. Mr. L. T. MOORE. On the page oppo- site the vote you will find the motion to lay upon the table, and your name is recorded in the affirmative as well as mine. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. I have a resolution which I desire to offer. The Reading Clerk read said resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the word “two,” in the second line of Rule 51, governing this Con- vention, be stricken out, and the word " five” substituted therefor. Mr. M. K. ALLEN. I ask that it be referred to the Committee on Rules, The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it will be so referred. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move that the Con- vention take up the report of the Joint (‘ommittee on Executive Department. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I second the motion. And the question being taken upon said motion, it was decided in the affirmative. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the matter under consideration. The FLERK. The first amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Daveiss (Mr. Pettit) as an additional section follow- ing section fourteen, as follows: Sec. 15. The Governor shall not, during his term of ofiice, be elected Senator to the Senate of the United States. Mr. PETTIT. In urging that amend- ment yesterday afternoon, I contended that it was a good amendment, because it re- moved all possibility of impugning the motive of the Governor in such an emer- gency. I wanted that Executive placed in such a position in the State of Kentucky that his motives would be, like Caesar’s wife, above suspicion. It is well known, and all who have been connected with legislative affairs in Kentucky have observed in Senatorial elections, the great power of the Governor over these elections when exercised. This I endeavored to point MooRE—ALLEN—Pmrrr. [November 21 . out yesterday. I spoke at the same time of the motives that might prompt the ac- tion of the presiding officer of the Senate in certain contingencies. The election of the Governor to the Senatorship elevates that oflicial to the position of Governor under our Constitution. I find a great number of members inclined to support this amend~ ment, but for a question in their minds in regard to the Constitutionality of it and fear an infringement on the right of the Federal Constitution. Section 2 of that Constitution provides in relation to Sena- tor, “ that no person shall be Senator who shall not have attained the age of thirty years and been nine years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that State from which he was to be chosen.” That is the only provision that affects the qualifications of a Senator of the United States. Will any person deny that the Constitution of Kentucky can say that the Senator from this State shall be thirty-five years of age, and, if that provision is incorporated in this Constitution, will it not be effective‘? Could there possibly be a contingency under the oath prescribed for mem- bers of th e General Assembly that any man, under this provision in our ‘Constitution, could be elected to the United States Senate until he is thirty-five years of age? This Constitution might say that he can be elected to the United States Sena- torship when he is twenty-five years of age, but coming in conflict with the Federal Constitution, it would be unwise for Ken- tucky to assume such an attitude. But this Convention has it in its power to so provide, although it might be unwise. Then, under such a provision, should we unwisely elect a man only twenty—five years of age, what is the result? It coming in direct contravention of the Constitution of the United States, we would thereby have elected a man who is ineligible, and would have to suffer the folly of our course by his rejection. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. _ 3 Friday,] MOORE—PETTIT. [November 21 . Mr. L. T. MOORE. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. Suppose we provide in the Constitution that a man should not be eligible until he is forty-five, and we should elect a man who is thirty- five, would they rejecthim'? Mr. PETTIT. I am glad the gentleman from Boyd propounded his question. I contend we‘ have rights under our Constitu- tion to regulate our own domestic afi‘airs, and that we have a perfect right to say that a Senator from this State shall not be elected by the State of Kentucky until he is forty years of age, but I would doubt the propri- ety and wisdom of such action. _ Mr. MOORE. The gentleman does not answer my question. Mr. PETTIT. I thought I did. Mr. MOORE. I asked you if We, per- haps, should elect a man under forty-five, when our Constitution provided that he is not eligible until he is forty-five, if he is of the age required by the Federal Consti- tution would they reject him? Mr. PETTIT. Certainly not; but we put the inhibition right here. \Ve say our Senator shall exceed the age that is required by the Federal Constitution, and we could not then possibly elect a Senator of the United States, unless the members voting for him in the General Assembly of our State violated the Constitution and their oaths of ofiice. Let us see if there is not a provision in our Constitution that makes some prohibition along this line. Section 15 of the general provision of our State Constitution provides: “In all elections by the people. and also by the Senate and House of Representatives (that includes United . States Senator), jointly or separately, the votes shall be personally and publicly given viva voce:” *1‘ Now, suppose a major- ity of the members of the United States Senate should think this was a wrong po- sition; that a secret ballot in our General Assembly should be the only mode by which we should vote for a Senator from Kentucky—— Mr. MOORE. I will ask the gentleman if the Federal Constitution does not pro— vide that the members of the Legislature shall elect a Senator, and if it does notpro~ vide that the members of the House of Representatives shall be elected by wthe electors qualified to vote for members of the most numerous branch of the Legisla- ture? Mr. PETTIT. Certainly, and that is why I say we should come in harmony with the Constitution of the United States, where they so vitally afl'ect our interests; but that does not prevent us, as a State, from providing otherwise than the Federal Constitution may provide for the regula- tion of our own affairs in the election of our Senators and Representatives in Con- gress, so we do not come in conflict with the provisions of the Federal Constitution. Suppose in Kentucky we say that every man shall be entitled to vote when he is twenty-one years of age; that he has to reside so long in the State and in the pre- cinct, and no qualification attached as to education. The Constitution of Massachu- setts provides that there shall be an educa- tional qualification for avoter. Does the gentleman from Boyd contend that the Congress of the United States may exclude the Representative of Kentucky or the Representative from Massachusetts, by reason of these conflicts of provisions in the laws of the two States‘? Mr. MOORE. I would ask the gentle- man if the Constitution of the State of Kentucky or the Legislature can provide that it is a qualification for a voter for Congress and not for voters for the General Assembly, whether the Federal Congress would pay any attention to it‘? Mr. PETTIT. The Federal Congress simply takes the State law. In a contest in Congress they decide the contest upon the qualifications made and required in each State, subject to this general provision in the Federal Constitution: “Each House shall be the judge of the election returns 4 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] PEITIT:—W£ITAKER——M ILLER. [November 21 . and qualifications of its own members.” How do they determine it? Do they de- termine it by some ipse dimit of their own— some Federal law‘? No, sir; they deter- mine it by recognizing the fact that we have, asa State, the right to regulate our own domestic affairs, which includes the election of a Congressman as well as the election of a Senator That we, and we alone, can determine what is best, in our judgment, as a State; and if the State of Massachusetts requires an educational quali- fication, and the State of Kentucky does not, the law of the several States governs the action of Congress; that the States are entitled to regulate these matters, although the qualifications may be entirely different in the several States. I believe my amendment is in the interest of good government; in the highest interest of our own State. It takes this office out of the realms of political affairs for the term of his office. It is a new feature in our Constitution. It will place the Gov- ernor on a high pinnacle—not a stepping- stonefor some other position. I feel that it is right, and ought to receive the sanction of this Convention. Mr. WHITAKER. Do you apprehend any danger to the State from the Governor being elected to the United States Senate? Mr. PETTIT. Yes, sir; I have some doubt on that point, and I have but to refer the distinguished gentleman from Mason county to the fact that dissensions have come to our State, and we, as wise men here in this Convention, ought to remove every thing that is inimieal to the welfare of the people of the State, when it has been so plainly pointed out in the past. This, Mr. President, is all I desire to say. I am anxious for that amendment to be adopted and made a part af our organic law, so as to remove every vestige of temptation to the Governor in his high office. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the previous question on the remaining portion relating to Executive Ofiicers for the State at Large. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I second it. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I call the yeas and nays on that. Mr. MACKOY. I second it. Mr. BECKHAM. Before that is done, I would like to inquire what other sections are to be acted on? Mr. CLARDY. I desire to offer two amendments, to put the name of Commis- sioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics in two other sections. The PRESIDENT. The amendment will not be in order unless the motion for the previous question is voted down. The vote being taken on the motion for the previous question, it was rejected—yeas, 37; nays, 54—as follows: YEAS—37. Allen, C. T. Hogg, S. P. ' Allen, M. K. Lassing, L. W. Amos, D. C. Lewis, W. W. Auxier, A. J. Martin, W. H. Ayres, W. W. McChord, Wm. C. Beckner, W. M. MeHenry, H. D. Bennett. B. F. Miller, W. H. Berkele, Wm. Blackwell, Joseph Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Boles, S. H. Muir, J. W. Brown, J. S. Parsons, Rob’t T. Brummal, J. M. Petrie, H. G. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, Zack English, Sam. E. Rodes, Robert Farmer, H. H. Smith, H. H. Field, W. W. Swango, G. B. Forrester, J. G. Glenn, Dudley A. Williams, L. P. V. Mr. President Clay Hines; J. S. NAYS—54. Askew, J. F. Holloway, J. W. Beckham, J. C. Jacobs, R. P. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Bourland, H. R. Jonson, Jep. C. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Brents, J. A. Kirwan, E. E. Bronston, C. J. Mackoy, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan May, John S. Buckner, S. B. McDermott, E. J. Bullitt, W. G. McElroy, W. J. Burnam, Curtis F. Miller, Will. Carroll, John D. Moore, J. H. Chambers, G. D. Nunn, T. J. Clardy, John D. O’Hara, R. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 5 Friday,] MILLER—PARSONS—MARTIN. [November 21 . 1Doris. guglllz, Sfingl Mr. PETTIT. I call the yeas and nays ur 1n, ares ulc sa , . . 1 v d- - ' .Q Edrington, W. J. Ramsey, W. R. on t 1e ad itlonal section ofi'ered by ~my.elf. Elmore, T. J. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Goebel, William Sachs, Morris A. Smith, W. Scott Twyman, I. W. Washington, George Mr. PARSONS. I second it. A vote being taken thereon, the section was rejected—yeas, 24; nays, 66—as follows: Graham, Samuel West, J. F. Hanks, Thos. H. Whitaker, Emery Harris, Geo. C. Wood, J. M. Hines, Thomas H. Woolfolk, J. F. ABSENT—9. Applegate, Leslie T. Spalding, I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Straus, F. P. . Hopkins, F. A. Trusdell, George James, A. D. Young, Bennett H. _Knott, J. Proctor Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the pre— vious question on the matter under con- sideration, the additional section moved by the Delegate from Daveiss. Mr. PARSONS. I second the motion. A vote being taken, the motion was carried Mr. Pettit’s additional section was read. The Delegate from Harrison county of- ered the following amendment : Amend by adding, “ N'or President of the United States, nor shall he be allowed ‘to resign his office.” The Delegate from Harlan offered the following substitute: That if the Governor shall declare him- self and become a candidate for the United States Senate. he shall thereby forfeit his office of Governor. ' Mr. MARTIN. I did not offer this amendment for the purpose of getting an opportunity of making a speech on that amendment. I think it ought to stand or fall on its merits. Mr. MCHENRY. Is it debatable? The PRESIDEN T. Not without unani- mous consent. Is there objection ‘2 Mr. MCHENRY. I call for the regular order. ‘ . The PRESIDENT. Then the gentle- man is out of order. A vote being taken, the amendment of the Delegate from Harrison was rejected. A vote being taken, the amendment of the Delegate from Harlan was rejected. Bronston, C. J. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hines, J. S. Hines. Thomas H. ‘Holloway; J. W. YEAS—24. Allen, M. K. Harris, Geo. C. Askew, J. F. Hogg, S. P. Auxier, A. J. May, John S. Ayres, W. W. Parsons, Rob’t T. Bennett, B. F. Pettit, Thos. S. Birkhead, B. T. Quicksall, J. E. Bourland, H. R. Ramsey, W. R. Buchanan, Nathan Smith, W. Scott Chambers, G. D. Twyman, I. W. Cox, H. West, J. F. Forrester, J. G. Williams, L. P \I . Forgy, J. M. Wood, J. M. NAYS 66. Allen, C. T. Jacobs, R. P. Amos, D. C. Jonson, Jep. C. Beckham, J. C. Johnston, P. P. Beckner, W. M. Kennedy, Hanson - Berkele, Wm. Kirwan, E. E. Blackburn, James Lassing, L. W. Blackwell, Joseph Lewis, W. W. Boles, S. H. Mackoy. W. H. Brents, J. A. Martin, W. H. McChord, Wm. C. - Brown, J. S. ' McDermott, E. J. Brummal, J. M. McElroy, W. J. Buckner, S. B. McHenry, H. D. Bullitt, W. G. Miller, Will. Burnam, Curtis F. Miller, W. H. Carroll, John D. Montgomery, J. F. Clardy, John D. Moore, J. H. Coke, J. Guthrie Moore, Laban T. DeHaven, S. E. Muir, J. W. Doris, W. F. Nunn, T. J. Durbin, Charles O’Hara, R. H. Edrington, W. J. Petrie, H. G. Elmore, T. J. Phelps, John L. English, Sam. E. Pugh, Sam’l J. Farmer, H. H. Rodes, Robert Field, W. W. Sachs, Morris A. Funk, J. T. Smith, H. H. ' Glenn, Dudley A. Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Woolfolk, J. F. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—10. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Hanks, Thos. H. Phelps, Zack Hendrick, W. J. Spalding, I. A. Hopkins, F. A. Straus, F. P. James, A. D. Young, Bennett B ‘6 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS Friday,] RAMSEY. [November 21 . Amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington, Mr. Bronston: Add'after the word “ Governor,” in the fourth line, the following: “'He shall be in- eligible for the succeeding four years after the expiration of the term for which he shall have been elected.” The Delegate from the county of Critten- den offered the following amendment: Amend section 15 by striking out all after the word “ Governor," in the fourth line. The Delegate from the county of Laurel offered the following substitute for sections 15,16,17,18, l9 and 20: In case of death, resignation, failure to qualify or disability of the Governor, the President of the Senate shall exercise the powers of Governor until such disability shall be removed, or until a successor shall be elected and qualified; and in case of death, removal from ofiice, resignation or disability of the Speaker of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall exercise the powers and duties of the Governor until removal of the disabilities of the Governor, or the election and quali- fication of the Governor. The General As- sembly shall have power to provide by law for filling unexpired terms by special elec- tion. Mr. RAMSEY. I do not desire to take up the time of the Convention in any lengthy speech, but I hope that I may be indulged for a few moments to explain the reasons why I have offered this substitute. I am very well aware of the difficulty I encounter at the outset in making thisinno- vation on the report of the Committee, but at the same time it seems to me that the creation of this office of Lieutenant- Governor is unnecessary, and I for one am opposed to the creation of all useless and unnecessary ofiices. I would say to those gentlemen who have been clinging to things “ancient‘ that the first Consti- tution of Kentucky, that of 1792, had no such provision in which the ofiice of Lieu- tenant-Governor was created. Since that time it has been made a Constitutional office, but I do not know of any good reason why that ofiicer should be retained. There are I find upon examination of Constitutions of the different States, twelve States of this Union that have no Lieu- tenant-Governor, but have a provision similar to the one I have offered, in which, in case of disability of the Governor, the powers of the Government devolve upon the President of the Senate, and in case of disability of the President of the Senate, then upon the Speaker of the House of Representatives until such time as the General Assembly may provide for the election of Governor. I find that nine of these States have never had any Lieutenant- Governor, but from the formation of their Government they have left it out, and regarded such ofiice as useless. They are the States of Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, West Virginia, Delaware, Tennessee and Georgia. Going back as far as 1792 and 1796 our forefathers in this country adopted a form of government which they regarded as simple in its framework, and they left out this, as it seems to me, unnecessary officer. There are three States that have tried the experiment. First, the State of Alabama in her Constitution of 1819, had no Lieu- tenant-Governor. In the Constitution of 1865 she had none. In 1867 it was provided in the Constitution for a Lieutenant-Gov- ernor; but afterwards, in the Constitution which was framed in 1868, I believe that office was abolished and the State went back to the old form of government, in which there was no such office as Lieutenant-Gov ern or. Another State, the State of Arkansas in the Constitution of 1836, had no Lieu- tenant—Governor. Sooin 1864; but in 1868 provided for a Lieutenant-Governor; but after trying that for about six years, in the Constitution of 1874 that officer was abol- ished, and his duties conferred upon the President of the Senate. So in the State 0 Maryland, in 1776, her _first Constitution and in the Constitution of 1851, had no Lieutenant—Governor. In 1864 she provided for a Lieutenant-Governor, but EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 7 I President of the Senate. Friday,] RAMSEY—MCDERMOTT—AUXIER. [November 21 . afterwards abolished the oflice, and in 1867 (conferred the duties of that ofiicer upon the So that has been the experience of other States of the Union, and I would like to ask Delegates on the floor of this House what good reason can be given why we should retain the ofiice of Lieutenant- -Governor in our Constitution. Can not the duties of that ofiice be well filled by the President of the Senate, and thereby abol- ish a useless and unnecessary ofiice, and re- duce the expenses of the government to that extent? We pay our Lieutenant-Gov- ernor about ten dollars a day. Why not allow, in case it should be necessary, the President of the Senate to exercise the du- ‘ ties of Governor, and he will not be paid any more than he already receives as Sena- tor, or, at any rate, it will not cost as much as Lieutenant-Governor‘? Mr. MODERMOTT. Is not the reason for the election of Lieutenant-Governor this: He would act as Governor in case the Governor should die, and the people of the State want to have a chance to say who shall occupy the Executive Chair? Mr. RAMSEY. The President of the Senate comes from the people in the first place, and in the next place he is chosen by .all the members of the Senate. In the next place, he only occupies that position until .such time as the people may have a chance to select their Governor. I provide that the Legislature shall make such provision as shall secure an officer to fill out the unex- pired term, so the President of the Senate. only acts until that time, and no longer; and the President of the Senatecomes di- rectly from the people, and‘certainly all the members of the Senate are capable of selecting a man who would have all the qualifications and ability necessary to fill that high and important position. I can see no good reason why we :should retain this otfice. It will be a saving to the State of I do not know how much. It would depend entirely on what length of time he serves, and I see no reason why we should not save that by leaving it to the President of the Senate; or, in case of his disability, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. I believe I voice the sentiment of the people of the State when I say, that we should go back to the theory of our fathers in framing a Constitution and form of Government which shall be simple in its framework and economical in its administration; and I believe the people will indorse us when we abolish this useless and unnecessary oflice, these sinecures, con- stantly being created in order to provide a position for somebody, and we will reduce our system of Government to the simplest form and the most economical basis. I hope the reasons I have given will be considered, and this substitute adopted. Mr. AUXIER. You propose to make the Speaker of the Senate Lieutenant- Governor; what reason is there for letting one hundred men elect this officer instead of the people of this State‘? Mr. RAMSEY. I propose to abolish the office of Lieutenant-Governor by the Sen- ate selecting a member of their own body to preside over them. Let the President of the Senate be selected in the same man- ner as the Speaker of the House of Repre- sentatives, by selecting a member of their own body to preside over them. Let the President of the Senate be selected in the same manner the Speaker of the House of Representatives is, and abolish entirely the oflice of Lieutenant-Governor. The PRESIDENT. We have been act- ing under the amended rule, which says each section which shall contain matter to be inserted in the Constitution which shall refer to an independent and separate sub- ject, shall be treated _as an independent proposition. The Chair holds that sections 15, 16, 17, 18,19 and 20 refer to a sepa- rate and independent subject, and neither one of them separately does. So they will, under the rule, be considered together, and therefore amendments to each section will 8 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] BULLITT—RAMSEY. [November 21 ,. be in order, and then the substitute of the Delegate from Laurel. Mr. BULLITT. I am not surprised to hear the young Delegate advocate the with- drawal of the Lieutenant-Governor from the Commonwealth of Kentucky, because others have advocated the same thing, but there is no decrease of expenses by reason of the withdrawal of the Lieutenant- Governor. The Speaker of the Senate would draw the same per diem the Lieutenant- ~Govern or does while the Senate is in session; but we have this advantage in the Lieuten- ant-Governor. He is selected by the whole people of the Commonwealth; the Speaker of the Senate is elected by one-thirtieth of the people of the State. Mr. RAMSEY. If the President of the Senate is selected from the members of that body, he would simply receive the pay that he would otherwise receive as member. Mr. BULLITT. No. Mr. RAMSEY. But if we provide for Lieutenant-Governor, all the pay he gets is extra, which is about ten dollars a day. Mr. BULLITT. I am willing to meet the gentleman on his own proposition. Would you, or has any Legislative body, ever required any member to sit either as the Speaker of the House or Senate with- out allowing him additional pay? It is always doubled, so that there is no economy in making the change, and whilst there is no economy in making the change, we have these other advantages, that the Lieu- tenant-Governor is the choice of the whole people of the State, whilst the Speaker of the Senate is the choice of one-thirtieth part of the people of the State. And is not elected by the Senate until it meets. In addition to this, in our Lieutenant- Governor, at any time the Governor should be unable to discharge the duties or Governor, we have an officer to perform those functions until the Governor gets well; if he should be taken down with a spell of sickness, or if he should be com- pelled to leave the State for any purpose, we have an ofiicer to perform the functionS of the Governor. The Speaker of the Senate could not act until elected. The Delegate from Laurel fails to provide for that contingency in his amendment. He may say that the Legislature might provide for it, but he does not do that. He leaves the State, therefore, if the Governor should be taken with a spell of typhoid fever, without a Governor or without any- body to perform the functions of the Gov- ernor. Now, in these States that the gen- tleman alludes to, they have a provision to perform those functions. Mr. RAMSEY. They have exactly the same provision as mine. Mr. BULLITT. Is there no provision which authorizes the Legislature to provide that he shall take the place of Governor when the Governor is sick, or out of the State, or unable to perform the function of Governor? I dare say you have not ex- amined the Statutes; you have simply looked at the Constitution as presented by the Poore Compilation, and you have over- looked the important features. The Com- mittee had all those questions before them, and there were gentlemen before the Com- mittee who advocated the doing away with the Lieutenant-Governor; but, upon con- sideration, the Committee, by a considerable majority, came to the conclusion that unless we can improve the affairs of the State by making a change, we ought to hang on to what we have. None of us saw any im- provement after the question was discussed, and I believe that the (‘ommittee came to an almost unanimous conclusion to let it stand as it is. But at the start there were gentlemen on the Committee who desired the change, but we all must admit, unless we can improve the organic law of the State, we ought not to change it; let what we have stand until we can improve it. The proposition of the gentleman, all on’ the Committee thought, would not be an improvement, and I do not think it would be now. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. . 9 Friday,] FUNK— MILLER—HARRIS. [November 21 . Mr. FUNK. I would like to move the previous question on that substitute. The PRESIDENT. I suppose the Dele- gate moves the previous question on the six sections pending and amendments and substitutes. _ Mr. FUNK. I would like to give op- portunities to those who offered amend- ments to explain. This substitute has been explained, and I want to move the previous question on that. ' The PRESIDENT. The Delegate does not understand the situation. The previous question cannot be moved on the substitute unless it includes the amend- ments which have precedence of the sub- titute. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move the previous question on the 15th section. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate misapprehends the Parliamentary status. The Chair holds the 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th sections refer to one independent proposition, and are consid— ered as a whole, and that the first thing in order will be to perfect those sections by , voting on the amendments to those six I sections, and then the question will come on the substitute offered by the Delegate from Laurel. Mr. HARRIS. I move to strike out the word “state” in the fifth line, and insert therein the word “designate.” ‘I think the word “designate” would be more proper. Mr. BULLITT. I think that is right. The PRESIDENT. Report the first amendment to the fifteenth section. The CLERK. The first amendment is that offered by the Delegate from Lexing- ton, Mr. Bronston: ‘ Add after the word “ Governor,” in the fourth line, the following: “He shall be ineli- gible for the succeeding four years after the expiration of the‘ term for which he shall have been elected.” Mr. W. SCOTT SMITH. There are two Governors in that line, and I would like to know which one it refers to? The CLERK. It is the first one. Mr. BURNAM. I desire to know who is made ineligible? Mr. BRONSTON. It is the Lieutenant- Governor. Mr. DEHAVEN. I would like to inquire A of the gentleman from Lexington whether he proposes to make him ineligible for Gov- ernor or for both‘? Mr. BRONSTON. For Lieutenant-Gov- ernor. Mr. DEHAVEN. You propose to make the Lieutenant-Governor ineligible just as the Governor? We have no objection to that. The trouble I see is whether your amendment makes him ineligible for the oflice of Governor and Lieutenant-Gov- ernor. Mr. BRONSTON. With permission, I will read it. I have taken section 3, the language you apply to the Governor, and applied it to this section : A Lieutenant-Governor shall be chosen at every regular election for Governor in the same manner, to continue in ofiice for the same time, and possess the same qualiti- cations as the Governor. He shall be in- eligible, etc. In voting for Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, the electors shall state for whom they vote as Governor, and for whom as Lieutenant-Governor. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The Clerk read the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Crittenden: Strike out all of said section after the word ‘*Governor.” in the fourth line. Mr. NUNN. I will only take a mo- ment to explain the amendment. It ap- pears to me those words are unnecessary at the end of the section. It ‘is complete without those words; and if the words added to that section are necessary, the same words ought to be added to the 24th sec’ tion: “A Treasurer, Auditorof Public Ac» counts, a Register of the Land Office, See- retary of State and Attorney-General shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at the same time the Governor is. 10 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] NUNN—MILLER—RODES. [November 21 . elected.” Now, if it is necessary to say that voters shall state who they are voting for, Governor or Lieutenant-Governor, the same necessity arises in regard to Audi- tor. Attorney-General, and all other ofiicers of the State. The second section reported reads this way : “The Governor shall be elected for the term of four years by the qualified voters of the State, at the time when, and places where, they shall respec- tively vote for Representatives.” The first part of the 15th section reads this way: “A Lieutenant-Governor shall be chosen at every regular election for Governor in the same manner, to continue in office for the same time, and possess the same qualifica- tions as Governor. In voting for Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, the electors shall state for whom they vote as Governor, and for whom as Lieutenant-Governor.” Why the necessity to add there that the voter must designate, in the language of the amendment of the Delegate from Simpson, or in the lan- guage of the report, “ state for whom he shall vote, Governor or Lieutenant-Governor?" It seems to me that should be left to the Committee on Elections, and let that Com- mittee designate how .the voter shall vote for every ofiicer. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The amendment of the Committee of the Whole was to strike out “ Speaker” and insert “President ” A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. Section 17 was then read, to which the following amendment was proposed by the Committee of the Whole: Strike out the word “ or,” in second line, and insert after the word “State,” in the following line, the words " or be from any cause unable to discharge the duties of his oflice;" and add at the end of the section these words: “ Or be able to discharge the duties of his office.” A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The substitute offered by the Delegate from Lincoln was read, and is as follows : Should the Governor be upon trial, under articles of impeachment, or be absent from the State, the Lieutenant-Governor shall exercise all the power and authority per- taining to the office of Governor until the Governor, absent or on trial, shall return or be acquitted ; and should there be a vacancy in the office of Governor, occasioned by removal from office, by death or refusal to qualify, or resignation, the Lieutenant-Gov- ern or shall succeed,to the office of Governor, and exercise all the power and authority pertaining thereto, for the remainder of the term for which the Governor shall have been elected. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to amend my substitute by inserting the Words proposed by the Committee of the Whole to the original section. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Delegate can so amend his substitute. Mr. BURNAM. Before the vote is taken on that amendment, I wish to sug— gest a verbal criticism on section 16. I propose to strike out the word “are,” and insert the word “is." Mr. RODES. I wish to call attention of the Delegate from Lincoln to the fact that the substitute provides that the Governor shall cease in the performance of his duty upon his being impeached. He shall not cease to discharge the duties of his oflicc until he is discharged by a verdict of guilty or not guilty. When Andrew Johnson was impeached he did not cease the duties of his ofiice. The PRESIDENT. By unanimous con~ sent, the amendment offered by the Dele— gate from Madison will be considered as adopted. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I also ask per- mission to correct my proposed amendment, so as to embrace’ the words of the original amendment as indicated by the gentleman from Warren. The substitute of the Delegate from Lin- coln, as amended, was read, and is as fol lows: EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 11 Friday,] MILLER-RonEs-DEHAVEN. [November 21. Should the Governor be impeached, or be absent from the State, or from any cause shall be unable to discharge the duties of his ofiice, the Lieutenant-Governor shall exercise all the power and authority per- taining to the ofiice of Governor, until the Governor, absent or on trial, shall return or be acquitted, or be able to discharge the du— ties of his oflice And should there be‘a vacancy in the office of Governor, by re- moval from office, death, refusal to qualify, or resignation of the Governor, the Lieu- tenant-Governor shall succeed ‘to the office of Governor and exercise all the power and authority pertaining thereto, for the re mainder of the term for which the Gov- ernor shall have been elected. Mr. W. H. MILLER. It will be seen that this amendment provides for the eleva— tion of the Lieutenant-Governor to the ofiice of Governor in the event of a vacancy at, any time. Section 18 provides that whenever a vacancy shall occur in the office of Gov- ernor before the first two years of the term ' shall have expired, a ‘new election for Gov— ernor shall take place to fill said vacancy. I can see no reason why the Lieutenant- Governor should not be as suitable a person to exercise the office of Governor at any time during his term as he is during the last two years. The proposed amendment will act beneficially in this particu- lar: It will be an inducement for the very best men of the State to seek, or at least accept this oifice. I do not wish in saying this to intimate that we have not heretofore had competent men to discharge the duties of the ofiice. The fact is, so far as I understand it, we have had competent men in the oifiee, but I am under the impression that, in the event of a vacancy, and the filling of it for a short time by the Lieutenant-Governor, who is a self-respecting and proud spirited gentle- man, that he would dislike very much then to have another citizen of the State selected over him to exercise the oflice of Governor for the remainder of the term. The pro- vision which I suggest is the provision controlling the office of the Vice-President of the United States, and has generally been adopted by the various States of this Union. If the Delegates will take the trouble to examine, they will find Ken- tucky an exception. I think there is every reason to urge for the adoption of this amendment, so as to follow in the line of the United States and the other States, and I hope the Convention will see proper to adopt it. Mr. RODES. I wish to call the attention of my friend from Lincoln to this feature of the question: An impeachment does not necessarily, ex rt' termini, carry with it that he is removed from otfice. It is only a charge made against him. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I would inform the gentleman from Warren that the changes indicated by him has already been made in my proposed amendment. Mr. RODES. Several gentlemen around me here did not think it‘ cured the defect. I hardly think it does myself. Mr. DEHAVEN. I am not certain that I catch exactly the amendment of the Dele- gate from Lexington, but it does not occur to me that, under the first few lines, the Lieutenant-Governor succeeds to his ofiice. Then, the second amendment that he offers is that if the Governor shall die during the term of his office, then the Lieutenant- Governor shall fill out the full term for which the Governor was elected. Now, we have heard a great deal about the rights of the dear people, and under the provision of the Constitution, as it stood before, when- ever a vacancy occurred in the oflice of Governor, before the first two years of the term shall have expired, a new - election shall take place and they also vote for the Lieutenant-Governor; and, it occurs to me, if a vacancy occurs before the first two years have expired, that the people ought to have another chance to vote for a man they desired to have as Governor. It oc- curs to me that the verbiage of section 17, as reported by the Committee, is clearer. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Would the criti- cism of the gentleman from Warren not 12 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.’ Friday,] apply as well to the language of section '17 of the Committee’s Report as to the amend- ment of the Delegate from Lincoln. Mr. DEHAVEN. I think not. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I cannot see the difference. According to the language of that section if the Governor were im- peached the Lieutenant-Governor would perform the duties until the Governor was acquitted. Mr. DEHAVEN. There is one other suggestion I desire to make. It occurs to me that this seventeenth section reported by the Committee is much shorter and more concise, and much less involved than the amendment offered by the Delegate from Lincoln. The only difference is that by his amendment he provides that the Lieu- tenant-Governor shall fill out the. whole term for which the Governor was elected. I hope that the report of the Committee, as it stands now, will be adopted. It seems to me it is better language and more concise. Mr. RODES. I would like to know from some of these Constitutional lawyers around here what the meaning of the word “ impeach ” is? Does it mean the filing'of the articles of impeachment, or does it mean a successful impeachment, or a conviction, or does it simply mean an indictment? I think the language of the Article introduced by the Committee goes upon the idea that the impeachment implies a successful trial against the officer. It doesnot so occur to me. I regard the word “impeachment ” equivalent to the idea of an indictment, and according to that section and the sub- stitute offered by the Delegate from Lin- coln, whenever articles of impeachment are sent into the Senate from trial, the Gov- ernor ceases to be Governor. I am opposed to that. _ Mr. McDERMOTT. The Constitution of the United States says the House of Rep- resentatives shall choose their Speaker and other officers and shall have the sole power of impeaching. Of course that means that DEHAVEN—MCDERMOTT—RODES SACHS. [N ovember 21. the House shall have power to impeach an officer but the Senate must try him. Mr. W. H. MILLER. In response tb the objection of the Delegate from Oldham. I desire to call attention again to the fact that my substitute is bound to be drawn in the language it is drawn in to cover the words indicated by me and contained in the last portion of the 18th section. In response to the criticism of the language used by the Committee in regard to impeachment, I desire to read the legal definition of an im- peachment. It is simply a written accusa- tion by the House of Representatives of the United States and the Senate of the United States against officers. An impeach- ment is not the imposition of a penalty, but simply the accusation. just as an indict— ment is an accusation against a person. Mr. MCDERNIOTT. I move that we add after the word “be" the words “convict- ed on impeachment.” Mr. SACHS. In response to the ques- tion asked by the Delegate from Warren, I do not consider myself one of the aforesaid great Constitutional lawyers, but I think I can make clear, at least clear to my mind, what is meant by section 17, as it stands. I do not think it requires any amendment to make it clear. The first line reads, “ should the Governor be impeached, removed from oifice, die, or refuse to qualify, etc., the Lieutenant-Governor shall exercise all the power and authority.” The last part of it says, “that until another be duly elected and qualified, or the Governor absent or impeached shall return or be acquitted.” The word “impeached” in the first line means indicted or charged, otherwise it would be inconsistent with the last part of it, which says, shall return or be acquitted. In other words, should'the Governor be charged or indicted, and then afterwards be acquitted; if you read it in that light it is perfectly plain. In the first line the word means not actually adjudicated upon, but charged or indicted so that it would read, if the Governor be charged by articles of im» EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 13 Friday,] RODES—DEHAV EN—Mc CHORD. [November 21 . .peachment, etc., the Lieutenant-Governor should exercise all power and authority per- taining to the oflice of Governor until an- other shall be elected, qualified, or the Gov- ernor, absent or impeached, shall return or be acquitted. The second word, impeached, means that he shall have been tried under Articles of Impeachment and been ac- quitted. Mr. RODES. I say he ceases his duty the minute he is charged. This is an im- portant matter. A House of Representa- tives being also opposed to the Governor, two-thirds of them could practically remove the Governor. If the Governor becomes odious to two-thirds of the House of Repre- sentatives, they might remove him or dis- lodge him altogether from his situation as Governor. Mr. DEHAVEN. In order to obviate the trouble some gentleman seem to have on this question, I will ask leave to offer the following amendment: The amendment offered by the Delegate - from the Fifth District of Louisville was read as follows: . Amend line one, section 17, by striking out the word “impeached” and by adding the words “ convicted on impeachment.” The amendment offered by the Delegate from Oldham was read as follows : Amend by adding after the word “ im- peached” “and.” A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from the Fifth District of Louisville, the same was rejected. A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Oldham, the same was adopted. Mr. MOCH'ORD. I offer an amendment. The amendment was read as follows: On the trial of the Governor, the Lieu- tenant-Governor shall not act as President of the Senate, nor take part in the pro- ceedings, but the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals shall preside during the trial. Mr. McCHORD. ‘It seems to me it would be improper for the Lieutenant- Governor to preside when he would be directly interested in the trial. If the Governor was convicted, the Lieutenant- Gover'nor would become Governor of the State of Kentucky. It is improper that the highest officer of the tribunal who is to try the Governor on this impeachment should not be one who is directly interested in the result of the conviction of the Gov- ernor. I take it that the Lieutenant-Gov- ernor, if he were so disposed, could exercise considerable power over the deliberations of the Senate on that trial. This simply follows the provision of the Constitution of the United States onpth'e trial of the Presi- dent of the United States. The Chief J us- tice of the Supreme Court, I ‘believe, pre- sides. The purpose of having the Chief Justice of the United States to preside on the trial of the President of the United States, it would seem to me, would hold good upon the trial of the Governor of Kentucky. Therefore, I offer that amend— ment to take from that body, as its presid- ing officer, the person most directly inter- ested in securing a conviction of the Governor. A vote being taken on the amendment, it was adopted. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I desire to offer an amendment to strike out the words “or impeached” in 5th line, and words “or be impeached” in the 6th line. _ The amendment was read and is as fol- lows: Strike out theywords in the fifth line “the Governor, absent or impeached,” and out the sixth line, the words “or be ac- quitted.” A vote being taken on the amendment, it was adopted. Mr. MACKOY. If it is in order now, I think that section ought to be referred to the‘Committee on Style immediately. The CLERK. The substitute offered by the Delegate from Lincoln—- Mr. W. H. MILLER. I do not want my substitute to be opposed to the amends ments to the original section which have 14 EXECUTIVE DEPA RT MEN T. Friday,] MILLER—DEHAVEN—PETTIT. [November 21 . been adopted, and I ask that the original section as amended be now engrossed so that I can redraft my substitute to meet the views of the House on other matters. The PRESIDENT. That can be done only by unanimous consent. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I ask unanimous consent to pass to the consideration of other sections until this can be done. The PRESIDENT. That also involves the postponement of the vote on the substi- tute of the Delegate from Laurel, which is a substitute for this and other sections. The Delegate from Lincoln moves that the consideration of sections 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 be postponed until the other sec- tions of the Committee's report are consid- ered and disposed of. Is there any objec- tion ‘? DELEGATES. Object! Object! Mr. W. H. MILLER. I think the en- grossment might be made by the time the amendment or the substitute proposed by the gentleman from Laurel can be reached. The PRESIDENT. But we cannot take a vote on the substitute of the Delegate from Laurel until the six sections are per- fected. The Chair hears objection. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I ask leave then to reform my substitute. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection, and the gentleman is granted leave. Mr. DEHAVEN. I think we could save time, perhaps, by having unanimous con- sent to go on with the consideration of the 21st section. The PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection and the Secretary will report sec- tion 21. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I wish to reform the amendment offered by me; I think I have asked to have too many words stricken out. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the gentleman can send up his amendment. The Reading Clerk read section 2], as follows: Every bill which shall have passed the two Houses shall be presented to the Governor. If he approve, he shall sign it; but if not, he shall return it, with his objections, to the House in which it originated, who shall enter the objections at large upon their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, a majority of all the members elected to that House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, with the objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be considered, and if ap- proved by a majority of all the members elected to that House, it shall be a law; but in such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the members voting for and against the bill shall be entered upon the Journals of each House, respectively. If any bill shall not be returned by the Gov- ernor within ten days (Sundays excepted), after it shall have been presented to him, it shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the General Assembly, by their adjournment, prevent its return; in which case it shall be a law, unless sent back within three days after their next meeting, The Governor shall have power to disap- prove of any parts of appropriation bills ‘embracing distinct items, and the portions disapproved shall not become a law unless re—passed, as in case of a bill. Mr. PETTIT. I desire to amendment to said section. “To strike out all beginning with the word ‘the,’ on the 18th line, and ending with the word ‘ bill,’ in line 21, and insert as follows: I desire to say to the Convention that this amendment was put into the bill on a motion made by myself, for which I desire to thank the Committee, but I do not think the amendment goes quite far enough. It provides simply to take effect in appropriation bills, and I therefore ofi'er this amendment, as it reaches a little beyond that point. offer an The Reading Clerk read the amendment as follows: Strike out of section 21 beginning with the word “the,” in line 18, down to and including the word “bill,in line 21, and insert the following: If any bill presented to the Governor contains several items of appropriations of money, he may object to one or more items while approving other EXECUTIV E DEPARTMENT. 15 Friday,] SMITH—CARROLL’ M oCnoaD. [November 21 . portions of the bill. In such case he shall append to the bill, at the time of signing it, a statement of the items to which he ob- jects, and the reasons therefor, and the ap- propriation so objected to shall not take effect unless passed over the Governor’s, objections as hereinbefore provided. Mr: W. SCOTT SMITH. I desire also to offer an amendment to section 21. The Reading Clerk read the amendment as follows : Amend section 21, in line 17, by striking out all after the word “law,” in said line, and the words in the 18th line to, and including the word “meeting,” and insert in lieu thereof the following: “Unless disapproved by him within ten days after adjournment, in which case his veto mess- age shall be spread upon the register kept by the Secretary of State.” Mr. CARROLL.‘ I desire to offer an amendment. ' The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Amend section 21, by striking out the words “A majority,” in the 6th and 9th lines, and insert in place thereof the words “ two-thirds.” The PRESIDENT. The question will be first on the amendment of the Delegate from Daveiss. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. The PRESIDENT. The question will he now on the amendment of the Delegate from Monroe. Mr. W. SCOTT SMITH. I merely wish to say a few words. It is obvious to me that the sentiment of this Convention is to limit the time of the Legislatuture to sixty days; and further, that the sessions will be held quadrennially instead of bien- nially as at present. Sometimes, at the close of a session, a measure is passed in a hurry, when the Governor does not have time to sign it, in which case the measure is suspended until the next session of the Legislature. It possibly might be a good measure, -or it might not be a good measure; but the people of the Common- \ wealth cannot know the action of the Gov- ernor until within three days after the next- meeting of the Legislature. I remember about three years ago, there was a little ap- propriation bill passed by the General As- sembly early in the session for my county, for the purpose of building a court-house. Three or four days previous to the adjourn- ment, it passed the Senate, thereby becom- ing a law when it obtained the Governor’s signature. We never heard any more from that measure; but I presume it was returned to the next General Assem- bly within three days after it convened at the next regular session; but it would have given us very great relief if, within ten days after adjournment, the Governor hav- ing vetoed the measure, it had been spread on the register of the Secretary of State. I believe it would tend to give more satis- faction, it would give the people and the Governor some relief, and be a matter of convenience,.if my amendment were adopt- ed. Mr. MCCHORD. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. ‘What oppor- tunity would the General Assembly have, under the proposition as contained in his amendment, of passing a bill over the Governor’s veto‘? Mr W. SCOTT SMITIL. If he dis- approves it, as a matter of coursethey would have to put the bill on its passage again. That would be the end of it, but if he did not veto it within ten days it would become a law, and the people affected by it, would know it was a law without needless delay. Mr. MACKOY. I would like to send up an amendment to the same section intended to cover the provision of the amendment of the gentleman from Monroe The amendment was read, and is as follows:‘ To insert the word “ not,” after the word “shall,” and before the word “he ” in the 17th line; and to strike out the words “ sent. back,” in the 18th line, and insert in lieu thereof, the word “ approved.” 16 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] MACKOY—PHELPS—B LACKBURN. [November 21 . Mr. MACKOY, I would like to call the attention of the Convention to the ‘change that would make. As it reads now, it is: “If any Bill shall not be re- turned by the Governor within ten days ‘(Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him it shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the General Assembly, by their adjournment, prevent its return, in which case it shall be a law, unless sent back within three days after their next meeting.” That is the language of the report, and, if I under- stand the language of the report correctly, it permits a Bill to operate as a law during the entire year between the ses- sions of the General Assembly, but the Governor may disapprove of it at the next session within three days. The change made by the amendment which I have sent up is, that it shall not operate as a law until it is approved by him, and that if the General Assembly prevents its approval by adjourning before he can report it back, he shall have until three days after the next meeting of the General Assembly in which to consider the matter, and send it back ap- proved, in which case it becomes a law, and not until then. It seems to me that it is unwise that persons should live and en- deavor to conform to that as law which may be put an end to by the disapproval of the Governor at the subsequent session of the General Assembly. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. It seems to me that the suggestion made by the Delegate ‘from Monroe county is a very important one. I would like to urge the Convention to consider it well before passing it by. I understand that the disposition of the Leg- islative Committee is to lengthen the inter- val between the sessions of the Legislature. If that be true, I think it would be unwise to allow acts of the General Assembly not signed to become laws, and to remain a law during the four years which would follow one session before another can be held until the Governor is given an opportunity to disapprove it. It seems to me that the Governor should be given an opportunity for at least ten days after the adjournment of the Legislature to disapprove of any act. The Delegate from Covington suggests that in that event the Legislature would have no opportunity to pass it over the veto. If it is disapproved by the Governor, it will not be a hardship to have it lay over until the next session. At that time the Legislature can again take up the matter, and if the Governor be in error, can pass it; but if ‘we are to have four years between the sessions, it seems to me to be very unwise to say (if such be a proper construction) that any law shall remain in force until three days from the beginning of the next session, which is four years off, and I hope the amendment of the Delegate from Monroe county will be adopted. Mr. BLACKBURN. It seems to me that the difficulty does not exist as sug- gested by the Delegate from Covington. The present report is in accord with the provision of the present Constitution. If the Legislature adopt a bill and adjourn before the Governor has had time to return it with his objection, it does not become a law at that time. It remains in his office and is not operative until three days have expired after the meeting of the next ses- sion of the Legislature. If during those three days that bill is not returned with the objections of the Governor, then it becomes vitalized and becomes alaw. We all know that after the adjournment of the Legisla- ture, in a short time, the public and private acts of the Legislature are published. That is notice to the citizen as to what laws have been passed by that Legislature. If this bill remains in the hands of the Governor, and is not among the published acts, either private or local, it is not a law. That is notice to all. The act of the Legislature is inoperative so far, but its vitality as a law depends upon the failure to return the bill by the Governor to the Legislature within the time allowed. Therefore no citizen is' EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 17 Friday,] deceived or misled in believing that it is a law. It is not a law, and cannot be, unless it is not returned within three days of the next session of the Legislature; and if so returned, it is to be passed by the Legisla- ture over the Governor’s objection before it can be a law. It occurs to me that the pro- vision of the report of the Committee is clear on that subject. Mr. w. SCOTT SMITH. Another emergency might arise, which I will call the attention of the Convention to. Grant- ing that four years will be the period fixed as the interval between the sessions of the Legislature, in the meantime we may have a gubernatorial election, in which another man is elected Governor. We have no means of knowing whether he is going to veto any measure left unacted upon by his predecessor or not, but when he assumes the reins of govern- ment, and that measure is left open and is odious to him, he has the power. according to the provision of the present Constitution, to veto that measure, when perhaps his predecessor anticipated to append his official signature. By giving the first Governor ten days to wind up all the business of the session, I believe justice would be more evenly meted out to everybody. Mr. ZACK PHELPS. If the construc- tion given by the Delegate from Woodford is a true construction, it seems to me that it argues more strongly than ever that the amendment is proper. If it be true that all acts passed by the General Assembly do not become vitalized laws unless approved by the Governor until the expiration of three days from the next session, that seems to be a much stronger reason why the Governor should be given ten days within which to approve it. Or if the other construction contended for be the true one, it may he that in the hurry of the last ten days of the Legislature some very important laws may be passed. These laws cannot become operative until three days of the next session have expired, which session SMITH—CARROLL. [November 21 . may be four years off, and I think it would be very important and wise that the Gov- ernor should have ten days after the expi- ration of the session in which to approve or disapprove an act. If the Governor be hurried in the last ten days, or if he is un- able to get in his approval before the session adjourns, a very important law may be thus left inoperative for four years before the Governor can have an opportunity to approve or disapprove of it. A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Monroe, it was adopted. The READING CLERK. The next amendment is the amendment of the Dele- gate from Henry. The amendment was again read. Mr. CARROLL. The object of that amendment is to require that two-thirds of the members elected to each branch of the General Assembly shall be necessary to pass a bill over the Governor’s veto, and in support of that proposition I desire to sub- mit for the consideration of the Conven- tion, a few remarks. In the organization of the Government of the United States upon which all the State Governments are founded, the distribution of power between the three Departments of Government, was found to be a very troublesome question, and an effort was made to equalize it as much as possible, in order that neither branch of the Government could absorb to itself the powers that had been granted to the other, and so that each branch of the Government might take care of its own interests and discharge the duties confided to it by the Constitution. The Legislntive Department of the Government is confessedly the strongest. The Executive branch of the Government in this State is admittedly the weakest. Hence, the necessity for lodging in the Executive the veto power for two reasons: First, that he may be able to protect his Department from unreasonable encroachments by the Legislative Department; and second, that 1 8 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] CARROLL—BRONSTON. [November 21 . he may check vicious legislation by calling the attention of the body that passed it to it in order that, if they deem it proper, they may have an opportunity to correct it. The bill, as reported by the Committee, provides that a majority of the members elected to each House of the General Assembly may pass a bill over the Governor’s veto. The reasonable presumption is that every bill that is passed will be passed by a majority of the members elected to each House of the General Assembly, as it is to be pre- sumed, that all the members elected to each House of the General Assembly will be present when bills are passed. If that be true, the power of the Governor to veto a measure of any kind or character, is of no effect at all, because it requires the same number of votes to pass a bill in the first place that it would require to pass it over the Governor’s veto. Mr. BRONSTON. A bill may be passed by a majority of all the members present, but that does not necessarily mean a ma- jority of all the members elect. Mr. CARROLL. The gentleman mis- understood me. I said the reasonable pre- sumption was that all the members elected would be present and vote upon each bill; and hence it would require a majority of those elected to pass it. Then, too, there is a strong disposition on the part of a great many members of this Convention to in- sert a clause in the Legislative Department of the Constitution that no bill shall be- come a law unless it shall have received a majority of the votes of all the members elected to each House of the General As- sembly. If that amendment is adopted, or if that principle is incorporated in the Con- stitution, it will be at once seen that the Governor's veto can be of no effect. Then again, I do not believe that gentlemen of this Convention desire to take from the Governor the entire power to veto any measure that appropriates money; and yet the proposed Constitution, as reported by the Committee, takes from the Governor the power to veto, or rather renders in- effectual a veto of his where the Legisla- ture has made an appropriation of money. The present Constitution (section 40) pro— vides: “That the General Assembly shall have no power to pass any act or resolu- tion for the appropriation of‘ any money, or' the creation of any debt exceeding the sum of $100 at any one time, unless the same, on its final passage, shall be voted for by a majority of all the mem- bers then elected to each branch of the General Assembly, and the yeas and nays entered thereon on the Journal,” and it is reasonable to presume that that provision- as it now exists, will be inserted in the Constitution we are about to make. If that be true, the Legislature can appropriate money for any purpose it sees proper, and the Governor is divested entirely of the power to veto it—not, perhaps. to veto it. but to make his veto have any effect, because it requires a majority of all the- members elected to each House to make the appropriation, and only requires a majority of all the members elected to each House to pass it over the Governor’s veto. It is plain, then, that the power of the Governor to veto any measure appropriating money is gone if this section is adopted as it now stands. Why should we not insert a pro- vision that it shall require two-thirds of the General Assembly to pass a bill over the Governor’s veto I’ Can any good reason be assigned against it‘? The Governor‘s veto is not absolute. The power vested in the Executive is simply a qualified one, and the main object of it is to direct the atten- tion of the Legislature to any matter that may have escaped their attention, in order that they may have an opportunity to cor- rect it; and if two-thirds of the members of any General Assembly cannot be found who ' are willing upon a reconsideration to pass a bill over the Governor’s veto, I insist that that bill must be in itself of questionable, propriety, because any laudable measure EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 19 Friday,] CARROLL—BRONSTON. [November 21. any measure beneficial to the best interests of the people of the State, could certainly obtain the vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each branch of the General Assembly. On the other hand, the Legislature, acting as they often do, hastily and unwisely passing bills as they often do, without any consideration what- ever, can under the present, law and under the report of the Committee as adopted, re- pass them-over the Governor’s veto with- out any difficulty whatever, if they see proper to do so. It is a well-known fact that one of the prime causes for the calling of this Convention was the abuses prac- ticed by the Legislative Department of this State; and I venture the assertion. that except for the vicious legislation and the local and special laws of all kinds and character passed by the Legislatures that have met in Kentucky for the last twenty years, that no proposition to call a Constitu- tional Convention could ever have received a majority of the votes of the people of Kentucky. The people of Kentucky are more in danger from abuses by the Legisla- tive Department than they are from abuses by any other Department of the State Government. ' The Executive has no power except to execute laws. He has, in fact, very little power under the Consti- tution and laws of this State. The Judicial and the Legislative Departments have almost the entire control of the affairs of the government in_ Kentucky. The Executive will, presumably, be in the future, and always in the past has been, a man of high integrity and character. It is his business, removed from the excitement ‘and passions that sometimes control Legisla- tive assemblies, to carefully consider and calmly investigate all their acts and Legisla- tive proceedings, and if in his cooler, better judgment, giving to it that calm, patient and considerate attention that I take it the Executive always has done, and will do, he finds that the Legislative Department has made some mistake, has appropriated, say, ten thousand dollars, as they might do, for some unwise purpose; has given to some supposed object of charity, or to some other purpose, ten thousand or one hundred thousand of the State’s money, the Gov- ernor ought to have the right to veto the measure; and unless it can receive two- thirds of the votes of all those elected to each branch of the General Assembly, it ought not to become a law. Mr. BRONSTON. Suppose that the Legislature should see proper to reduce taxation. How would it work then to re- quire that, after a veto of the Governor, two-thirds of the members elected should .approvejt, when we know that it is almost impossible to have a full attendance of any Legislative body present at the same time‘? Mr. CARROLL. I shall make the same answer to that that I made awhile ago, that if any measure is proposed in the General Assembly, and is worthy of being a law, it can always receive two-thirds of the votes of all the members elected to each branch of the General Assembly; and if it cannot receive them, if, as a matter of fact, forty- nine members of the General Assembly are opposed to the measure, I say that measure upon its face is of questionable propriety; so, too, of the Senate, if seventeen members of the Senate are opposed to ameasure, that measure is upon its face of doubtful wis- dom. Under the law as it now stands nineteen members of the Senate and fifty- one members of the House Mr. BURNAM. If fifty-one members of the House vote for a proposition, is not the veto of the Governor a matter of ques- tionable propriety‘? Mr. CARROLL. I think not. The provision I propose is found in the Consti- tution of the United States and several of the States. It requires a two-thirds vote of Congress to pass a. bill over the President’s veto, and I think that it ought to require two-thirds of the members elected to the General Assembly to pass a bill over the Governor’s veto. 20 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMEN T. Friday,] MCHENR Y—CAaRoLL—FARMER. [November 21. Mr. McHENRY. The report of the Committee on this subject is the same pro- vision found in the present Constitution. .We have had forty years of practical ex- perience under that provision, and I believe the present Constitution is like the previous Constitution in that regard. I want to ask the gentleman, in view of his experience as a lawyer, and also his personal experience, the result of that law has been that in three cases out of four the vetoes of the Governor have been sustained by the Legislature ? Mr. CARROLL. I incline to think that in a great majority of cases a veto of the Governor is sustained; but I have known of several instances where the veto of the Governor was not sustained, and the bill passed over the Governor’s veto, not because of any intrinsic merit in the bill, but because of the personal influence and popularity of the member who introduced the measure, and who exerted his personal influence to pass it over the Governor's veto. Attention was called to that the other day by the gentleman from Coving- ton, and I know of a number cases where it was done. The Governor of this State has never had the power to veto with any effect whatever an appropriation bill passed by the Legislature of Kentucky. Mr. FARMER. I was a member of this Committee, and I cannot let this come to a vote without saying some few words in opposition to what has been advanced by the gentleman who last addressed the Convention. I am in hopes that the Dele- gates of this Convention will not undo the work that has been done by the three Con- stitutional Conventions which have met in this State. As I understand it, the policy for the last forty years has been to give the Governor a qualified veto. So far as 1 can understand it throughout the State there has been no disposition to do away with this provision in our Constitution. The people almost universally agree that the qualified veto of the Governor is all-sufli~ cient to protect us in all our rights. All civilized Governments in existence have checks and balances to hasty legislation. I would appeal to the Delegates of this Convention if we have not sufiicient checks and balances in the present Constitution as it is? We have two Houses in our State Legislature. When a matter has been deliberately considered in one House it goes to the other, and if there has been any thing done inconsiderately, there is full opportunity for discussion and consid- eration in the other House, and I hold that the deliberate will of the people ought, in all cases, to prevail. We have then a Senate and an Executive. This is to prevent hasty legislation, and not to prevent the deliberate will of the people of the State from being carried out; and "I hold that when the people of the State have deliberately expressed their opinion that that should be the law of the land. I would furthermore say, that the provision in the Constitution of the United States does not apply to this ques- tion at all. We know that when the Con- stitution of the United States was formed, the States were very careful in guarding their rights, and it was owing to this that it required that the President’s veto should prevail, unless a majority of two-thirds should carry the measure over his veto. They were fearful that the States might be injured by a bare majority in the House and Senate, and it was on this account that this provision was made, and probably wisely, in the Constitution of the United States. If we will go back to England, we _will find that under the British Constitu- tion, the Sovereign had an absolute veto power. There the three Departments of the Government were separate, and the Sovereign, the representative of all the people, could veto any measure that was passed by both Houses; but practically it has been a long period, I cannot tell how long, since any Sovereign has dared to in- terpose his veto. In England we find that the deliberate wish of the House of Commons EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 21 Friday,] FARMER—J ONSON. [November 21 . is really the supreme law of the land. That the House of Lords does not dare to ob- struct the deliberate will of the people, and no Sovereign for centuries, probably, has interposed his veto. For these reasons I hope it will not prevail, and I consider that the veto power of the Governor, as it now stands, is a very considerable protection. Af- ter a measure has gone through two Houses, and been carefully considered by them, then the Governor gives it his careful, earn- est consideration. If he is a man of abil- ity he will give to these Houses such rea- sons as would probably influence them to rescind their hasty action; but I contend that after going through all these process— es, after it has been carefully considered by the two Houses, and after the Governor has given it his careful consideration, and given all his reasons, then, I say, we must distrust popular government entirely, if we cannot leave it to a majority of all the members elected to both Houses, from all parts of the State, to decide whether it shall become a law. After they have given it their deliberate sanction and overrule the veto, I think it ought to be the law; and the members of this Convention and people of the State will sustain me, I hope, in that opinion. (Applause) Mr. JONSON. After the very clear and forcible statement of the Delegate from Henry, I have been convinced that his proposition ought to obtain. It is a fact that this power of veto by the President of the United States and by the' Governors of Kentucky, have almost universally been as to measures that were of purely local or private interest. It has ordinarily been the fact that no great political issue has been dependent on such action. As I remember the history of our Government now, with the single exception of a veto of a bank charter by the President of the United States, no political issue has been de- termined by any such act of the President of the United States, or by any Governor of the State of Kentucky. And I do not Q believe that it is probable in the future that the rule will be materially changed, and that the practice will be very greatly dif- ferent from what it has been heretofore. I can easily imagine in the history of Ken- tucky a case in which the power thus sought to be vested in the Executive and require a two-thirds vote might have been used to very great advantage. There are gentle- men on this floor old enough to remember the great conflict arising between the Old and New Court parties in Kentucky. Financial troubles had arisen. An unusual excitement among the people generally over the State had obtained. Inflammatory speeches were made and declamations against the authority and administration of the law obtained in such a way that excitement obtained the mastery over the people, and over her Representatives, and their legisla- tion was bad. It will be remembered by gentlemen of the Convention that that oc- curred in the times of profound peace; that there had been no war to excite any of these issues; that it was only a financial crisis that precipitated this action ; and re- ferring back to it, we must all recognize that as pne of the darkest chapters in the legislation of our State from its inception up to this time; and if gentlemen will travel south of us a little, and view what has been occurring down in Baton Rouge, but a few months since, when a monster corporation, that has been variously de- nominated by gentlemen standing on the floor of this Convention as a vampire, as as an octopus, striking at the liberties of the people, has gone into the legislative body in the State of Louisiana, and asked for the the continuation of an infamous charter, and seeing that charter grantedby a majority of the Legislature in both Houses, and seeing the people of that State protected only by the manly interposition of a single man in the exercise of the veto power, I believe that they would recog- nize the fact of the danger of lodging in the legislative body the power to strike EXECUTIVE DEP-ARTMENTi. ' down this veto, unless by a- greater number than a bare majority; and I am indifferent whether it be two-thirds or three-fifths. I believe that the limit ought to be extended above a bare majority. I can very easily see where great danger might be averted by lodging in the Executive’s hands the controlling power over the majority. And I want to take occasion now to say that I have been as much opposed to the one-man power as any Delegate in this House. Recognizing the force of the argument of the Delegate from Henry, that the eo-ordi- nate branches of this government of ours ought to be furnished with something like equality, and that especially the weaker power ought to be allowed in some way to exercise a balance and a check, I insist that we consider duly and gravely and thoughtfully his proposition. I am ready to vote for it. M1'.WOOD. I ask the indulgence of ' this Convention for only a moment upon this important change proposed in our fun- damental law. The Delegate who has just preceded me remarked that the plain and explicit manner in which the gentleman from Henry presented this question has convinced him that this amendment should be adopted. I think the good reasons so earnestly and explicitly given by the Dele- gate from Henderson thoroughly satisfies my mind that the amendment should not prevail. I do not think the argument offered by the distinguished Delegate from Henry can obtain in this case. As I under- stand, the veto power of the Governor is not intended to be absolute, but is merely suggestive; and the history of legislation in Kentucky for the last forty years will prove this fact, which I think is sufliciently convincing that forty-nine times out of fifty where the Governor has sent his veto to the Legislature accompanied with his objection to a bill, and pointing out the 0b- noxious features therein contained, the Legislature has adhered to the suggestions made by the deliberate and ever watchful J oNsoN-Woon—C ARROLL. [N ovember 21 . and painstaking Governor; and I think with forty long years‘ experience under the present wise provisions of the Constitution, with no wrongs to be looked back to and regretted, not a single mistake or injury that has grown out of the provision in the present Constitution has been or can be cited by the author of the proposed amend- ment, is reason enough for us to say the provision should remain as it is The Dele- gate from Henry says there will be, per- haps, some unnecessary appropriations made. If there is any thing in the world that a demagogue in the Legislature is afraid of, it is extravagant appropriations and the record that he makes. There can be no appropriation made over $100 under the present Constitution without the yeas and nays, and whenever you put a man on rec- ord he is going to vote from honest convic- tion. and will generally vote right. Mr. CARROLL. Will the Delegate yield for a question ? Mr. WOOD. Certainly, with pleasure; it is information we want-and so greatly need. Mr. CARROLL. The latter part of sec- tion 17 reads this way: “ The Governor shall have the power to disapprove of any part of an appropriation bill embracing distinct items, and the portion disapproved of shall not become a law unless re-passed, as in case of a bill.” Now the question I Want to ask is this: It requires a majority of all the members elected to pass an ap- propriation bill; of what effect, then, and of what force is that part of the section giv- ing the Governor the right to veto a bill when they can pass it over the veto by a bare majority‘? Mr. WOOD. It has a most salutary and happy effect in this, sir: We have the objections, with his veto, brought to the Legislature, accompanied with the reasons for his objections; and those reasons are generally convincing; and many who would vote for a bill when first‘ presented will not vote for it when the objections of the, Gov- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 23 \ Friday,] Woon—Macxov. [November 21 . ‘ernor are returned to them; and the evi- dence of that is the proposition I first ‘stated, that forty-nine times out of fifty, when a bill is brought back to the Legis- lature with the Governor’s objections, his objections are adhered to, and members :so plainly see the error of their former vote, We know that, by experience, they are often very glad to change them, because the objections of the Governor that accompany his veto are so plain and convincing they see the error of their way, and gladly change their votes; and I think there is no danger of any in- fringement being made upon the rights of the people. There are one hundred and thirty-eight men, I believe, who compose the Legislature, and there are not over two- thirds or three-fourths generally present to vote upon any proposition. Seventy-five men, perhaps, out of the one hundred in the House are as many as generally attend during the ordinary business of the Legis- lative days. To require two-thirds of all members elect would be to require sixty— .seven of these seventy—five to vote for a measure over the opposition of the Gov- ernor. I think that we have been adhering to that grand old principle that this Gov- ernment belongs to the people, and the same intelligent and confiding people who make the Legislatures make the Governors, and neither one should supremely control the other, but opposed to any thing that looks like Regal or Kingly power. This is not a one-man Government, and if the Governor’s objections go -to .the Legislature, and they are good, they will be heeded. There is no question about that. The experience of forty years tells us in unmistakable terms that that is the case, and I do not think there is any danger of the rights of the people being invaded. I am opposed to delegating or transferring any more power from the Executive Department of this State to the Legislative Department, or from the Legis- .ative to the Executive. The powers of ‘change their votes willingly. this State government are divided into three distinct departments, each of them confided to a separate body of magistracy— the Legislative, Executive and J udicial— each aiding the others and serving as checks and balances, and they are equitably and safely checked and balanced now, and let them remain undisturbed. The ~present Constitution in this particular amply pro- tects the rights of the people, and I do trust the amendment will be promptly voted down. Mr. MACKOY. I merely wantqto say a few words on this question. A few days ago when the matter was under discussion be- fore the Committee of the Whole, I took occasion then to express my approval of the amendment which the Delegate from Henry has introduced in this Convention. Gov- ernment is a system of checks and balances, and that government it seems to me is the best iniwhich the powers of government are so ar- ranged as that neither may infringe upon the other, and that ‘one or all combined may not affect the people. We all know that the representatives, or the members of the _ General Assembly, represent more perfectly _the will of the whole; that sometimes they come from the people in times of great po- litical excitement, when the entire Statr may be moved by political questions that are of burning importance. It is upon these occasions that a majority of the Legislature might interfere with and trample upon the rights of the minority, and it is then that the Governor, whose term of ofiice is longer than that branch of the Legislature which reflects most perfectlyr the will of the people would be most likely to stand impartial. The possessiori' of power makes one con- servative. which men comparatively of no character have been placed in important positions, men who were radical in their opinions, and the moment they have accepted a position of responsibility and power, they have become conservative in their actions. The Governor of Kentucky is the repre- The instances are numerous in ~ 24 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. MACKOY—BECKNER. [November 21 . Friday,] sentative of the entire State. He represents every party in the State. He represents not singly the Democratic party or the Republican party, or any other party; but he stands there as the representative of all; and if in, a time of public heat and party passion persons composing the General Assembly should be tempted to do something which they would not in calmer moments. it seems to me that the Governor, more than any one else, wo 11d be likely to repress the inclina- tion to do wrong by the proper exercise of his veto power. We all know that this power was exercised beneficially in the Roman Republic by the Tribune; that it was interposed there upon occasions that were of great importance to the people, and that its use was beneficial and not injurious, and that he could interpose his veto and prevent the execution of any thing he deemed injurious to the people. The veto power, as it is proposed to control it in the amendment of the Delegate from Henry, is not as great as that which existed in the ~ancient Roman Tribune, because the Gen- eral Assembly by a vote of two-thirds may pass a bill over the veto of the Governor. We know that this power has been exer- cised judicially in the United States; for instance, in case of impeachment of the President, it is required that two-thirds of the Senate shall vote for the articles of im- peachment. We know, too, that if the rule had prevailed in the Senate of the United States that prevails here, with reference to the veto power of the Governor ; that if it had been possible to have impeached a President simply byabare majority, Andrew Johnson would have been impeached and removed from his oifice as President of the United States. Fortunately, as I think, for the entire country, such was not the case. It would probably have plunged us again into civil war; but by the exercise of that salutary rule that misfortune was prevented, and I do not believe there is to-day anyuperson belonging to any political party in the- United States who does not think that the action of the Senate upon that occasion was wise, and that turmoil and confusion was prevented in the United States that would have ensued if the majority rule had existed in that body. Mr. BECKNER. In the discussion before the Committee on Judiciary, it has been urged that this Convention was called because of complaints among the people that the Courts have not been properly conducted, and justice has not been done in the Commonwealth. In listening to the consideration of sections relating to the Governor, I was made several times to tremble almost with alarm when I found how near we had been to having a royal government; that one man was about to absorb every power belonging to the people, and that the crown was almost on the head of the Chief Executive. ing my friend from Henry, who is usually a careful and considerate man, has assured. us that the people have called this Conven- tion because of the complaints arising from the action of the Legislature; that there has been so much bad legislation that they were anxious to have this Convention as- semble and provide checks, and protect the people from vicious action on the part of those who have met in this hall. I may be mistaken about it, but I think this Con- vention has been called because the people of the State understand that the old order is changed; that we are living in a new era. The people have learned that there has been progress in legislation, as in other things, and they want an organic law given to them that will be up with the times. We have not met here because of evils result- ing from the administration of any particu- lar branch of‘ our State Government. The proposition made by the gentleman from Henry will practically abrogate the major- ity rule which obtains in this country. The people, through their representatives, meet in these halls and pass laws. Ours is a This m orn- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 25 Friday,] BECKNER—DEHAVEN. Q [November 21 . representative government. It is not a pure Democracy; the people act through the General Assembly. They control this country by virtue of a majority. If the gentleman’s amendment prevails, the Governor may say that no bill shall be passed until two-thirds of the members of both Houses elected shall have voted for it, which would be a destruction of the majority rule, and would be the most serious innovation upon our system of Government that could be made. The veto power is given simply for the pur- pose of calling the attention ‘of the Legislature to inadvertences; to mistakes or to errors it may commit through want of proper consideration, and not to give the Governor more power than the General Assembly has; or, in other words, the people through, their representative, have. It is conferred in order that some one who has a cool head, who reads carefully what they do, may calmly consider and call their attention to an error in the bill they may have passed; and the representa- tives of the people have almost always responded by refusing to pass a hill where a mistake had been made. If the Governor, however, should be mistaken in his view, there are one hundred and thirty-eight representatives of the people who sit in this hall, and in' the hall across the way, who will correct his mistake, and pass the bill, as they ought to have the right to do ; and I cannot imagine any greater mistake that we could make than to say that the people shall not rule through a majority of their represent- atives, which would ,be the effect of the passage of this amendment offered by the Delegate from Henry. Mr. DEHAVEN. This whole subject was very thoroughly discussed in Com- mittee of the Whole, and I did not antici- pate this morning that we were to have the same discussion over again. The question we have before us is one of very considerable importance, and it ought to be carefully considered. As has been well said by several Delegates upon this floor, and as we have heard repeated, I sup- pose, well nigh on to a hundred times, we have attempted to formulate a Government here in which the various powers of Gov- ernment should be divided, and the Consti- tution under which we are living now lays down what the powers of the Governor are: “The Supreme Executive power of the Commonwealth shall'be vested in a Chief Magistrate,_who shall be styled the Gov- ernor.” The principle object of having a Governor, as I understand it, is to have some person in whom this Executive power can be vested. Our Constitution also pro- vides that he shall have a sort of super- visory control over the legislation of the country. That is, befpre any law shall become a law, it shall be submitted to the- Chief Executive and he shall examine it, and if he approve, he shall sign it, and if he disapprove it, he shall return it to the House in which it originated with his- objections, and unless it is passed again by a majority of those elected to both Houses, it shall not become a law. It does occur to my mind that that large legislative power being conceded to the Governor is enough to vest in the Ex- ecutive Department. The assumption upon which the argument of the gentleman from Henry was predicated was that in all proba» bility we will pass some amendment to the present Constitution. requiring a majority of both Houses to pass any law. I will not undertake to anticipate what we are going to do, but will view this subject from where we are now. We all know that it does not require a majority of all elected to either House of the General Assembly to passa law. If we retain the same number of members we now have, which is one hundred, fifty-oneis a quorum of that body, and a majority of fifty-one can pass any hill. These twenty-six men in the House can pass a bill. 26 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] Q DEHAVEN—MCELROY. [November 21 . Mr. CARROLL. But not an appropria- tlon bill? Mr. DEHAVEN. None over$100; but I will get to that provision directly. That is an isolated case. Here is a state of case in which twenty-six members of the House of Representatives can pass a bill. You take it to the Senate, and twen- ty in that House can pass it. When it goes to the Governor and meets with objection upon the part of the Governor, it cannot become a law when it is returned to the House in which it originated, unless a majority of the members elected to both Houses shall have voted for it. It does oc- cur to me that it is a tremendous power 0 lodge in the Executive, making it a sine qua won that it shall not become a law until a majority of both Houses shall vote for it; and if we go to the‘ extent of adopting the amendment of the Delegate from Henry, that it shall require two-thirds, we will place it in the hands of the Governor to obstruct all legislation in this country en- tirely; and it makes no odds what sort of a law the exigencies of the people may de- mand, as was suggested by some gentleman in a question presented to the gentleman from Henry. Suppose they undertook to reduce the taxation in this State, or to pass any other salutary measure of that sort, and it did not meet with the approval of the Executive? It would be a very easy matter for him to gather around him at least one-third of the Legislature so as to support him in his veto power, and the other two-thirds of the Legislature would be entirely powerless. One-third of either House, with the Governor, could obstruct .2111 legislation. I think if the balance of the members of this Convention are as tired of this discussion as I am, we are ready to vote, and I do hope we will take a vote on this question, and say whether it shall be adopted. Mr. McELROY. I mpve the previous question on this proposition. The motion was put, and the previous question was ordered. The question being taken on the adop- tion of the amendment of the Delegate from Henry, and the yeas and nays thereon being demanded by Mr. Burnam, seconded by Mr. Birkhead, the result of the roll-call was as follows: YEAS—12. Allen, C. T. Buckner, S. B. Carroll, John D. Hines, Thomas H. Jonson, Jep. C. Knott, J. Proctor Mackoy, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Sachs, Morris A. Swango, G. B. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Nails—75. Allen, M. K. Hines, J. S. Amos, D. C. Hogg, S. P. Askew, J. F. Holloway, J. W. Ayres, W. W. Jacobs, R. P. Beckham, J. C. Beckner, W. M. Bennett, B. F. Berkele, Wm. Birkhead, B. T. Blackburn, James Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Brents, J. A. Bronston, C. J. Brown, J. S. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Chambers, G. D. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. Doris, W. F. Durbin. Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Forrester, J. G. Forgy, J. M. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Johnston, P. P. Kennedy, Hanson Kirwan, E. E. Lassing, L. W. Lewis, W. W. Martin, W. H. May, John S. 0 McChord, Wm. C. McDermott, E. J. M cElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. Parsons, Rob’t T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, John L. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, H. H. ‘Smith, W. Scott Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. WVest, J. F. Williams, L. P. V. Wood, J. M. Vvoolfolk, J. F. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—13. Applegate, Leslie T. James, A. D. Auxier, A. J. O’Hara, R. H. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. .27 Friday,] PHELrs MILLER—MCCHORD—JONSON. [November 21. Boles, S. H. Petrie, H. G. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. If I under- English’ Sam- E- Spalding, 1' A- stood that, I desire to call the attention of Hendrick, W. J. Straus, F. P. Hopkins, F. A. The READING CLERK. The next amendment is the 'one proposed by‘ the Delegate from Covington (Mr. Mackoy). Mr. MACKOY. That has been disposed of by the adoption of the amendment of- fered by the Delegate from Monroe, and is no longer before the Convention. The PRESIDENT pro tem. There being no further amendment, the question is on the adoption of the section as amended. The vote being taken on the same, it was adopted. Mr. GLENN. I move that the Conven- tion do take a recess until 3 o’clock. Mr. JONSON. Are we not in Commit- tee of the Whole? The PRESIDENT pro tem. The motion was put and carried. AFTERNOON SESSION. Young, Bennett H. No, sir. The Convention was called to order by the President. ‘ The PRESIDENT. The Convention will resume the consideration of section 17, and the substitute offered by the Dele- gate from Lincoln. Report the substitute. The Reading Clerk read the substitute of- fered by Mr. W. H. Miller, as follows: Should the Governor be absent from the State, or shall, for any other cause, be unable to discharge the duties of his office, the Lieutenant-Governor shall exercise all the power and authority pertaining to the of- fice of Governor until the Governor absent shall return or be able to discharge the duties of his office. Should there, be a va- cancy in the office of Governor, occasioned by an impeachment, removal from oflice, death, refusal to qualify or resignation of the Governor, the Lieuten an t-Gov ernor shall succeed to the oflice of Governor and exercise all the powers pertaining thereto for the re- mainder of the term for which the Governor shall have been elected. On the trial of the Governor the Lieutenant-Governor shall not act as the President of the Senate nor take part in the proceedings, but the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals shall pre- ‘ side during the trial. the gentleman from Lincoln to the words “trial and impeachment.” Would it not be better to supply that ‘2 Mr. w. H. MILLER Iwould statb a, the Delegate from Russell that the language of that poi'tion of the substitute is the exact language of the amendment offered by the Delegate from Washington, which has al- ready been adopted by the House. I wrote mine in the language in which the House adopted it. Mr. MCCHORD. Is it not the purpose of your amendment, that when a vacancy shall occur in the oflice of ,Governor, the Lieutenant-Governor shall succeed to the ofiice during the remainder of the term? Mr. W. H. MILLER Yes. Mr. McCHOR-D. Then there is no _ election for Governor to fill out the unex- pired term ‘? Mr. W. H. MILLER. None at all. A vote being taken on said substitute, same was rejected. The PRESIDENT. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that offered by the Delegate from Mc- Lean. Mr. JONSON. I did not offer any amendment; I started to offer it, but the purpose was accomplished, and I did not offer it. ' The Reading Clerk read section 18, as follows: , SEC. 18. Whenever the government shall be administered by the Lieutenant-Govern- _ or, or he shall fail to attend as Speaker of the Senate, the Senators shall elect one of its own members as Speaker for that occa- sion; and if, during the vacancy of the office of Governor, the Lieutenant-Govern- or shall be impeached, removed from office, refuse’to qualify, resign, die or be absent from the ‘State, the Speaker of the Senate shall, in like manner, administer the Gov- ernment: Provided. That whenever a vacancy shall occur in the office of Gov- ernor, before the first two years of the term shall have expired, a new election for 28 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] M ILLER—RAMSEY—SMITH. [November 21 - Governor shall take place to fill such vacancy. The Committee of the \Vhole propose the following amendment by way of sub- stitujze therefor: A President pro tem. of the Senate shall be elected by each Senate as soon,after it is organized as possible, the Lieutenant-Gov- ernor vacating his seat as President of the Senate until such election shall be made, and as often as there is a vacancy in the oflice of President pro tem, another Presi- dent pro tem. shall be elected by the Senate, if in session, and if, during the vacancy in the oifice of Governor, the Lieutenant— Governor shall be impeached or removed from office, rufuse to qualify, resign. die or be absent from the State, the President pro fem. of the Senate in like manner dis- charge the Government: Proridecl, That ewhenever a vacancy shall occur in the oifice of Governor before the first two years of his term shall have expired, a new elec- tion for Governor shall take place to fill said vacancy. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I desire to offer an amendment to that section of the report. The Reading Clerk read the amendment offered by M r. Miller, as follows: Amend section 18 by striking therefrom all that part thereof after the word “Gov- ernment” in the eighth line. The words proposed to be stricken out are as follows; “Provided, That whenever a vacancy shall occur in the office of Governor before the first two years of his term shall have ex- pired, a new election for Governor shall take place to fill said: vacancy.” The vote being taken on said amendment, it was rejected. A vote being taken, the amendment of the Committee of the Whole was adopted. Section 19 was then read, as follows: SEC. 19. The Lieutenant-Governor, or Speaker pro tempore of the Senate, while he acts as Speaker of the Senate, shall re- ceive for his services the same compensation which shall, for the same period, be allowed to the Speaker of the House of Representa- tives, and no more; and, during the time he administers the Government as Governor, shall receive the same compensation which the Governor would have received had he been employed in the duties of his office. The CLERK. The Committee of the Whole propose the following amendment: Strike out the word “Speaker,” in the first and second lines, and insert the word “ President " G A ‘vote being taken, the amendment of the Committee of the Whole was adopted. Section 20 was then read, as follows: SEC. 20. If the Lieutenant-Governor shall be called upon to administer the Gov- ernment, and shall, while in such adminis- tration, resign, die or be absent from the State during the recess of the General As- sembly, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, for the time being, to convene the Senate for the purpose of choosing a Speaker. The Committee of the Whole propose the following amendment: If the Lieutenant-Governor shall be called upon to administer the government, and shall, while in such administration, re- sign, die or be absent from the State during the recess of the General Assembly, if there be no President pro tern. of the Senate, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, for the time being, to convene the Senate for the purpose of choosing a President, and until the President is chosen the Sec- retary shall administer the Government. If there be no Secretary of State to perform the duties devolving upon him by this section, or in case that ofiicer be absent from the State, then the Attorney-General, for the time being, shall convene the Senate for the purpose of choosing a President pro tem., and shall administer the government until the same is chosen. A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. The substitute of the Delegate from Lau- rel for sections 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 was read. Mr. RAMSEY. On the adoption of that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. W. SCOTT SMITH. I second it. Leave of absence was granted to the Delegates from Barren and Whitley. The result of the roll-call was as follows -. YEAS—-—8. Bennett, B. F. Pugh, Sam’l J. Brents, J. A. Ramsey, W. R. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 29 ‘Glenn, Dudley A. Friday,] i PHELPS. I [November 21 . May, John S. Smith, WV. Scott necessary, except on a question of adjourn- Parsons, Rob’t T. West, J. F. ment, shall be presented to the Governor, ,_ and, before it shall take effect. be approved STAYS—"'3' by him ; or, being disapproved, shall be re- Allen, C. T. Hogg, S. P. passed by a majority of all the members Amos, D. C. Holloway, J. W. elected to both Houses according to the Askew, J. F. Jacobs, R. P. rules and limitations prescribed in case of a Auxier, A. J. Jonson, Jep. C. bill. lggcliglsl’ax' 1555:8011 A vote being taken, the section was Beckner, W. M. Lassing, L. W. adopted- Berkele, Wm. Lewis, W. W. Section 22 was again read, and is as fol- Birkhead, B. T. Mackoy, W. H. lows: ‘ Blackburn, James Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. Bronston, C. J. Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. McChord, Wm. C. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Miller, Will. Burnam, Curtis F. ‘Miller, W. H. Carroll, John D. Montgomery, J. F Chambers, G. D. Moore, J. H. Clardy, John D. Moore, Laban T. Coke, J. Guthrie Muir, J. W. Cox, H. Nunn, T. J. DeHaven, S E. O’Hara, R. H. Durbin, Charles Petrie, H. G. Edrington, W. J. Pettit, Thos. S. Elmore, T. J. Phelps, John L. English, Sam. E. Phelps, Zack Farmer, H. H. Quicksall, J. E. Field, W. W. Rodes, Robert Forrester, J. G. Smith, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Swango, G. B. Funk, J. T. Twyman, I. W. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, J. S. Hines, Thomas H. ABSENT—19. Allen, M. K. James, A. D. Applegate, Leslie T. Kirwan, E. E. Blackwell, Joseph Knott, J. Proctor Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P.- V. Wood, J. M. Mr. President Clay Boles, S. H. Sachs, Morris A. Brown, J. S. Spalding, I. A. Buchanan, Nathan Straus, F. P. Doris, W. F. Trusdell, Georg-e Woolfolk, J. E. Hendrick, W. J. Young, Bennett H. Hopkins, F. A. _ So the substitute was rejected. A vote being taken, sections 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 were adopted. Section 22 was read, and is as follows: Every order, resolution or vote, in which the concurrence of both Houses may be Contested elections for Governor _and Lieutenant-Governor shall be determined by both Houses of the General Assembly, according to such regulations as may be established by law. Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. I desire to offer an amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: Strike out “ both Houses of the General Assembly ” and insert “ Court of Appeals.” Mr. JOHN L. PHELPS. I simply de- sire to call the attention of this Conven- tion to the past history of contests before the General Assembly. It is well known when two candidates, each claiming to be elected. have a contest before the General Assembly of Kentucky, before there is a syllable of proof introduced, what the re- sult will be. It is not a question of law that comes before the General Assembly in contested election cases—nota question of fact-but simply a question of politics. I have this opinion of the Court of Appeals: that when they are called upori to decide a contested election case, they will, at least in some respects, be governed by the laws of Kentucky. They are removed further from politics than the men, fresh from political fields, assembled at the State Cap- itol. They have law books before them, and they are presumed to understand the laws that govern contested .election cases; and more than that, they know their decis- ion will go into the law reports, and be read by the lawyers and the people all over the State of Kentucky. Men fresh from polit- =3 30 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] ical fields seem to have the idea that all their duty is to pander to the political party which sends ‘them here. I know that, without speaking disrespectfully of any party, I have seen contested election cases decided in this House where the result reached would never have been attained had the decision of the matter been left to the Court of Appeals. I saw one man unseated in this House when it was admitted that he had forty-odd votes more than his opponent. That was admitted by the Committee. I do not say they did wrong ini unseating him; but I say they did violate the law when they seated the contestant. They unseated him simply because, at the time, he held the office of United States Commissioner in some county. On the 28th of July, before the election, he wrote his resignation, and sent it to the Judge at Louisville, but that Judge happened to be away from home, and did not get it until five days after the election. The man received a majority of forty votes; but the point was made that he was ineligible because he held the office of United States Commissioner. He con- tended that because he forwarded his resignation, saying “ accept my resignation as of to-day” ( which was the 28th of July), that when his resignation was accepted, it was accepted as of the 28th of July, and. he was entitled to his seat. But that is not the question I am driving at. It was the seating of the man who was not elected, and who did not claim he had a majority of the votes. He did not claim it, and the Committee did not claim it; but they claimed that, because the other man was ineligible, therefore, the man who was eligi- ble and had the smaller number of votes was entitled to the office. To show the ex- tent to which that could be carried, sup- pose a man was running for ofiice, and an- other man thought he was not eligible; and , on the day of the election, no oppo- sition having appeared theretof'ore, this one man stepped up to the polls and voted £1 Perms-Jonson JOHNSTON. [November 21 . for himself. He could come down here and turn out a man, the unanimous choice of the people, and serve on his own individual vote alone. There is not _a man on this floor who would believe that the Court of Appeals could ever commit such a blunder as that. When Henry Clay was in this hall, on a similar occasion, he contended that nothing less than a majority of votes cast could elect a man to the Legislature, where there were only two candidates, al- though the other man might be ineligible; that in such a case they must send the ques- tion back to the people, and let them elect the man, because, under our laws, nothing less than a majority of the votes cast could elect the man where there are only two candidates. Mr. J ONSON. In the event there were three candidates, and one of them got a plurality, but not a majority, would he be elected ? Mr. PHELPS. Yes, sir. Mr. JOHNSTON. Do you not know that that very House unseated a Democrat and seated a Republican, whose seat was contested '? I believe it was a Republican from Lancaster. V Mr. PHELPS. No, sir; I. think you re- fer to a Republican from Lincoln. Mr. JOHNSTON. The party you speak of was unseated on a legal ground, and the same point was made against a Republican from Lincoln, and he was given his seat. You stated that cases were invariably de- cided according to the politic-s of the body. Mr. PHELPS. I want to say that in the case where that Republican was seated there was not a single solitary man claim- ing the seat against him. It is true that some man in Lincoln county, who had some feeling against that Republican, sent down a protest against seating him, stating that he was Master Commissioner; but there was no candidate claiming it, and the man who made the objection did not appear. No one was here asking the ofiice or pro- testing against seating the Republiean, and EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 31 PHELPS—FUNK. [November 21 . the Delegate from Fayette was here, and knows all about that. I do not want the Delegate from Fayette, or any other gen- tleman in that Legislature, _to think I mean to get on that Legislature. I like that Legislature I was here amyself‘ ; but what I want to do is to impress on the mind of this Convention that in acontest before a po- litical Legislature the whole proceeding is a farce, and always will be, where a party is overwhelmingly in the majority, and I do not care what party it is. You may put the party in the minority to-day as much in the majority as the dominant party is, and they will seat every man of their party if they can get any excuse for it You know it is often done ‘in the Congress of the United States, and it is the effect of politics and political excitement. I was about to say, when I was interrupted, that one man was seated when the proof showed before the Committee that there were one hundred and thirteen votes received by him that did not live in the precinct or anywhere else— fictitious names. \Vitnesses stated before that Committee that they went to count th ose votes, and asked leave to take a copy, but before they could get a chance to do it the poll-books were stolen. If those one hun- dred and thirteen names had been expunged from that record, as they should have been, the other man would have been elected by a fair majority. Do you believe, if you go before the Court of Appeals with such proof as that, that a hundred and thirteen fraud- ulent votes have elected a man. that they would say that that man shall take his seat on those votes? No, sir; the Court would say, “We will wipe out these one hundred and thirteen fictitious names and seat the man we believe to be elected.” Besides that, when you have a con- test in the Legislature, there is no principle of law laid down in your re- ports; there is no guide to future cases. If you should contest a case in the Court of Appeals, the law of that case is put down in ‘ your report, the Court construes that law, and when another man has another contest, all he has to do is to go to the Clerk’s oflice, pick up the case and read it, and determine the law of his own ‘case. If he is not able to do that, he can go to a lawyer, and that lawyer can tell him whether it is worth while to contest the case. But now the only question asked is, how much majority has his party in the Legislature? I do not want to be under- stood as reflecting on that session of the Legislature, but I am stating facts, and those facts are in the record and can be produced. I had just as soon take other cases; but I know these better than any other case, because I saw them. I want to ask, if it is the purpose of the Convention to put a clause in the Constitution that will perpetuate political frauds on your Legisla- ture and on your people, or is it your pur- pose, as far as possible, to make fraud im- possible in your Legislature and every- where else‘? I do not intend to say that that Legislature was different from the Legislatures in other States, or from Con- gress; but it_ will be the case always, so long as you allow contests to be decided by political bodies. ' Mr. FUNK. Do the Supreme Courts of any of the States decide contested election cases? Mr. PHELPS. I have not examined that question. - But I see no reason Why Ken- tucky should bow to other States, or be governed by what other States have done, unless Kentucky will put it on record that other States know more than Kentucky. I do not believe this Convention is going to put that on record. I believe Kentuckians are able to determine these questions for themselves without looking to the shining lights looming up in other States. I determine questions for Kentucky, I look to no lights outside of her borders, be- cause we have as good and as great men in Kentucky as anywhere else, and I see no reason why Kentucky should be hunting the United States over to find Q When ~ 32 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] PH ELPS—PARSONS—HAN KS. [November 21 . a State which has done something, and then to follow that State. Let us determine questions from our own obser— vation and intelligence for our own people. _ Our surroundings and circumstances may differ from other States. Our experience may differ; but I want to say on this sub- ject of political contests in the Legislatures experience has always been the same. The man belonging to the party having the majority always gets his seat, let the facts be what they may; that has been experience, with but few exceptions. Every Delegate knows that, so far as his observation has gone, in nine cases out of ten in Kentucky, or in the United States, or anywhere else, that in a political con- test the man belonging to the majority gets the seat. A Delegate said to me: “I shall be opposed to your plan, although I think it is the true one, from the simple reason that I know my party will get the benefit of this, because we are in the majority.” I want to say that I am fair enough in my de- sire to treat all men alike. That if my party in this body or in the Legislature were ninety-nine to one, I would want to give that man as fair a show as if he were with the majority. I believe it is in the hearts of this Convention to deal fairly. I believe there has been nothing said savor- ing of political feeling in this Convention, and I would not refer to it now if it were not that I am bound to do it to present the facts of the case I represent. I do not do it with political feelings. I only do it that fairness, and justice, and right maybe done hereafter. I do it that the people may have the men serve them whom they elect, and not that a political body may seat some man whom they acknowledge was not elected There is not a man in that Legis- lature who will contend that one of those men seated had a majority of the votes from his county. There are men on this floor who know what I am saying is true. Mr. PARSONS. If your resolution was adopted, Kentucky would be taking the lead in this respect. Mr. PHELPS. Yes, sir; and if any State in the Union should take the lead, it is Kentucky. I hope the Delegates on this floor will think of this question. Just think of a political mob, so to speak—not casting reflections on the Legislature, but you gentlemen who have served here know that sometimes they become almost a mob, when political excitement runs highj-think of trusting your chances for fair dealing before an excited political House rather than trust them in the hands of a Court which sits there with dignity, and under the solemnity of an oath, and with the fact known that their reports go through- out Kentucky and every State in the Union. But when you make the legisla- tive record on that subject, perhaps each one of the members takes it away, and it is soon covered with dust. The people of Kentucky do not know about it. One—half the people of Kentucky do not know about these contested election cases. I hope the Convention will look seriously at this ques- tion, and vote to remove contests as far from politics as possible. Mr. FARMER. I wish am endment: Add to the Committee’s report the fol- lowing: “ But the Legislature shall provide for some tribunal outside of its own body.” Mr. HANKS. The Delegate from Rus- sell was talking about the Legislature of three years ago. It was my misfortune to have been associated with him in that body, which he calls a political mob. I have al- ways been a Democrat, but I dislike to be charged with being associated with a mob. I will say to him and to this Convention, that that Democratic Legislature of which he speaks was not a mob. Mr. PHELPS. I desire to correct the gentleman. ‘I did not say ,it was a Demo- cratic Legislature, nor a mob of any kind. Nor did I speak of the political complexion of that body at all. to ofi'er an EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 33 Friday,] HANKS—PHELPS——-MILLER. [November 21 . Mr. HANKS. I say it was largely The gentleman said politics were not to be Democratic. That Democratic Legislature brought into this Convention, but he has seated one Republican and one Democrat. That was an even divide. I will ask the gentleman from Russell where his party ever divided fairly with the Democrats? Mr. PHELPS. The gentleman is sadly mistaken about that. They seated one Republican and two Democrats, and no one was contesting the election of the Republican. Some man down in’ Lincoln county sent up a written protest against seating the mem- ber from Lincoln, but no one was claiming his seat. ' Mr. HANKS. I saw two men almost exactly alike. One was a Democrat and'the other was a Republican, and they were both claiming the seat. I would know them both if I were to see them now. There were but two contested cases in that House. One was from Jessamine and the other from Lincoln or Garrard county. Mr. PHELPS. I still insist the gentle- man is mistaken, and the records show it. Mr. HANKS. That may be; but it is my opinion against yours. There are half a dozen members on this floor who were members of that body, and I venture the ' assertion that every one will agree with I have an excellent memory about some things. I have great confidence in Kentucky Courts. They are good Courts. They are learned and fair Courts. Some- times cases go to higher Courts of a politi- cal nature; and the higher Courts have shown that they are moved by political considerations as well as the Democratic Legislatures of Kentucky, as charged wrong- fullyby the Delegate from Russell. “ Eight to seven” was once heard in a Court higher than ‘our Court of Appeals, and their de- cision was felt all over this country. There is not a Democrat on this floor but who would scorn to approve of any man con- testing the election of a man in the oppo- site party simply because his party was in the majority. No Democrat would do that. me. brought them in. He charges upon the party of which I am a member that, right or wrong, they would seat their man in a contest. As a Democrat of fifty years’ standing, I deny that assertion. Can he say as much for his party? Look to the Congress of the United States at its last ses- sion for an answer. We dono such thing. 1 say that every law-making body in this country, every legislative body, should be the judge of the elections of its own mem- bers. I am opposed to the amendment of the Delegate, and shall vote for the Com- mittee’s report. . Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the remarks of both gentlemen be referred to the Legislature of Indiana, and then I move the previous question. Mr. PHELPS. I rise to a question of privilege. I want to say to the Conven- tion, as I said in the outset, that, in re- ferring to this matter, I did so with no po- litical sense or feeling. I said that you might put the other party in power and ‘ they would do the same thing. I said they had done the same thing in the Congress of the United States. Now, my worthy old friend arises-— Mr. HANKS. Please leave that “old” out. Mr. PHELPS. I had no reference to his ago, only to the length of our friendship. The gentleman rises and puts his memory against mine. There were other Delegates here, the Delegate from Fayette The PRESIDENT. That is not a mat- ter of personal privilege. Mr. PHELPS. The question of personal privilege is this: That I did state the truth about it, as I know, and the records are in print, and I presume they can be found in some of the offices in this city. Mr. JOHNSTON. I will state that I be- lieve the gentleman did state the truth from his stand-point, butfrom mine he did not. 34 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] PnELrs—PARsoNs—MeDERMoTr. [November 21 , A vote being taken, the main question was ordered. Mr. PHELPS. On the amendment of- fered by me, I call the yeas and nays. Mr. PARSONS. I second it. The roll-call on the adoption of said amendment resulted as follows: YEAS—5. Forrester, J. G. Phelps, John L. Forgy, J. M. West, J. F. Parsons, Rob’t T. mus-75. Allen, C. T. Hines, Thomas H. Amos, D. C. Holloway, J. W. Askew, J. F. Jacobs, R. P. Auxier, A. J. Jonson, Jep. C. Ayres, W. W. Kennedy, Hanson Beckham, J. C. Kirwan, E. E. Beckner, W. M. Lassing, L. W. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Berkele, Wm. Mackoy, W. H. Birkhead, B. T. Martin, W. H. Blackburn, James May, John S. Bourland, H. R. Bronston, C. J. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Buckner, S. B. Bullitt, W. G. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. DeHaven, S. E. Doris, W. F. Durbin, Charles Edrington, W. J. Elmore, T. J. English, Sam. E. Farmer, H. H. Field, W. W. Funk, J. T. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Hanks, Thos. H. Harris, Geo. C. Hines, J. S. Johnston, P. P. McChord, Wm. C. McDermott, E. J. McElroy, W. J. McHenry, H. D. Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, J. H. Moore, Laban T. Muir, J. W. Nunn, T. J. O’Hara, R. H. Petrie, H. G. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Pugh, Sam’l J. Quieksall, J. E. Ramsey, W. R. Rodes, Robert Smith, H. H. Smith, W. Scott Swango, G. B, Twyman, I. W. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—20. Allen, M. K. James, A. D. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Blackwell, Joseph Boles, S. H. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Brents, J. A. Straus, F. P. Brown, J. S. Trusdell, George Glenn, Dudley A. Washington, George Hendrick, W. J. Wood, J. M. Hogg, S. P. Woolfolk, J. F. Hopkins, F. A. Young, Bennett H. So the amendment was rejected. A vote being taken on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Henderson, it was rejected. The section was then adopted. - The Clerk then read section 26 of the report. The following amendments were read. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Larue: Strike out so much of section twenty-six as makes the Auditor of Public Accounts ineligible for the succeeding term. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Clinton: Amend by striking out lines one, two and three, and the words “been elected," in the fourth line, which embraces the en- tire first sentence. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Warren: Strike out the first paragraph in section twenty-six, ending in line four with the word “elected,” and insert in lieu thereof the following: “The Auditor of Public Accounts shall be eligible for re-election for the succeeding term, but not for a third term till one full term has intervened.” Mr. MoDERMOTT. I withdraw the amendment offered by me, because the Delegate from Hart has offered an amend- ment which is, perhaps, better than mine. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Hart: Amend by adding after the words “pre- scribed bylaw,” in the sixth line, the fol- lowing words: “ The Attorney-General shall be the Chief Ofiicer of the Depart- ment of Justice, to whom all Prosecuting Attorneys of the Commonwealth shall re- port, and over whom he shall exercise supervisory control in all criminal and penal prosecutions, and the General As- sembly shall enact laws to enforce this provision." EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 35 Friday,] The amendment offered by the Delegate from Christian : Add after the words “ Land Ofiice,” in line five, “Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics.” Amendment offered by from Woodford: Add after the word “law,” in line six of section 26, the following: “ And all fees col- lected by either of said oflicers shall be cov- ored into the Treasury.” Substitute offered by the Delegate from Franklin: The Treasurer shall be ineligible to re- election for the succeeding four years after the term for which he shall have been elected; and the Auditor of Public Ac- counts shall be ineligible to re-election for the succeeding four years after he shall have held the office for two terms, if he shall have been elected for two successive terms. The duties and responsibilities of those offi- cers, and those of the Attorney-General, Register of the Land Ofiice, Commissioner of Agriculture and Labor Statistics, and Secretary of State, shall be prescribed by law. Inferior State ofiicers, not specifically provided for in this Constitution, may be appointed or elected in such manner as may be prescribed by law for a term not exceed- ing four years. the Delegate The amendment of the Delegate from Lexington to said substitute: The Treasurer. Secretary of State, Regis- ter of the Land Ofiice, Attorney-General, Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics, shall be ineligible to re-election for a succeeding term. Mr. MACKOY. I would like to suggest to the gentleman that his amendment, in connection with that of the Delegate from Franklin, would make rather an inhar- monious whole. Mr. RODES. I wish to withdraw the amendment I offered, inasmuch as I think the one offered by the Delegate from Frank- lin fulfills my object. Mr. TWYMAN. I withdraw my amend- ment. Mr. BRONSTON. The substitute of the Delegate from Franklin only applies to the Auditor and Treasurer. It does not apply MACKOY—RODES—TWYMA v-Bnonsrox-McDnnnorr. [November 21. to the other officers. I mean to accept his substitute that far, but I also make ineligi- ble the Attorney General, Register of the Land Ofi‘ice, Secretary of State. and Com- missioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statis- ties. The PRESIDENT. The first thing in order will be the amendment offered to the original section by the Delegate from Clin- ton. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. _ The PRESIDENT. The question now is upon the amendment offered by the dele- gate from Hart. Mr. MCDERMOTT. Though that amendment has been offered by the Dele- gate from Hart, it is substantially like a part of one I offered. I withdrew my amendment because it seemed objectionable, and this seemed as good: as any we could hope to get. I have no desire to detain the Convention by making a speech, nor much hope of changing your opinion. Still, the subject is too important to be ignored. From some speeches we have heard hitherto, one might almost conclude that the Governor of Kentucky is a con- stant menace to our liberties; that he is, in dignity and influence, very little below a king; that so tremendous and far-reaching is his power, we are in imminent danger of waking some morning to find him in com- plete control of the State, his army sur- rounding him and his navy floating in the murmuring, but subdued Kentucky river. and all the good citizens in abject thralldoim To give him any of the powers intrusted to the President of the United' States would seem to be nothing short of volun- tary submission to despotism. However these feeling may confuse us when We are dealing with the Governor, there is no reason why we should have any such apprehensions of the Attorney-General. He is merely the adviser and repre- sentative of the State in all legal matters. Under the law now he 36 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] MCDERMOTT—BUCKN ER. [November 2] must defend, in the Court of Appeals, proceedings which he can in no way regu- late in the inferior Courts. He must de- fend actions which he could not control, and might have disapproved. He may see that proceedings should be taken in behalf of the State, and yet he is powerless to set the necessary legal machinery in motion. There ought to be a head over the Judiciary Department of the Commonwealth,and the Attorney-General ought te be next to your Governor and Chief Justice in rank and influence. If you increase the responsibil- ity and elevate the dignity of this high oflice in every proper way, you can never fail to get the finest lawyer in our borders to render you invaluable services and to do incalculable good to the State. And even then he would, in his sphere, have far less power than the Attorney-General of the United States—far less relatively, as well as absolutely. However well we may have been satisfied with our able and honorable Attorneys-General in the past, we can not peer far into the future. When discussing the pardoning power of the Governor, you heard much discussion and complaint of the pardoning power of the Commonwealth’s Attorneys, who sometimes, it is said, let prosecutions die out, or file away, or dismiss indictments. I have no particular com- plaint of that sort to make against the State’s Attorneys; but many of you seemed so much incensed about that and the Gov- ernor’s exercise of his pardoning power, that you were almost willing to take away '~ from him the last thing that saves his office from uselessness and contempt—the power of dispensing mercy. It seems to me that, instead of having twelve or fifteen Commonwealth’s Attorneys throughout the State, independently deciding on these im- portant matters, we should have them act- ing under the supervision of the Attorney- General, who reports to the Governor all the affairs of his ofiice, in order that the Governor may transmit to the General Assembly—to the Representatives of the people—all such important information. These matters concern, not alone the dis- tricts of the Commonwealth’s Attorneys, but the whole State. A crime in the mountains is a crime against the people of Jefferson county, and a crime in Jefferson is a crime against the people of the moun- tains. But at present our laws are enforced by a sort of “local option." If a Common- wealth’s Attorney does not choose to prose- cute, he does not prosecute. Many good statutes are dead letters. The people can only wait for years to defeat an officer whom they condemn. The people outside of his district have no influence whatever over him. Therefore, we should have above him a chief, who is responsible to all the citizens of the State. I would not at all belittle the dignity of the Commonwealth’s Attorneys. All I mean to say is, that the Attorney-General is a more important officer, and should have a supervisory power over those whose actions he must defend in the Superior Courts. The information gotten by him from the reports of those who aid him in upholding the law should go through him and the Governor to the Legis- lature for the consideration and appropriate action of the representatives of the people. I do not ask that the Attorney- General’s power be defined or be made unreasonable; but he should be in substance, as he is in form, the chief legal ofi‘icer of the Commonwealth. Perhaps his reports will enable us gradually to per- fect our laws, and to secure a uniform and rigid enforcement of every wise statute. Whatever others may do, my vote at least shall be cast for this amendment. Our laws on this subject are now imperfect, and we are here to perfect them. As was said by the gentleman from Lexington on another occasion, I am not now attacking the men in office. I am attacking the system. Surely you can give the people something better. Mr. BUCKNER. This amendment EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 37 Friday,] BUCKN ER. [November 21 . was intended to embrace a suggestion made by the Delegate ' from Louisville, my own ideas being but a part of the amendment offered. I am one of those Delegates who believes that we were sent here to accomplish if possible, among other things, some rem- edy for the existing evils in the administra- tion of justice in the Commonwealth. That many abuses exist we all know. Per- haps ev-ery Delegate in this Convention is’ ' cognizant where some official of the Gov- ernment has in a very gross manner neglected every important public duty. It happens that I occupy a position which brings me information from all sections of the State, which develops the fact that in most of the sections of the State there are very serious abuses, which, under the ex- isting laws and the present Constitution, cannot be adequately remedied. If such abuses exist, then I conceive it is our duty to make some effort to remedy them. Yesterday I called the attention of the Convention to a few of the evils existing, and, as I thought, with some modesty, offered a suggestion as to what might be a remedy, saying at the time that I _had no preference as to the matter of remedying it, but wished simply to awaken the atten- tion of Delegates on the floor to the exist- ence of the abuses, that they, from their superior knowledge and wisdom, might devise some means to correct them. I re- garded that as my duty, and my effort was met by such serious objection from some of my best friends on the floor, because I proposed that the Governor of the Com- monwealth might, under some circum— stances, have the power to suspend the functions of an ofiicer derelict in his duty. The ghost of King John marched across the floor, and the Governor was represented as a tyrant over the people. It was insisted that such a motion was unprecedented—- that it was unusual. Yet, when we come to consider both of the two great parties in this country, assume that it is the acme of statesmanship to permit the President of a w? country to remove. without cause, oflicials who are ably discharging their duties, it does not seem that when we approve of that, fault should be found with permitting the Governor to remove one or two officials who should refuse to discharge their duty. This certainly is a custom in the United States Government. The United States District Attorneys are appointable and re- movable at the will of the President; yet they think if this same power should exist in the State, the liberties of the people would be endangered. It is no novel thing for this power to exist in a State. I think in a number of States power far more reach- ing than this. In the Constitution of New York the Governor is given power to re- move not only all the ministerial ofiicers, but also any Prosecuting Attorney who may fail or refuse to prosecute properly in the Courts. I mention this to show that my proposition was not novel by any means, and I think if my friends who criticised with such severity—I might say, rebuked nue—which I received with proper hu- mility, I think if they would consider and think awhile, they would come to the con- clusion it was not so novel. But, finding ! such a storm of opposition, I withdrew it, with the idea of trying to obtain a remedy in some other department for the evils known to exist. If my friends who criticised so severely would direct some of their large learning and well-known ability to the solution of this, I think it would be better than to criticise my mode, without offering any other remedy I ask for information in what manner the Governor could enforce the law ‘? One dis- tinguished gentleman said it could be en- forced because he had the authority, after the attorneys of the offender had exhausted every means to prolong and defer the rendering of justice, that the Governor had the ‘great power of fixing the day of execu- tion. I think that power could be accorded to the Court, or to the Clerk, or even a tip- stafl', and I do not think that gives any ade- 38 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] quate remedy. Another gentleman said he could call out the militia. I may be of a more pacific turn than those gentlemen, but I do not think we should always be compelled to turn out the militia. The ex- pense is large, and it is a bad example to set to the civil oflicials, who should be taught to do their duty. It has been my duty to investigate some of the very recent troubles that have arisen in our State, and in every instance these troubles have arisen from the neglect of some civil ofiicer to discharge the duties of his oflice. Sometimes it was the Courts, but usually it was a ministerial officer, who, when the Court had discharged its duty, refused to execute the order in at- tempting to arrest. Delegation after dele- gation has come to the Executive orfice, representing these matters, and begging that troops might be sent, in order that they might be protected in choosing their civil officers, who might represent the law- abiding people instead of the criminal classes. Many cases arise in which it is very essential that somebody should be appointed to see that these laws are enforced. I think that the motion of the gentleman from Louisville meets this case by allotting these duties to the Attorney-General, who represents, in reality, the prosecuting power of the Com- monwealth. A case like this arose, and it is but a sample of many: On one occasion a requisition was made on the Governor of a neighboring State for the surrender of a criminal, charged with obtaining money by false pretenses. The requisition was answered, the person was brought back un- der arrest, and the agent of the State, who was the person who had been defrauded, on reaching the limits of the State, tele- graphed to the Governor that the poison would pay the amount which he had dc- ' frauded him out of, if he could be released, and asking if he could release him. I rc~ plied no; that that would be compounding felony; that he was taken from the other State f .- the purpose of answering a crim- BUCKNER. [November 21. inal charge, and not to pay money. Not- withstanding that, he took the person to the county, and he was brought before a magistrate; no witnesses appearedfand the party was dismissed. The felony was com- pounded, and the party himself ought to have been convicted of it. What could the Governor do‘? Perhaps some of my dis- tinguished friends might say, “He could call out the militia.” I did write to the Commonwealth’s Attorney, calling his at- tention to the fact, and asking him to investigate. There was no reply to the communication, and no steps ever taken towards ascertaining- the facts. Another thing we all know; and I have no personal pride in this matter, and only invite your attention to it, because there are evils we should remedy; there are numer- ous petitions reaching the Executive ofiice asking for remissions of penalties and fines, and probably three-fourths of the Judicial districts of the State constantly send peti- tions asking a remission of the State’s part, amounting in some cases to a thousand dol- lars. Sometimes it is accompanied by a petition of the Sheriff, stating that that portion belonging to the officers has been collected and paid to them. We all know that, under existing laws, the Prosecuting Attorney and the Clerks had no right to take any portion of that except their per- centage of the amount collected. In this way an incalculable amount of money be- longing to the people is lost to them. I do not think I exaggerate when I say that half a million dollars belonging to the State is out uneollected, and no attempt made to collect it. I make no personal allusion. There are many exceptions among the Commonwealth’s Attorneys; but, as we know that has been the custom in many cases, and so long has it been the custom that it has been a sort of second law, and it is not regarded as a wrong to take the l money which belongs to the State. These 1 and many other similar evils exist, and I 1 think they could be remedied if we give EXECUTIVE DEPARTM E NT. 39 Friday,] BRONSTON. [November 21. authority to the Legislative Department to organize the Legal Department of the State, so that all the Attorneys of the Com- monwealth should report to a head oflice, and in that office should be kept a state- ment of the prosecutions in behalf of the State, and of all fines assessed and collected. I think if we give our attention to this matter in the spirit in which we all ought to approach it, we shall accomplish more good to our people and will receive their thanks when we return home. I believe every Delegate, when he considers this matter, will come to the conclusion that it is an evil which ought to be remedied, and that it is in our power to remedy it; and if we do not do something to correct it, we will merit and receive disapprobation of our constituencv. ' Mr. BRONSTON. I regret the neces- sity of taxing the patience of the Conven- tion again when I had promised myself and my friends that that patience had been so kindly extended that I felt my appre- ciation could be best shown by keeping quiet. In the first place, I desire to dis- abuse the mind of the distinguished Dele- gate from Hart, wherein he attributes a rebuke in the language which may have been used by myself and others on yester- day afternoon. I have had occasion to say before, that upon this floor I am discharg- ing the duties not of an individual, but of a representative of the sovereign people. And one of the dearest rights of the peo- ple which I represent is that of choosing its own ofiicers, and holding them responsi- ble for a faithful discharge of their duties. We may make laws, we may devise schemes, we may establish Bureaus; but I make the bold assertion that those laws, these schemes, and those Bureaus fall far short of forcing a man to discharge a duty who is not capable of knowing how and hon- est enough to doit ; but let him have resting upon him, surrounding him, constantly before him, the responsibility that he owes to the people who places him in the ofitice, and it will secure from him an earnest, honest and faithful discharge of his duty. Now, if the proposition made by the dis- tinguished Delegate from Hart, and sup- ported so earnestly by the gentleman from Louisville, would correct an evil, cheerfully would I support it. But, in the first place, I deny the assertion that the evil exists at the place indicated by them. This is no new proposition on the part of the distinguished Delegate from Hart. It has been submitted in the most careful and most deliberate way to the people of the Commonwealth of Ken- tucky before. It has been submitted, I doubt not, at the instigation of his closest and most confidential advisers. It was submitted, without any effort on his part to ascertain from the gentlemen charged in that indictment, as it were, the true state of case. He makes the assertion on this floor to-day, that there is at least half a million dollars belonging to the Commonwealth of Kentucky which has not been collected by , eason of the fact that Commonwealth A t- torneys have not discharged their duties. Thatisa serious charge. Not as arepre- sentative of the Commonwealth Attorneys of Kentucky, but as a citizen who knows something of its laws and the jurisprudence under which we act, I deny the assertion, and assert that the laws of Kentucky do not permit the Attorneys for the Commonwealth to-day to attend in any sense of the word to the collection of a dollar of Kentucky’s revenue. Another Bureau already estab- lished has control over the revenue of the State, including the collection of all judg- ments in favor thereof. The Auditor, through officials who, under oath and under the responsibility of oflicial bonds, is re- quired to look after these matters, and have reported fully and periodically to him the exact status of all judgments in favor of Commonwealth, whether collectable or col- lected, how much, to whom paid, and when. The Commonwealth Attorney’s duty is 40 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] simply to be present in Court, prepare in- dictments for Grand Jury and prosecute cases to judgment. As soon as judgment has been rendered, he has no more power over that judgment than the humblest citizen. It is made the duty of the Trustee of the Jury Fund, who gives bond for faithful discharge of his duty, to collect judgments in favor of the Commonwealth. The Attorney for the Commonwealth cannot direct or suspend their collection without the assent of the Trustee of Jury Fund. He cannot direct the Trustee of the Jury Fund; but when the Trustee of the Jury Fund calls on him for advice, it is made his duty to give it. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Has it not been frequently the practice, both of Common- wealth and County Attorneys in this State, to ask and permit a stay of execution in misdemeanor cases‘? Mr. BRONSTON. I cannot tell you what the custom has been- of either the Commonwealth’s Attorney or County At- torneys. I can answer for myself, and I can answer for the law, that the Common- wealth’s Attorney and County Attorney have no power to stay an execution, and it can only be done on the assent of the Sheriff and the Trustee of the Jury Fund, both of whom are responsible by bond to the Com- monwealth; and if it had been stayed by such Attorneys, the Trustee of the Jury Fund has a perfect right to cancel such action and enforce its collection through the Court of his county. That is the law, is it not, my friend from Lincoln? I am not speaking of the abuses of the law, but of the law itself. Now, examine the Ex- ecutive paper, in which reference to this mat- ter was made before. It was stated that the Auditor of the great Commonwealth of Ken- .tucky had suggested that, by reason of the Commonwealth Attorneys collecting a part of their per cent., there had been a great leakage in the Treasury. Let- me suggest there is not a lawyer upon this floor who does not know that, under what is known as the Auditor’s Agent Act, the Auditor BRONSTON—MILLER. 'to do what? ' tucky, to collect those debts [November 21. has been invested with power to appoint an Agent for every county of the Common- wealth. Under his direction a Bureau, if you please, is established. That‘ is the most infamous stain upon the statute book of the Commonwealth to-day, wherein the Auditor is empowered to select Agents and direct them to collect or not collect, to prosecute or not prosecute, to compromise or refuse, and report alone to the Auditor. It is made the duty of those Agents, under the direction of the Auditor, To go to the Courts, examine the records, examine the accounts of the Trustee of the Jury Fund, and ex- amine the accounts of the Clerk, both of the Circuit and County Courts; examine the Sheriff’s ofiice, and see what Common- wealth judgments have been collected, what have not been collected, and institute necessary proceedings to collect that which has not been collected; investing them with absolute power over Trustees of Jury Fund, Clerks, Sheriffs, and the revenue of the State. The Commonwealth’s Attorney, shorn of power, cannot open his mouth or direct a prosecution for collection of this revenue, yet must be censured by this financial autocrat. They have the right to employ attorneys of their own choosing, and pay them out of the Treasury of Ken- and dues which they say now ought to have been col- lected by an officer who has been shorn of his power. That is the evil complained of; that is what we are told of here. When I have sought, as other Commonwealth’s At- torneys doubtless have, to see that these judgments should be collected, we are con- fronted by two laws: first, the Trustee of the Jury Fund has absolute control in the respective counties; and second, over the the Trustee of the Jury Fund is the Au- ditor’s Agent, who takes it from even the hands of the Trustee of the Jury Fund, and directs his actions, if he sees proper. Charge not upon these officers such dere- liction of duty until you have changed the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 41 Friday,] BRONSTON—BUCKNER. [November 21 . law. How do they carry it out by the pro- posed amendment? Suppose you establish this Bureau, with what is the Attorney- General invested‘? With authority to di- rect all prosecutions in the Commonwealth of Kentucky; to require the Attorneys for the Commonwealth to report to him each case, and get instruction from him and let him direct how he shall proceed; have a report made to him as to what fees have been collected, and what have not been col- lected, and what can be collected, and act under his direction. Just think of it. In the district alone which I have had the honor to represent, there were sometimes in one county as many as five hundred cases that demanded prosecution at my hands and how could the Clerks get even a half dozen deputies to write out a complete his- tory of the cases, and direct it to the At- torney-General, and let me await direction from him as to how I shall proceed‘? Sup- pose that he, having the one-man power, had seen proper to direct twenty, or forty, or one hundred cases to be dismissed, al- though remote from the people af- fected by such order. Shall it be done? To whom would he be responsible? Will you clothe him with this power, and take away from the Attorneys for the Com- monwealth that leverage which is the best and safest of all orders, the eye of his own constituency, which is ever fastened on him‘? Love of approval, by the people, for faithful service, and fear of censure for inefliciency, slothfulness and dishonesty, is the fundamental idea of our elective system. Let an officer be responsible to the people who elect him, and them alone. I have no doubt Common wealth’sAttorneys have done many things wrong, and I am not here to . defend them, as I have said before to the dis- tinguished gentleman from Louisville, who leems to have the Commonwealth’s Attor- ney as a ghost before him. They were the great bugbear that interceded and were set up in the face of the application that was made as to restricting the pardoning power of the Executive, which I will not now dis- cuss. And so it seems now, by the amend- ment of the distinguished Delegate from Hart, he too would hold them responsible for a failure to do that which by the law they could not do. He says further, that fre- quently the Sheriff has certified to him that fifty-five per cent. which goes to the officers has been paid, but the other has not. He says the officers have no authority to col- lect their percentage, except on amount paid. Of course they have not. Does that mean they had paid the' Commonwealth’s Attorneys? ' Mr. BUCKNER. I will state that a ma- jority of the communications received state that those amounts have been paid in fees to the officers. Mr. BRONSTON. Grant that they have been paid the amount due to the Attorneys for the Commonwealth and other officers, and that they have no right to do so without the approval of the collecting officers, viz. : the Sheriff and Trustee of the Jury Fund Mr. BUCKNER. That was _all I have stated. Mr. BRONSTON. stand you. I understand you to assert that the State has been defrauded; it is that as- sertion I wanted to answer. If it has been paid to these ofiicials, the law has been vio- lated, and they can be compelled to pay back the State its portion. The law is ample in this regard, and the Courts would cheerfully enforce it. If the Trustee of the Jury Fund fails to collect-the balance of the judgment, they may demand—yea, it is their duty to demand, the Commonwealth’s At- torney to pay back the excess, and should he fail, the Trustee of the Jury Fund could compel it either by rule of Court or in- dictment of Grand Jury, just as you could collect by law from an individual money improperly received. The Auditor’s Agents, these offshoots of another Bureau like that which you now propose to establish, should they discover, upon investigation I do not so under- 42 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Friday,] and inspection of the books, that on a judg- ment, for example, for five hundred dollars in favor of the Commonwealth, fifty-five per cent. had been paid, and the Common- wealth’s Attorneys and officers had received their portion, and that the balance could not be collected, by reason of defendant’s insolvency or other cause, they only being entitled to their per cent. of the amount actually collected, could cause a prosecution to be instituted against such ofi‘icers and collect it. Should they fail, the Common- wealth is still not without a remedy, for both the Sheriff and Trustee of the Jury Fund, who made or assented to this over- “payment, are responsble on their ofiicial bonds. 5Suppose the Attorney-General could direct the Commonwealth’s Attorneys in what form would the order come‘? He is confronted by the Trustee of the Jury Fund, who is intrusted with the power to collect judgments. The Auditor’s Agent would step forward and say, I have the power to collect all these judgments. Yet gentlemen say, in the face of that law, that the great ,evil can only be corrected by the establishment of this new Bureau. I grant you there is an evil. I have seen and known of the evil. I know from my own personal experience that ofttimes the judg- ments of the Commonwealth have not been collected with that promptness with which they should be. Oftentimes I have seen the laws not executed in that regard as they ought to be executed. How could it be avoided? I was confronted with the fact that there has been established this Bureau, which cduld properly be called the “Bureau of the Auditor,” which has appointed these special agents, and given them absolute power over all the officers in the county, and all others are rendered inefficient. I make this suggestion not in defense of the Commonwealth Attorneys. I have no doubt that they, like many others, have failed to discharge their duty. An instance has been given which, I have no doubt, re- BRONSTON. [November 21 . ceived from our excellent Executive severe censure, wherein he says one of his Agents sent to bring a man to Kentucky, tele- graphed to know if he could dismiss him if he would pay the money he had gotten under false pretenses, and he telegraphed, “No, it would be compounding i'elony;” that he came on to the county, and that when he reached that county, no prosecu- tion was had so far as he was advised, and the party went back; and he assumes that the money was paid, because he wrote to the Commonwealth’s Attorney and received no answer. If that was done, it was a great wrong. The Commonwcalth‘s Attorney may have failed to respond to the Governor when he wrote to him to institute prosecu- tion. Was it his duty? Has the Governor the right to command the Commonwealth’s Attorney as to whether he shall institute prosecution against A, B or C‘? Is that the law ‘2 There was a tribunal to which he could have addressed his _letter, and that was the Judge who presided at the Court, whose duty it was to look over the records underneath his eye and see that each and every official under him, including a Com- monwealth’s Attorney, discharged his re- spective duty. I desire to say, now, that so long as Kentucky retains its Republican form of government, so long as its oflicers are elected by the people, and held respon- sible to that people for the faithful dis- charge of that duty. that the Executive has no right to direct that A shall be prose- cuted. and that B should be prosecuted, or C should be discharged He may inter- pose, by the exercise of the power that you have seen proper to invest him with, in a pardon before trial, but in that Way, and in that way alone, can he thus in- terfere. And you cannot correct it, gentle- men, by establishing this Bureau. The efi’ort by this amendment to invest one man with autocratic power is but in accord with the system which seems to have found lodgment in high oflicial circles in Ken- tucky, Bureaus to manage and control fin- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 43 Friday,] ances, Bureaus to direct prosecutions, Bu- reaus to pardon before and after conviction, Bureaus to control your Judiciary, and Bureaus to dismiss from office Executive and Ministerial Ofiicers and fill by appoint- ment. It comes, I know, from an honest conviction, but I beg leave to suggest to the distinguished Delegate from Hart, it comes BBONSTON——SMITH. [November 21 . from a failure to understand the laws of a great Commonwealth which has honored him as he deserved to be honored, and I trust will honor him again. Mr. H. H. SMITH. I move we adjourn. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried, and the Convention thereupon ad- journed. Qonvention Ziecoro. KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Vol. 1. Saturday,] HINES ,__.__.~____.—._h__._x.. ._.______ A_ _ FRANKFORT. NOVEMBER 22. 1890. No.59 SWANGO. [November 22 . The Convention was called to order by I the President, and the proceedings were, opened with prayer by the Rev Mr. Hen- derson. The Journal of yesterday’s proceedings was read, corrected and approved. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. Reports from Standing Commit- tees. Reports from Special Connnittees. Motions and resolutions. Resolutions. Mr. J. S. HIN ES. I have a resolution. The resolution was read, and is as fol- lows: Resolved, That upon the virtue and in- telligence of the people depend the per- petuation of our republican institutions; and Resolved, 2. That it is essential that Ken- tucky continue to improve her system of Common Schools; and in order to do so, the Common School system ought to be separate, with a Superintendent at the seat of government and a. Superintendent in each county, elected by the people on ac- count of his fitness, and whose business it shall be to look after the‘ educational inter- ests of the county. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution will be referred to the Com- mittee on Education. On Saturday, October 18, 1890, the fol- lowing resolution was ofl'ered by the Dele- gate from Montgomery, Menifee, Powell .and Wolfe (Mr. Swango). It was not read .at the time, and, consequently, was not printed in the debates: SEC. 1. Corporations may be formed under general laws, but shall not be‘ created by special acts. All laws relating to corpo- rations may be altered, amended or re- pealed by the Legislature at any time, and all corporations doing business in this State may, as to such business, be regulated, limited or restrained by law. SEC. 2. All existing charters, franchises, special or exclusive privileges. under which an actual and bona fide organization shall not have taken place, and business been commenced in good faith at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall there- after have no validity. SEO. 3. Corporations shall not issue stock except to bona. fide subscribers therefor or their assignees; nor shall any corporation issue any bond or other obligation for the payment of money except for money or property received or labor done. The stock of corporations shall not be increased ex- cept in pursuance of a general law; nor shall any law authorize the increase of stock without the consent of the person or persons holding the larger amount in value of the stock, nor without due notice of the proposed increase having been previously given in such manner as may be prescribed by law. All fictitious increase of stock or indebtedness shall be void. SEC. 4. No corporation organized outside the limits of this State shall be allowed to transact business within the State on more favorable conditions than are prescribed by law to similar corporations organized under the laws of this State. SEO. 5. No corporation shall lease or alienate any franchise, so as to relieve the franchise or property held thereunder from the liabilities of the lessor or grantor, lessee or grantee, contracted or incurred in the operation, use or enjoyment of such fran- chise or any of its privileges. SEC. 6. The State shall not in any man- 2 CORPORATION S. Saturday,] Swxneo. 4-‘ [November 22 ner loan its credit, nor shall it subscribe to, or be interested in, the stock of any com- pany, association or corporation. SEO. 7. The exercise of the right of eminent domain shall never be so abridged or construed as to prevent the Legislature from taking the property and franchise of incorporated companies, and subjecting them to public use the same as the property of individuals. SEC. 8. No corporation, association or individual shall issue or put in circulation as money any thing but the lawful money of the United States. Each stockholder of any banking or insurance corporation or joint stock association shall be individually and personally liable, equally and ratably, and not one for another, for all contracts, debts and engagements of such corporation or association, accruing while they remain such stockholders, to the extent of the amount of their stock therein at the par value thereof, in addition to the amount invested in such shares. SEC. 9. Any president, director, manager, cashier, or other oflicer of any banking institution, who shall receive or assent to the reception of deposits after he shall have knowledge of the fact that such banking institution is insolvent or in failing circum- stances, shall be individually responsible for such deposits so received. SEC. 10. All railroad and other transpor- tation companies are declared to be com- mon carriers and subject to legislative con- trol. Any association or corporation organ- ized for the purpose under the laws of the State shall have the right to connect at the State line with railroads of other States. Every railroad company shall have the right with its road, whether the same be now constructed or may hereafter be con- structed, to intersect, cross or connect with any other railroad ; and when such railroads are of the same or similar gauge they shall, at all crossings and at all points where a railroad shall begin or terminate at or near an y other railroad, form proper connections, so that the cars of any such railroad com- panies may be speedily transferred from one rail road to another. All railroad companies shall receive and transport each the other’s passengers, tonnage and cars without delay or discrimination. SEC. 11. No railroad company or other common carrier shall combine or make any contract with the owners of any vessel that leaves or makes port in this State, or with any common carrier, by whieh combination or contract the earnings of one doing the carrying are to be shared by the other not doing the carrying. SEC. 12. No discrimination in charges or facilities for transportation shall be made by any railroad or other transportation company between places or persons, or in the facilities for the transportation of the same classes of freight or passengers within this State, or coming from or going to any other State. Persons and property trans- ferred over any railroad, or by any other transportation company or individual, shall be delivered at any station, landing or port at charges not exceeding the charges for the transportation of persons and property of the same class, in the same direction, to any more distant station. port or landing. Excursion and commutation tickets may be issued at special rates. ‘ SEC. 13. No railroad corporation shall consolidate its stock, property or franchise with any other railroad corporation owning a competing line. SEC. 14. The rolling stock and other movable property belonging to any railroad company or corporation in this State shall be considered personal property, and shall be liable to taxation and to execution and sale in the same manner as the personal property of individuals, and such property shall not be exempted from execution and sale. SEC. 15. The Legislature shall pass laws establishing maximum rates of charges for the transportation of passengers and freight, and to correct abuses, and to prevent dis- CORPORATIONS. 3 Saturday,] crimination and extortion in the rates of freight and passenger tariffs on the differ- ent railroads and other common carriers in the State, and shall enforce such laws by adequate penalties. A railroad and trans- portation commission may be established, and its powers and duties fully defined by law. SEC. 16. Any association or corporation, or the lessees or managers thereof, organized for the purpose, or any individual, shall have the right to contract and maintain lines of telegraph and telephone within this State; and said companies shall receive and transmit each other’s messages without delay or discrimination; and all of such companies are hereby declared to be com- mon carriers, and subject to Legislative control. Railroad ‘corporations organized or doing business in this State shall allow telegraph and telephone corporations and companies to construct and maintain tele— graph lines on and along the rights of way of such railroads and railroad companies, and no railroad'corporation organized or doing business in this State shall allow any telegraph corporation or company any facilities, privileges or rates for transporta- tion of men or material, or for repairing their lines, not allowed to all telegraph companies. The right of eminent domain is hereby extended to all telegraph and telephone companies. The Legis- lature shall, by general law of uni- form operation, provide reasonable regu- lations to give effect to this section. SEC. 17. No railroad or other transporta- tion company shall grant free passes, or sell tickets or passes at a discount, other than is sold to the public generally, to any member of the Legislature, or to any person holding any public otfice within this State. The Legislature shall pass laws to carry this provision into effect. SEO. 18. Railroad companies now or hereafter organized, or doing business in this State, shall allow all express companies organized or doing business in this State SwAxeo-DEHAvEN—Moomc. [November 22 . transportation over all lines of railroad owned or operated by such railroad upon equal terms with any other express com- pany; and no railroad corporation organ- ized or doing business in this State shall allow any express corporation or company any facilities, privileges or rates for trans- portation, or men, or materials, or property carried by them, or for doing the business of such express companies, not allowed to all express companies. SEO. 19. Monopolies and trusts shall never be allowed in this rtate, and no in- corporated company, co-partnership or as- sociation of persons in this State shall, di- rectly or indirectly, combine or make any contract with any other incorporated com- pany, foreign or domestic, through their stockholders, or the trustees or assignees of such stockholders, or with an y co-partn ership or association of persons, or in any manner whatever, for the purposes of fixing the price, or limiting the production, or regu- lating the transportation of any product or commodity. The Legislature shall pass laws for the enforcement of this section by adequate penalties, and in case of incorpor- ated companies, if necessary for that pur- pose, may declare a forfeiture of their fran- chise. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move that the Con- vention take up the further consideration of the report of the Joint Committee on Executive Affairs. The vote being taken on said motion, it was carried. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire to offer, as an additional section of the report, the fol- lowing amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: All the officers mentioned in this article shall be paid for their services by salary, and not otherwise. The PRESIDENT. That will be con- sidered at the end of the report. Report the next amendment. The CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Delegate from Hart; 4 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ‘— Saturday,] Amend section 26 by adding, after the words “prescribed by law,” in the sixth line, these words: “The Attorney-General shall be the chief oflicer of the Department of Justice, to whom all Prosecuting Attor- neys of the Commonwealth shall report, and over whom he shall exercise super- visory control in all criminal and penal prosecutions; and the General Assembly shall enact laws to enforce this provision.” The vote being taken upon said amend- ment, it was rejected. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Christian was then read, and is as follows: Add after the words “ Land Office,” in line 5, the words “ Commissioner of Agri- culture, Labor and Statistics.” The vote being taken upon said amend- ment, it was adopted. The next amendment, that proposed by the Delegate from Woodford,was then read, and is as follows: Amend by adding after the word “ law," in the sixth line of section 26, these words: “All fees collected by either of said officers shall be covered into the Treasury." The vote being taken on said amend- ment, it was adopted. The CLERK. The next amendment is that offered by the Delegate from the city of Lexington to the substitute as proposed by the Delegate from Franklin. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington is as follows: The Treasurer, Secretary of State, Regis- ter of the Land Oifice, Attorney-General, and Commissioner of Agriculture and La- bor Statistics shall be ineligible to re-elec- tion for the succeeding term. The substitute proposed by the Delegate from Franklin is as follows: The Treasurer shall be ineligible to re- election for the succeeding four years after the expiration of the term for which he shall have been elected, and the Auditor of Public Accounts shall be ineligible to re- election for the succeeding four years after he shall have held the office for two terms, if he shall have been elected for two suc- BRONSTON—-J ONSON WASHINGTON. [November 22, cessive terms. The duties and responsibil- ities of those officers, and those of the Attorney-General, Register of the Land Office, Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics, and Secretary of State, shall be prescribed by law. Inferior State offi- cers, not specifically provided for in this Constitution, may be appointed or elected in such manner as may be prescribed by law for a term not exceeding four years. Mr. BRONSTON. For the purpose of having this harmonize with the other, I ask that the word “Treasurer” be stricken out, as it is included in the other, and that those words be inserted after the substitute of the Delegate from Franklin. Mr. JONSON. I do not see that the Delegate from Franklin is here this morn- ing. I regard this as a very important matter. I favor his substitute for section 26. I also favor it as against the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Lexing- ton. I anticipated that the Delegate from Franklin would advocate his substitute by some remarks. I believe that is his pur- pose. I am not advised as to the cause of his absence, and would like to have the Convention postpone the consideration of this until he comes in. Mr. \VASHINGTON. I saw the Dele- gate from Franklin a few moments ago, and he told me would be necessarily absent this morning in the Court of Appeals. Mr. BRONSTON. I would ask the gen- tleman in what respect does my amendment difl’er from the substitute of the Delegate from Franklin‘? We are in perfect accord, and I simply include other oflicers which his substitute omitted. His substitute ap- plies to the Auditor, Treasurer, and I add the other State oflicers. Mr. J ONSCN. I came to the conclusion that there was some necessity for the amendment proposed. Upon reading them I came to the conclusion that there was a difference. If that is a fact, that there is no conflict, I have no ‘objection to the amendment offered by the Delegate from the city of Lexington; nevertheless, I believe the Delegate from Franklin should be ac- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. _ 5 Saturday,] BRENTS——BRONSTON—ALLEN—HARRIS. [November 22. corded a fair opportunity of being heard upon this substitute, and I hope after this amendment is adopted that then the sub- stitute will be passed until he shall have had an opportunity of being heard. Mr. BRENTS. I would ask the Dele- gate from Lexington why it is that he makes a difference between the Auditor and the other State officers‘? Mr. BRONSTON. There is no differ- ence between my amendment and the sub- stitute. I concur with it, because the duties of the ofi‘ice are so complicated that it requires a man two years to fit himself for those duties; and if he proves himself competent and worthy, I think it would be fair to give the people an opportunity to re-elect him. Mr. BRENTS. Why not give the peo- ple a chance to re-elect the other State offi- cers? Mr. BRONSTON. Because we think four years is long enough for them to ' stay in. The vote being taken on the amendment offered by Mr. Bronston, it was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The question is now upon the substitute, as amended. Mr. HARRIS. In order that the sub- stitute may be like the written report, I offer, as an amendment, the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Woodford, which comes in after the word “ law,” in the sixth line: All fees collected by either of these ofli- eers shall be covered into the Treasury. The vote being taken on the amend- ment proposed by the Delegate from Simp- son, it was adopted. , Mr. C. T. ALLEN. I would like to offer an amendment, striking from the substitute the word “Treasurer,” so that the office of Treasurer can be made a two-term office. I ‘think it hardly fair to say, that a man who can receive the appro- bation of the people should be limited to a single term. I am willing to make it two terms, like the Auditor, and then, after that, let him be ineligible. The PRESIDENT. The Chair insists, in order to prevent confusion, that it is necessary to have all these amendments in writing. Mr. JOHNSTON. I make the point that within the last five minutes it has been voted in, and can it now be moved to be stricken out ‘2 The PRESIDENT. That point is good, if it is fact; but that is in the original sec- tion and not in the report. .WIr. COX. I hope very much that the amendment offered by the Delegate from Caldwell will be defeated. We want those who handle the public money to be brought frequently up to a fair and complete settle- ment, which will prevent the loss of the money of the people. I insist that four years is long enough for any man to handle the public money before a final and com- plete settlement is brought about. I conse- quently hope this Convention will not give a Constitutional office a term of eight years without having the accounts settled. A vote being taken, the amendment of- fered by the delegate from Caldwell was rejected. I A vote being taken on the substitute, as amended, it was adopted. A vote being taken on the section, as amended by the substitute, it was adopted- Mr. BULLITT. Is now the time to move to reconsider the vote by which the section was adopted? I want to be able to let the Convention know what they have done. A vote being taken on the motion, it was lost. Section 27 was then read, and is as follows: The General Assembly may provide for the abolishment of the oflice of the Register of the Land Oflice, to take effect at the end of any term, and shall provide by law for the custody and preservation of the apers and records of said office, if the same e abolished. The amendment of the Delegate from 6 EXECUTlVE DEPARTMENT. PSaturdayJ BECKNER—MCHENRY. [November 22 . Covington (Mr. Mackoy) was read, and is as follows: Strike out the words “at the end of the term of the present incumbent,” and strike out the word “ may,” in the first line thereof, and insert the word “shall,” and strike out the words “ if the same be abolished.” Mr. BECKNER. I have a substitute for that section, and the Delegate from Covington told me last evening he had concluded to withdraw his amendment, as he was satisfied with my substitute. The substitute of the Delegate from Clark was read, and is as follows: A Register of the Land Oflice shall be elected at the first election for Governor under this Constitution, and shall hold his ofiice and discharge the duties thereof as now prescribed by law for a period of four years, at the end of which time said office shall terminate. The General Assembly shall, prior to the expiration of said ofiice, provide for taking care of the records and archives of said ofiice, and for furnishing and certifying copies thereof. Mr. BECKNER I will ask the Clerk to strike out the word “ now ” in that sub- stitute, where it says, “as now prescribed by law,” and leave it to read, “ as prescribed by law.” I desire to say about the substi- tute. that it has been considered by a num- ber of gentlemen in the Convention, and wchada speech on the subject from the Delegate from Floyd, who is not now pres- ent. A number of those best acquainted with the circumstances agree with me that the ofiice is a useless one; that all the pub- lic lands in the State have been entered, and it is merely multiplying claims on property which already belong to private owners. I do not think anybody can name a portion of the Commonwealth in which there is an acre of land yet to be taken up, and yet the Register of the Land Office is issuing, and the Governor is bound to sign, hundreds of patents each month. Since we have been here there have probably been three or four hundred patents issued which Would bring clouds on the titles of other people. This is only complicating the land \ titles of Eastern Kentucky, which is really the greatest obstacle to the development of enterprises in that section. Men are afraid to buy lands in that region, because they understand it is a matter which involves litigation, and serious care and attention to secure the ownership of a tract of land there. Mr. MCHENRY. I do not understand the difficulty about land titles in Eastern Kentucky. What law prevails there that does not obtain all over the State: that the oldest patent takes the land, and if a man has been in possession for fifteen years, his title is good. Mr. BECKNER. The law is the same in Eastern Kentucky as in the balance of the State, but the conditions are different. The lands are wild; they are not inclosed as they are in the other parts of the State. There are great bodies of land open, covered with primeval forests. Mr. MOHENRY. Why will not the survey and the boundary line and the old- est patent then cover it ‘? Mr. BECKNER. There is the trouble. Who has the oldest patent? The Virginia grants are held by men who have never come to the front. There is no record, except in the ofiice of the Register of the Land Ofi‘ice. The parties holding those patents have carried them in some instances one hundred years without listing the land for taxation, and when a man buys from the Commonwealth of Kentucky under a patent, and goes to claim possession, he finds some one with an old Virginia grant coming up and claiming it. Of course, the old Virginia grant succeeds, if it embraces the land. The first patent takes it out of the Commonwealth. When land passes under a grant, the Commonwealth can no more give another patent for that land than a party can lawfully give a deed for land which he has already conveyed to some one else. Of course, these grants were given before Kentucky became a State of the Union. Virginia had granted pat- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 7 Saturday,] BECKNER—MONTGOMERY—BLACKBURN—MOORE—AUXIER. [November 22. cuts for hundreds of thousands of acres, and the grants have been located, many of them in Eastern Kentucky. The people who came in from Virginia and North Carolina located them along the lines of travel, and frequently located them one on top of the other, not knowing that the others had been located. Then this State has issued patents, and parties have taken possession and held for years as against the original grantees under the Virginia- patents. Of course, possession would give ownership if the Courts would recog- nize the possession; but the Courts have not said that the possession under which many of the people of Eastern Kentucky hold gives them the right to ownership. The whole matter is much complicated. The difliculty about the Land Oflice is that men away from the State look at our Con- stitution and find that we have a Register of the Land Office, and, of course, think we have public lands unappropriated; and this enables those who hawk these patents around for sale to sell them; and in a ma- jority of cases they are junior patents, and frauds on those who buy as well as on those who really own the land. This has a ten- dency to destroy confidence _in our land titles. Mr. MONTGOMERY. Why not abol- ish the oflice at once ‘? Mr. BECKNER. Some gentlemen say there might be some lands yet to be taken up. I would be willing to abolish it now; but some have insisted to give the office an- other term. so that it would be notice to all the world; and if, perhaps, there should be a piece of land not yet entered, a patent could be obtained. I find that nearly all intelligent people of that section agree with me that there is no land to be entered, and the work of the oflice is simply to put clouds on the title of those who think they own it. Mr. BLACKBURN. Would this pro- vision impair the title under the Virginia grants ‘? ' Mr. BECKNER. No, sir. My substi- tute says at the end of four years the Land Office in Kentucky shall cease; that there shall no longer be notice to the world that we have unappropriated lands. It does not impair anybody’s rights. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Is there any pro- vision in your amendment against any further issue of patents? Mr. BECKNER. No, sir. It only says the office shall cease at the end of four years, and that the General Assembly shall provide for the custody of the records and for giving copies. Mr. MOORE. Ought not the amend- ment to embrace some provision of that kind ‘? Mr. BECKNER. I would be glad to have that done; but I wanted to get what the Convention would give. I thought I would ask this and be satisfied with it, so that at the. end of four years it will no longer be given out to the world that we have wild, unappropriated lands, by virtue of the fact that we have a Register of the Land Office provided for in our Constitu— tion. . Mr. AUXIER. I do not know whether the proposition of the Delegate from Clark is a wise one or not. Nearly every ques- tion relating to lands has been settled by the Court of Appeals; and while it is true that land titles frequently lap, and the same land is patented twice—in my section it is a good deal like the shingles on a house—sometimes two or three patents cover the same land. Whilst it is not necessary to keep this oflice for the purpose of issuing new patents—because there is no wild land now—yet we have use for this oflicer for one purpose, at least. I do not attend a Court in my county, or any other county in the Circuit where I practice, but what it is necessary, at every term of the Court, to write to the Register of the Land Oflice to procure copies of patents that have issued from fifty to one hundred years ago; and it will be. necessary in my 8 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT gSaturdayJ AUXIER—BULLITT. [November 22 . county, for the next thirty years, to corre- spond with some officer having the custody and charge of the Land Office. It is of vital importance to us, and we are continually under the necessity of pro- curing copies of these patents which have been lost and destroyed. We want it for the purpose of determining who has the oldest patent. Mr. A has a patent for a tract of land in Pike county. and Mr. B has a patent which covers a portion of the same land claimed by A. Those patents are lost, and we have to correspond with the Register of the Land ()tfice in order to ascertain by copy who has the oldest and true title to the land. And I think it is now premature to repeal this 0 ! cc. It is so essential to the people of m y section to have some oflicer who shall be the cus- todian of those records, that we my deter- mine and settle our litigation according to the face of the patent, and ascertain who is the real owner of the land in contest. Now. I believe, one proposition by the Delegate from Clark is to leave these records in the care and custody of the Sec- retary of State or the Auditor, I do not know which. If you do away with this office, the Legislature will be compelled to establish another oflicer whose duty it shall be to take charge of these records, and if you make it a secondary office and attach it as one of the duties of the Secretary of State or Auditor, he will, necessarily, have to have a Deputy or As- sistant Secretary to take charge of these books and records. I can conceive of no more important officer in the Common- wealth of Kentucky than a safe, reliable custodian of its land records Our lands are not held by possession and simple cus- tody, as is personal property, in this Com- monwealth. When a litigation arises between individuals concerning their lands we go back to the written title and written document as evidence of the ownership of the land, and as long as litigation arises between litigants we will have frequently to refer to the Register of the Land Office, in order to procure copies of the land titles and patents that have been issued since the foundation of our Commonwealth down to the present time; and if we make this ofiice to attach to some other department of the Government, I apprehend that the amount of care and skill will not be applied to the exercise of the duties of the oflice as will be when leIt entirely to one man, whose sole duty is to attend to the duties of that ofiice. It might be said, as argued by the Delegate from Clark, that if we leave that entirely to the Legislature, the Legislature will prob- ably be careful in that regard, and not re- peal the office when the people demand a personal exercise of its functions; but the fact that we have no more vacant land in Kentucky does not argue at all that we will not need these records continually; and, therefore, I shall be opposed to the amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Clark. Mr. BULLITT. We investigated this question before the Committee, and we find that there are about a half a million acres of land in the mountains of Kentucky that are not paying a cent of tax to the Com- monwealth. Patents issued upon those lands by the Commonwealth of Virginia about one hundred years ago, and during the whole of that time the Commonwealth has never received a single, solitary cent of taxation on it. By virtue of the compact between the States of Kentucky and Vir- ginia, Kentucky is not allowed to issue any patents on those lands,so that the only way for them to be divested from the original pat- entee is for somebody to go upon them and have actual occupation of the lands for fifteen years. The seven-year statute will not ope- rate, because a part of the seven years‘ limita— tion is a patent. which is void. It is posses- sion of seven years connected with a quasi title from the Commonwealth that is neces- sary to enable any one to avail himself of the seven years’ limitation ; so that the only way to divest these patentees of th sa 1'11 6 EXEC UTIVE DEPARTMEN T. 9 Saturday,] title to that half million acres of land is for somebody to occupy it for fifteen years. The method of the Delegate will only accumulate the difficulty in his section of the country. This Convention ought to pass some law or provision, requiring a law to be passed by which, if these original patentees fail to come forward and claim that land, and have it recorded in the county in which the land is situated, within five years, it shall be forfeited, and when forfeited, we will then require the Register of the Land Office to issue patents on this half million acres of land. I do not see how it is possible to get rid of the Land Office at present. We ought not to continue to live here with this half million acres of land in our borders unoccupied and unclaimed, and no taxes paid on it. We have allowed these people one hundred years’ time to come and settle on their land or sell, and they have failed to do it. The lands are there; we have held them without any taxes on them, and still hold them, and if we say to them you must come in within tive years from this day, and claim your lands and pay your taxes as far back as we have not released the taxes on them. (I think there was a statute in 187-5 or 1878 releasing all former taxes which had not been paid.) But make them come forward and make them pay their taxes as far back as 1878, and record their title in the county in which it is situated, or let it be forfeited ‘to the Commonwealth, and let the Common- wealth issue patents on it to those who want it. I think this is a clear case. I do not see how else you can get rid of it. To do as the gentleman desires would simply post— pone the evil day, and leave the lands in a condition that whoever may go there and settle upon them, even with a patent from the Commonwealth, without a title from these original patentees, they are constantly in danger of being turned out of possession and lose the improvements they may put on the lands, unless they can be pro- tected by fifteen years of actual occu- B ULLITT—BECKNER—MOORE. [November '22 . pancy of the land. So I think the method adopted by the Committee, of allowing the Legislature at any time to discontinue this oflice whenever it ceases to be useful proper. It can not cease to be useful in less . than eight years, or we are bound to leave that half million acres of land untaxed and untaxable. .‘ Mr. BECKNER. The question raised by the gentleman from McCracken is an- other matter, being considered by the Com- mittee on Circuit Courts now. I cannot see how it is necessary to continue the Reg- istership of the Land Office in order to dis- pose of the land that may be found belong- ing to those who hold these old grants, who- have not discharged their duties as citizens in paying taxes. Mr. BULLITT. If those lands go back to the Commonwealth, how is it possible to divest the Commonwealth and invest the party who buys the land from the Common- wealth without a patent ‘2 Mr. BECKNER. We havea law which covers that now. The land is sold by the Auditor, and he gives a deed. Mr. BULLITT. In that character of case, the title is not in the Commonwealth. It is simply the usufruct and possession which is forfeited to the Commonwealth, and the Auditor’s certificate is suflicient to pass the possession, but when it comes to title, I ask you how the Commonwealth can pass a title except by patent ‘? Mr. L. T. MOORE. I understood the gentleman from McCracken to say a few moments ago that the patents which had been issued to the people of the Common- wealth included lands that were granted by Virginia, and those patents were void. ‘Mr. BULLITT. Absolutely void. Mr. L. T. MOORE. .What good would it be to get any more patents? Mr. BULLITT. Forfeit the land to the Commonwealth. Prescribe conditions to the original patentees, and if they fail to comply, forfeit. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Could it not be 10 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] done this way Provide in this Constitu- tion that no fui‘her patents should issue, and then provide that any land ascer- tained to be vacant might be sold, and the Commissioner making the sale should make the title for the Commonwealth ‘? Mr. BULLITT. titles in that way. Mr. L. T. MOORE. Could not you get‘ the whole rights of the Commonwealth by a provision allowing the Commissioner who sold the land to pass the title ? Mr. BULLITT. The Commissioner who sells the land does not pass the title. M r. MOORE. Can you not authorize him? Mr. BULLITT. No, sir. When he sells the land for taxes, he cannot pass a title, but simply passes the right of the de— linquent tax-payer; and when the delin— quent tax-payer comes forward and pays his taxes, he gets his land. There is a dis- tinction between passing title and usufruct. The usufruct or possession of the land may be passed by one system, but the title is to be passed by a system peculiar to itself. Mr. BECKNER. We have had a little too peculiar a system about the Registership of the Land Ofiice. Mr. BULLITT. The Supreme Court of the United States has passed upon the ques- tion. The State Courts have, by an un- broken line of decisions, from the beginning of the Commonwealth down to the present time, held that you cannot violate that com- pact with Virginia by passing laws, and then there must be office found in order to authorize a forfeiture, and I propose to create office found, which will operate as a forfeiture by prescribing the time for them to do certain things, and if they fail to do those things of record, that is office found, and that authorizes a forfeiture. Mr. BECKNER. The Delegate from McCracken is talking of one thing, and I am talking of another. Mr. BULLITT. You are talking about the Register of the Land Office 2' Mr. BECKNER. Yes, sir. BULLIT'I‘———MOORE They can get tax BECKNER [November 22. Mr. BULLITT. I say that if the things we are talking about have to be done, we have to have a Register of the Land Oflice to do it. Mr. BECKNER. There is where we differ. I say when the time comes we will have these lands brought back to the ownership of the Commonwealth by opera- tion of a Constitutional amendment or statute passed by the General Assembly. We will have ample power to provide that the lands owned by the Commonwealth shall pass to the individual who may buy them. The truth is, that those lands held under the old grants have all of them been since patented by the State. It will be found by inquiry that the State has issued patents on all such lands, and they are claimed now under authority of the State of Kentucky as well as by those who got their grants from the State of Virginia. I desire to know if the State of Kentucky,after having been once paid for the lands, will, when they have been forfeited to the State, because the parties holding the old Vir- ginia grants have failed to do the things necessary to hold the land, undertake to sell them again. Mr. BULLITT. Has this belonged to Kentucky ’? Mr. BECKNER. Not if it was granted before Kentucky became a State. Mr. BULLITT. They were granted by the State of Virginia, and by virtue of their being within the boundary of the State of Kentucky, the State of Kentucky has the police control over them, and that Com- monwealth has never passed a title to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, except by virtue of its obligation under the compact between the State of Kentucky and the State of Virginia. Those lands are within the borders of Kentucky, and Kentucky has the police control over the land, and, if I may go a little farther, I may say that the Commonwealth of Kentucky never had any thing except the eminent domain. It occupied the status of the Lord of the Fee. V'rginia passed to Kentucky that Lord- land ever EXEC UTIVE DEPARTMENT. 11 Saturday,] B'ULLITT-BE0KNER. [November 22 . ship of the Fee, but the simple title was already parted with by the Commonwealth of Virginia, and it had no right to part with it again. Now, by virtue of Ken- tucky’s occupying _the attitude of Lordship of the Fee, and being entitled to the con- trol of the land in the regulation of the police system of the State, it may cause those titles to be forfeited, but it can never forfeit any thing without ofiice found. It is one of the fundamental principles of our Government. It is one of the principles embodied in the Bill of Rights, which we have but recently adopted. It was in the Bill of Rights of our old Constitution, and we cannot get rid of it. There must be judgment, or, in other words, ofiice found before any thing can be forfeited. I pro- pose that we forfeit those lands, and put them in the hands of somebody to pay taxes on them. _ Until we do that there is no possible chance to get taxes paid on the lands, and it is unjust to the balance of the Commonwealth to leave those lands in that condition—over half a million acres that we can receive no taxes on. The inhabi- tants of that part of the country are pro- tected as much as the inhabitants of other parts of the State, and those lands ought to help pay the taxes, the expenses for the management of the Government of the State, and I do not see how we can get rid of the difiiculty except by forfeiting the land and passing the title to somebody else. They are bound by the compact with Virginia not to pass any title, and not to take those lands away, but respect those . titles ; but it was not the duty to respect those titles and let the people use the lands without paying taxes, and the forfeiture is the only way to get rid of the difiiculty. Mr. BECKNER. The gentleman has given a luminous exposition of a subject ‘which will come before the Convention at a future time. I am a member of the Com~ mittee having that matter in charge, and it will be useful to us, and after'awhile to the Convention; but what I insist on is, it has nothing on earth to do with the question under consideration. If it is found that the people holding Virginia grants shall forfeit them under a clause of this Consti- tution, or under a provision of the General Assembly hereafter, we will have full power to forfeit these lands. What 1 propose new is to abolish this Registership of the Land Ofiice, which I say is putting a cloud on the titles of people honestly owning the land, and who ought not to be forced to go into Court and litigate about titles that the (cm- monwealth, through this officer, has put them in possession of. Now, my friend from Pike has made an objection which is fully covered by my substitute. My sub- stitute provides that the General Assembly shall make provision for the custody of the records and for granting certified copies, so that persons having litigation in Courts about those lands shall get copies of patents and have them properly certified. We find that the Insurance Bu- reau is under the control of the Auditor, and it discharges its duty just as well as if it had a separate department. It is an im- portant part of our State Government, and yet it is under the control of the Auditor. Now the Registership of the -Land Office, . as I said before, is an advertisement to the world that the State of Kentucky has wild and unappropriated lands, when the fact is, it has none; yet it is issuing patents con- tinually. Land in Franklin county can be patented. Anybody who goes and pays five cents per acre gets an order of survey, and the surveyor makes the survey, and then the order and survey are returned to the Register, and he issues a patent, and presents it to the Governor. who, under the law, is bound to sign the patent. I have heard the present Governor, and his prede- cessor too, say that they were always squeamish about signing these patents, be- cause they felt, when ;they were doing it, that they were signing something that might be a fraud on other people. My personal interest is to have these titles as EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] BEcKNER—~C0K-MART1N--BURNAM. [November 22 . confused as possible, because I will have chances to make fees in clearing the clouds ; but my judgment says that we ought to abolish what is not only costing the State money. but is useless and absolutely harm- ful. We ought to do away with every place that is not needed in administering the affairs of Government. It will not do to leave the matter to the General Assem- bly, which may create, but will never abol- ish an oflice. The objection of my friend from Mc- Cracken need not disturb this body. In the case of the lands embraced by the old Virginia grants, the “simple title" about which he so learnedly talks has already passed. The State of Kentucky may get control of them by virtue of forfeiture for taxes or some other process yet to be adopted ; but it will certainly have power to dispose of the interest it may thus acquire without the intervention of a Register. The diffi- culty in the mind of the Delegate from Pike will be amply met by the provisions of my substitute, and I call the attention of the Convention to the fact that no one has controverted my statement that there are no vacant lands in Kentucky. Mr. CCX. I have very seldom in my I life called for the yeas and nays on any question, but this is a very important mat- ter, and I will call for the yeas and nays. Mr. DEHAVEN. I second the call. The roll-call resulted as follows. YEAR—28. Amos, D. C. Harris, Geo. C. Ayres, W. W. Johnston, P. P. Beckham, J. C. Kennedy, Hanson Beckner, W. M. Lassing, L. W. Birkhead, B. T. Mackoy, W. H. Blackwell, Joseph Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. McElroy, W. J. Chambers, G. D. Pettit, Thos. S. Clardy, John D. Ramsey, W. R. Cox, H. Rodes, Robert Doris, W. F. Sachs, Morris A. Edrington, W. J. Smith, H. H. English, Sam. E. Washington, George Graham, Samuel West, J. F. NAYs—45. Allen, C. T. Jonson, Jep. C. l Auxier, A. J. Kirwan, E. E. Bennett, B. F. Lewis, W. W. Blackburn, James May, John S. Brents, J. A. M cDermott, E. J. Bronston, C. J. MeHenry, H. D. Brown, J. S. Miller, Will. Brummal, J. M, Miller, W. H. Buchanan, Nathan Montgomery, J. F. Buckner, S. B. Moore, Laban T. Bullitt, W. G. Muir, J. W. Burnam, Curtis F. Nunn. T. J. Coke, J. Guthrie O’Hara, R. H. DeHaven, S. E. Phelps, Zack Durbin, Charles Pugh, Sam’l J. Elmore, T. J. Smith, W. Scott Farmer, H. H. Swango, G. B. Field, W. W. Trusdell, George Forgy. J. M. Goebel, W’illiam Hanks, Thos. H. Hines, J. S. Holloway, J. W. ABSENT—27. Twyman, I. W. \Vhitaker, Emery Wood, J. M. Mr. President Clay. Allen, M. K. ' James. A. D. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Askew, J. F. McChord, Wm. C. Berkele, \Nm. Moore, J. H. Boles, S. H. Parsons, Rob’t T. Carroll, John D. Petrie, H. G. Forrester, J. G. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Phelps, John L. Quicksall, J. E. Spalding, I. A. Hendrick, W. J. Straus, F. P. Hines, Thomas H. Williams, L. P. V- Hogg, S. P. Woolfolk, J. F. Hopkins, F. A. Young, Bennett H. Jacobs, R. P. So the substitute was rejected. The PRESIDENT pro fem. The ques- tion is on the adoption of the section as re— ported by the Committee. The section was reported. Mr. MARTIN. Did not the Committee of the Whole adopt an amendment to that section‘? The PRESIDENT pro z‘cm. does not show it. A vote being taken, the section was adopted. Mr. BURNAM. I propose to add an- other section to the report, to be numbered 28. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: The Attorney-General, Secretary of State, The record EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 1s Saturd ay,] ll/IACKOY—BURNAM—RAMSEY—CLARDY. [November 22 . Register of the Land Otfice, Auditor of Public Accounts, Treasurer, and Commis- sioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics, shall each be at least twenty-five years of age, and shall have been a citizen of the United States and of the State of Kentucky at least five years next preceding his elec- tion. Mr. MACKOY. I would call the atten- tion of the gentleman to the fact that cer- tain qualifications of certain oflicers are al- ready provided for under section 24, and it would be proper, therefore, to strike out from his amendment the officers whose qualifications are already fixed by section 24. Mr. BURNAM. I was not aware of that. In order to make it conform to that section, I will have it to apply only to those oflicers that are not embraced by that, and will limit the additional section to the Sec— retary of State, which office is not covered by the previous section. Read the section as it would then stand. e The section was then read, and is as fol- lows: The Secretary of State shall be at least twenty-five years of age, and shall have been a citizen of the United States and State of Kentucky at least five years next preceding his election. The PRESIDENT pro tem. There are other amendments that have precedence over that amendment. The READING CLERK. The gentle- man from Boyd has offered the following as an additional section: All the oflicers mentioned in this article shall be paid for their services by salary, and not otherwise. A vote being taken on said amendment, it was adopted. .. A vote being taken on the amendment of the Delegate from Madison, it was adopted. ' The PRESIDENT pro tem. Report section 28. The section was read, and is as follows: The first election under the Constitution, for Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Treas- urer, Auditor of Public Accounts, Register of the Land Oflice, Attorney-General and Secretary of State, shall be held on Mr. RAMSEY. to that section. Mr. CLARDY. I have an amendment. The amendment of Mr. Ramsey was read, and is as follows: I have an amendment Amend section 28 by striking out the word “and,” in the third line of said sec-~ tion, and after the word “State,” and be- fore the word “shall,” in the ,fourth line thereof, insert the following: “And Com- missioner of Agriculture, Labor and Sta- tistics.” Mr. CLARDY. I will withdraw my amendment, as it was to the same effect. A vote being taken, the amendment of Mr. Ramsey was adopted. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Carlisle moves to fill the blank as follows: The Tuesday after the first Monday in November in the year 1891. Mr. MONTGOMERY. In confidera- tion of the fact that the different Com- mittees who are to report will report dif- ferent lengths of terms for different officers, and that this question cannot be safely settled until the terms of the different oflicers are fixed by this Convention, I think it would be best to pass that section until we get through with the question as to the terms of officers, and the times of the election of other officers, so that they may all conform.- Therefore, I make the motion to postpone the consideration of this section until a later day in ‘the session of this Convention. The PRESIDENT. That would post- pone the whole section. The gentleman’s object would be accomplished by voting down the the amendment which has just been read. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I suppose it would be reached better by my motion, which is to postpone the consideration of that section, because it relates to nothing 14 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT; Saturday,] DEHAVEN—BLACKBURN—HARRIS, [November 22 .. except the time of election, and not to any other subject. The motion being put, was carried. Mr. DEHAVEN. I would like to ask the unanimous consent of the Convention to insert one word in section 18. It will be remembered that section 17 was so amended by the Convention as to read thus: “Should the Governor be impeached and removed from office.” That amendment was adopted. There is also a similar provision in regard to the Lieutenant-Governor. I want that section to read in this way : “If, during the vacancy of the office of Governor, the Lieutenant-Governor shall be impeached and removed from office,” so that identical- ly the same provision .will apply to the Lieutenant-Governor as to the Governor. I do not want to have to go through the formality of moving to reconsider the vote by which that section was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Clerk suggests that that section was not adopted, but an amendment or substitute for the section was adopts‘. Report the substitute. The READING CLERK. dent pro tempera of the Senate shall be elected by each Senate as soon after it is organized as possible, the Lieutenant-Gov- ernor vacating his seat as President of the Senate until such election shall be made, and as often as there is a vacancy in the oflice of President pro tempore, another President pro tempore of the Senate shall be elected by the Senate if in session, andif, during the vacancy ofthe office of Govern- or, the Lieutenant-Governor shall be im- peached, removed from office— Mr. DEHAVEN. I want the “ and” put in before the word moved.” The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the suggestion of the Delegate from Old- ham to insert the word “and ” will be adopted. Mr. BLACKBURN. I move that the report of the Committee as amended be printed and recommitted to the Committee, word “ lee- “ A Presi- ‘ with a view of adjusting and making it agree with the reports of other Commit— tees when they shall be made. Mr. HARRIS. Before this is recommit- ted, I desire to call the attention of the Convention to section 10. If I understood the purport of the Convention’s action on that section in the amendment that it adopted, the object was to have the appli- cation made to the Governor for a pardon filed away in his office, so that the public might have access to it, and see who the petitioners were, and what representations they had made, and in that way to some extent check misrepresentation_and exagger- ation ; but I call the attention of the Conven- tion to the fact that as the amendment now stands, that has not been accomplished. After stating that “he shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, commute sen- tences, grant reprieves and pardons, except in cases of impeachment,” the amendment says: “ And he shall file with each applica- tion a statement of the reasons for his decision thereon, which shall always be open for public inspection ”-that is, “ which statement shall always be open for public inspectitm.” Under that he can burn up the applications, if he wants to, or put them in his pocket, and file the state- ment that he makes of the reasons; and . that is the only thing that the public can see. "I do not think the Convention really meant that. I believe the object of the Convention was to have the applications ' filed away, so that people might see the applications. The PRESIDENT. I would suggest to the gentleman that he write his amend- ment, and it may be considered by unani- mous consent. Mr. HARRIS. I would amend by in- serting after the word “ which” the follow— ing: “application and statement shall be filed away.” Mr. JOHNSTON. Has it passed the stage of amendment‘? The PRESIDENT. Yes; no amend- EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. ' 15 Saturday,] J OHNSTON—HARRIS—JONSON. [N ovember 22. ment can come in excep y Birkhead, B. T‘ May, John S. consent. Mr. JOHNSTON. I object. I offered that amendment, and it was understood that the reasons for the action of the Governor were to be filed away for public inspection. It was not intended to have the whole rec- ord, which would reproduce the scandals of the neighborhood, open for public inspec- tion, subject to be overhauled by every curious scandal-monger who might come here for the purpose. The amendment is in exactly the shape that I believe it ought to be in, and I believe it is in exactly the shape the Convention intended it to be, and I object to reopening the question. Mr. HARRIS. I move to reconsider the vote by which it was adopted. I was going upon the idea that the mover of the amend- ment intended the application to be a mat- ter of, public record. I know that was the argument made, and the object, as I think, was to restrain applicants from making ex— aggerated statements or misrepresentations to the Governor, and this, in some sense, would prevent it. I, therefore, move a re- consideration of the vote by which that section was adopted, with a view of moving this amendment: adding after the word “ which ” the words“ application and state- ment.” Mr. MAY. I second the motion. Mr. JONSON Under the rules, that motion must necessarily lie over. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds the report is not disposed of. That rule applies only to matters perfected and dis- posed of. The Chair holds that the consid- eration of this report is not yet ended, and therefore that rule does not apply. Mr. BRONSTON. I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. CARROLL. I second it. The result of the roll-call is as follows: nus—46. Allen, C. T. Kirwan, E E. Amos, D. C. Lewis, W. W. Ayres, W. W. Mackoy, W. H. Blackwell, Joseph Bourland, H. R. Bronston, C. J. Buchanan, Nathan Bullitt, W. G. Carroll, J ohn D. McElroy, W. J. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Nunn, T. J. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack Chambers, G. D. Pugh, Sam'l J. Cox, H. Quicksall, J. E. Doris, W. F. Ramsey, W. R. Durbin, Charles Rodes, Robert Elmore, T. J. Smith, H. H. Forgy, J. M. Goebel, William Graham, Samuel Harris. Geo C. Swango, G. B. Trusdell, George Twyman, I. W. Washington, George Jacobs, R. P. West, J. F. Jonson, J ep. C. Whitaker, Emery Kennedy, Hanson Wood, J. M. says—27. Auxier, A. J. Hines, J. S. > Beckner, W. M. Johnston, P. P. Blackburn, James Lassing, L. W. ' Brents, J. A. . McDermott, E. J. Brown, J. S MeHenry, H. Brummal, J. M. Buckner, S. B. Burnam, Curtis F. Clardy, John D. Coke, J. Guthrie Miller, Will. Miller, W. H. Muir, J. W. O’Hara, R. H. Phelps, John L. DeHaven, S. E. Sachs, Morris A. Edrington, W. J. Smith, W. Scott Farmer H. H. M r. President Clay. Hanks, Thomas H. ABSENT—27. Allen, M. K. Holloway, J. W. Applegate, Leslie T. Hopkins, F. A. Askew, J. F. James, A. D. Beckham, J. C. Knott, J. Proctor Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm C. Boles, S, H. Moore, J H. English, Sam. E. Parsons, Rob’t T. Field, W. W. Petrie, H. G. Forrester, J. G. Spalding, I. A. Funk, J. T. Straus,‘F. P. Glenn, Dudley A. Hendrick, W. J. Hines, Thomas H. Hogg, S. P. Mr. CARROLL. Is this section now open for amendment? The PRESIDENT. No, sir, unless it is to the- original text of the section as not amended by an amendment of the Commit- tee of the Whole. Williams, L. P. V. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. 16 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] CARROLL—BLACKBURN—BECKNER—HARRIS. [November 22 . Mr. CARROLL. I desire to offer an amendment. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows Amend section 10 by inserting after the word “power,” in the first line, the words “after judgment,” so it will then read: “ He shall have power after judgment to remit fines and forfeitures, commute sen- tences " The PRESIDENT. The Chair will de- cide that those amendments that were adopted by the Convention cannot be amended by any insertion, unless they are reconsidered; and the Secretary will report whether that amendment will apply to the original text of the report of the Commit- tee upon the Executive Department, or whether it is an amendment to an amend- ment hitherto adopted by the Convention. The CLERK. It applies to the original text, as reported by the Committee. The PRESIDENT. If that is the case, it is in order. Mr. BLACKBURN. Would not the amendment of the Delegate from Simpson take precedence ‘? The PRESIDENT. If the amendment of the Delegate from Simpson is an amend- ment to an amendment adopted by this Convention. then the amendment is not in order. The vote by which that amendment was adopted has to be reconsidered; but if it is an amendment to the original text of the report of the Committee, it is now i'n order. Mr. HARRIS. It is an amendment to an amendment adopted by the Convention, and in order to reach it under the ruling of the Chair, I move to reconsider the vote by which that amendment was adopted. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the amendment to be reconsidered. The READING CLERK. Insert after the word “impeachment,” in the third line, these words: “ And he shall file with each application a statement of the reasons for his decision thereon, which shall always be open for public inspection.” The PRESIDENT. The question is on the reconsideration of the vote by which the amendment just read was adopted. The motion being put, was carried. Mr. HARRIS. I move that after the word “which,” in that amendment,the words “application and statement” shall be in- serted, so that it would read: “Which ap- plication and statement shall always be open for public inspection.” Mr. BECKNER. I want to call the at- tention of the Chair to the fact that the amendment offered just new by the Dele- gate from Henry was voted upon in its exact terms when it was up before, and disposed of. Can it now be considered again‘? The PRESIDENT. No. sir; it cannot. Mr. BLACKBURN. I hope that amend- ment will not prevail. I think there are grave reasons why it should not be adopted. It occurs to me that the amendment as made to that section by the Convention covers every ground desirable on that ques- tion. It furnishes to every person who wants to know why the Governor did a certain thing, why he granted a pardon, The amendment adopted by the Convention says that the Governor shall keep on file in his oflice a statement of the reasons why he did this. If the amendment of the Dele- gate from Simpson should be adopted, it requires the Governor to keep open for in- spection every petition, every remonstrance, every private letter that has influenced him in his action. Those private letters must be open, not to the inspection of one who examines those matters and wants to inform himself for the public good, but to a gossip- monger, a mischief-maker, in his neighbor- hood, who believes that one of his citizens has signed a petition, and another has signed a remonstrance; who may believe that the Governor has received a private communication, a confidential communica- tion, from some citizen of the locality where the offense charged was committed ; and he remitted a fine, or refused the same. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 17 Saturday,] BLACKBURN—HA KRIS—JONSON. [November 22. goes there to delve among those records and find out, for what? For the public good? No, but in order that he may make mischief at home among his neighbors. This may hap- pen. An application for Executive clemency goes to the Governor. He is in doubt as to the merit of the matter. He has a friend in that neighborhood whom he can trust. He knows that he will give him a fair, full statement of all the facts in the case. He writes a letter to that friend, and receives an answer from him, suggesting that Exec- utive clemency should not be extended to that party. Do we propose to require the Executive of our State to keep that confi- dential letter—that letter written to him in order to enable him to discharge his duties fairly and _fully to the people of the Com- monwealth—open to public inspection ? I can see no good policy or good purpose to be accomplished by that. The amendment, as adopted by this Convention, provides that he shall keep on file the reasons for his ofiicial act, which may be a word spoken, a letter written, a petition filed, or remon- strance. How can we determine what it is that brings the Executive of this State to such determination as to authorize him and compel him to act under his oath in a given state of case? It is hard for us i to tell what motives actuate us under cer- tain conditions. > So multifarious are the circumstances surrounding us, that we sometimes take very important steps in life, and yet, if asked why we do it, it would be diflicult for any one to tell exact- ly the impelling power—the motive that induced us to do it. I only suggest this: that the report, as adopted by the Conven- tion, I think is full and fair enough. Cer- tainly, we do not want to establish by this Constitution any v-isitorial Court, or open up a door through which the inquisitive can enter and make mischief, contrary to public good. -Mr. HARRIS. I am one of those who do not much believe in secrecy in a Repub- lic. I believe that when the Governor acts upon an application for pardon, he ought to act upon the truth, and I say that the truth hurts nobody. If the truth alone is repre— sented to him in the application, then he has the truth before him, and his action can be in accordance with truth and with justice to all parties; and the very reason why I want these applications so that the public can inspect them is, that they may be made true. I do not want the Governor, in exer- cising Executive clemency, to act upon a misrepresentation of the truth, or an exag- geration of the truth. I want him to have the truth before him; and if these misrepre- sentations are to be left open for the peo- ple’s inspection, I say that the applicants will be very careful that they make no mis- representations. If a they only make such representations as are true, that is all right; and if the Governor acts upon them, it is all right. That is the kind of ground I want him to have. I want him to act upon the truth alone ; and it is for the purpose of get- ting that truth before him that I want these matters published; and I do not think it is a good idea to allow him to act upon mat- ters in a secret way of that kind, and then burn the whole record up, and say to the public: “ Here are my reasons.” Mr. J ONSON. I fully concur with all that the Delegate from Simpson has said; and in answer further to the remarks made by the Delegate from Woodford, I would say that the act of the Governor in mak- ing these remissions is a public act, and that no sort of private influence can properly enter into his consideration as to whether he ought to grant or withhold a pardon; that no sort of private communication, with any propriety, be considered by him, and is not considered by him ; and it is no sense an innovation on privacy and confidence ex- isting between individuals that this informa- tion ought to be spread at large before the public; and whatever comes to him as $8. pri- vate communication from one citizen to him as another citizen, is not involved in,‘ this issue; and that it is necessary that he shall 18 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Eat‘ur‘daj] MOELRDY—MCHENRY—iCARROLL—BRONSTON. not consider anything of that sort, and I say that he will not do it. I, therefore, am in ' favor of the amendment. Mr. MoELROY. I now move the pre— vious question. Mr. MCHENRY. I second it. Mr. CARROLL. I rise to a parliament- ary inquiry. Can the amendment I offered awhile ago be voted upon ? The PRESIDENT. Has that amend- ment already been proposed and voted down? Mr. CARROLL. It has. The PRESIDENT. It can only come up by a reconsideration of the vote by which it was defeated. Mr. CARROLL. motion. The PRESIDENT. That will be in order as soon as the present order for the previous question is disposed of. Does the gentleman withdraw his motion for the previous question ? Mr. MCELROY. I moved the previous question to put and end to the matter. Mr. CARROLL. I hope the Conven- tion will vote the previous question down. I call for the yeas and nays on the motion. ' Mr. BRONSTON. I will second the call. The gentleman offered his amend- ment in good faith, and the reconsideration was ordered in order that all amendments that Delegates might desire should be ofi‘ered. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will give the status of the question. The Dele- gate from Allen moves the previous ques- tion. If the previous question is ordered, the Delegate from Carroll cannot move a reconsideration of the vote by which the amendment he sent up was rejected. The Chair holds that that amendment, as an original amendment, is not in order, having once been voted down; and the only way the amendment can come up is by way of reconsideration. If the motion for the previous question prevails, that motion is cut off, and the Delegate will not have the I now make that privilege of bringing up his amendment. Mr. W. H. MILLER. Is it in order to amend the motion for the previous ques- tion ? The PRESIDENT. No, sir. Mr. CARROLL. I would like to know how far that previous question will reach‘? The PRESIDENT. The Chair under- stood the gentleman to move the previous question on the section and amendment. It is in the discretion of the Delegate to make his motion apply to the section, or to any amendment. Mr. MCELROY. My object is that the whole thing shall not be re-opened. I move the previous question upon the amendment of the Delegate from Simpson, and put an end to the matter. The PRESIDENT. The Chair does not understand the Delegate yet. Does he move the previous question upon the sec- tion and all amendments? Mr. MCELROY. Yes, sir. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll, which resulted as follows: YEAS—28. Allen, C. T. Hines, J. S. Amos, D. C. Jacobs, R. P. Auxier, A. J. Johnston, P. P. Ayres, W. W. Lassing, L. W. Beckham, J. C. Lewis, W. W. Beckner, W. M. McDermott, E. J. Blackburn, James McElroy, W. J. Brents, J. A. McHenry, H. D. Buckner, S. B. Miller, W. H. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Clardy, John D. Nunn, T. J. DeHaven, S. E. Rodes, Robert Doris, W. F. Whitaker, Emery Edrington, W. J. Wood, J. M. NAYS—42. Bennett, B. F. Kennedy. Hanson Birkhead, B. T. Kirwan, E. E. Blackwell, Joseph Mackoy, W. H. Bourland, H. R. Martin, W. H. Bronston, C. J. May, John S. Brummal, J. M. Buchanan, Nathan Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Miller, Will. Montgomery, J. F. Moore, Laban T. Pettit, Thos. S. Phelps, Zack November 22 .W EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 19 Saturday,] CARROLL—HARRIS—BLACKBUBIN—BRONSTON. [November 22 . Cox, H. Pugh, Sam’l J. , The PRESIDENT. The question is on Durbin, Charles Qllicksan, J- E- the adoption of the amendment as amended. jggfgg? JH grzrirjlsleyfivg R‘ A vote being taken on the same, it was Field, w. w. - Smith’, w. Scott adopted- ‘ Forgy, J. Swango, G. B. The PRESIDENT. The question is on Goebel, Wflham 951' usden, 616%?’ the motion of the Delegate from Henry to gzggf'sméigmél 61 Wig [13:21 01'1 G'eorg e reconsider the vote by which his amendment Hines,,Thor.nas. 11. West, J. F_ ’ to said section was defeated. Jonson, J ep. C. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—30. Allen, M. K. Hopkins, F. A. Applegate, Leslie T. James, A. D. Askew, J. F. Knott, J. Proctor Berkele, Wm. McChord, Wm. C. Boles, S. H. Moore, J. H. Brown, J. S. O’Hara, R. H. Bullitt, W. G. Parsons, Rob’t T. English, Sam. E. , Petrie, H. G. Forrester, J. G. Funk, J. T. Glenn, Dudley A. Hanks, Thos. H. Hendrick, W. J. Hogg, S. P. Holloway, J. W. Phelps, John L. Sachs, Morris A. Spalding, I. A. Straus, F. P. Williams, L. P. V. Woolfolk, J. F. Young, Bennett H. So the motion for the previous question was lost. Mr. CARROLL. I desire to move to reconsider the vote by which the Conven- tion refused to adopt the amendment to in- sert the words “ after judgment ” in section 10. The PRESIDENT. Your motion will be considered after the amendment of the Delegate from Simpson is disposed of. A vote being taken on the amendment of Mr. Harris, it was adopted.- Mr. HARRIS. I offer another amend- ment to the same. It was read, and is as follows: Amend the amendment by adding thereto, after the word “inspection,” the following : “And a copy of said application‘ and state- ment shall be filed for public inspection in the Circuit Clerk’s ofiice of the county wherein the ofl'ense was committed.” A vote being taken on the amendment, and a division of the vote being called for, it resulted 32 in the aflirmative and 34 in the negative; so the amendment was rejected. Mr. BLACKBURN. Was not there a yea and nay vote on the adoption of the amendment now spoken of when it was up before ? Mr. CARROLL. I know personally there was not, and it was suggested by one or two Delegates if there had been a yea and nay vote it would have carried. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will inform the Chair if there was a yea and nay call on the amendment. If there was not, the Delegate will have leave to make his motion. - Mr. BRONSTON. I might possibly as- sist the Secretary by making this suggestion: This amendment was offered by the Dele- gate from Henry to the Committee’s report to insert the words “ after judgment.” On that there was no roll-call. The vote re- ferred to by the Delegate from Woodford, where there was aroll-call, was on an amend- ment offered to strike out the words “ after judgment, after conviction,” in the substi- tute offered by myself. On that there was a roll-call, and it was voted in the negative. The PRESIDENT. The recollection of the Secretary is, as he has not the Journal of that date here, that there was no roll- call, and the Chair will so decide, and the Delegate has the right to make the motion The section, as it would read with the proposed amendment, was read, and is as follows: He shall have power, after judgment, to tences, to grant reprieves and pardons, ex- cept in cases of impeachment; and he shall file with each a plication a statement of ‘the reasons for his ecision thereon,which state- ment and application shall always be ‘open for public inspection. In cases of treason l he shall have power to grant reprieves until remit fines and forfeitures, to commute sen- ». 20 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Saturday,] McHENRY—DRRROIZIILB1.35153111€NIBRoNsTon=-DEHAvEN. [Noyemher 22 ,n the end of the next session of the General Assembly, in which the power of pardon- ing shall be vested; but he shall have no power to remit the fees of the Clerk, Sheriff, or Commonwealth’s Attorney, in penal or criminal cases. Mr. MCHENRY. This question has been debated more than any other before the Convention, and one or two votes taken upon it. I do not want to waste any more time upon it; for I presume every gentle- man in the Convention has made up his mind whether the Governor shall have the power ‘to grant pardons before or after con- viction. I therefore move the previous question. Mr. CARROLL. I second the motion. Mr. BLACKBURN. I move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table, and on that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. BRONSTON. I rise to a point of order: that the motion of the Delegate from Woodford is out of order; that the motion to reconsider has already been car- ried. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Ohio has moved the previous question, and the Delegate from Woodford has moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. Mr. BLACKBURN. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. MCHENRY. I will withdraw my motion. Mr. BRONSTON. I will call for the yeas and nays on the proposition of the Delegate from Henry. The PRESIDENT. It is moved by the Delegate from Woodford to lay the motion to reconsider the vote by which the amendment of the Delegate from Henry was defeated, on the table. Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point of order that the motion to reconsider has carried. The PRESIDENT. It has not carried, and the Secretary will report the matter and see if the Chair is not correct. Mr. BRONSTON. I so understood that it carried a moment ago. After the Dele- gate from Allen made his motion for the previous question there was a roll-call. The Delegate from Henry made a motion to reconsider the vote by which the words “after judgment” had been voted down,‘ and that was put by the Chair and carried, by a vote of 20 something on one side, and 38 on the other. Mr. McHENRY. How could he offer an amendment unless it was reconsidered ? The PRESIDENT. The vote by which the amendment of the Delegate from Henry was defeated was not reconsidered; but the Secretary will report the matter. The SECRETARY. The amendment to section 10, as amended by Mr. Harris, was adopted. The next minute I have is the motion by Mr. Carroll to reconsider the vote rejecting his amendment, which carried, and then Mr. MeHenry moved the previous question upon the adoption of the amend- ment. The PRESIDENT. The Chair stands corrected. The yeas and nays are de— manded on the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Henry. Mr. DEHAVEN. I sincerely hope that that amendment will not be adopted. Mr. BRONSTON. I would like to make a suggestion, that we consented to a with- drawal of the motion for the previous question on the understanding that there was to be no debate. Mr. DEHAVEN. Has the previous question been ordered? The PRESIDENT. No, sir. Mr. DEHAVEN. As has been suggested by the Delegate from Ohio, if there is any one question upon which we have had the most thorough discussion, it has been upon this section. We have discussed it world without end in Committee of the Whole, and we have discussed it in this House; and if we are ever to have a determination of our labors, it does occur to me that it is about time we are settling upon something; and I sincerely hope that the amendment EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 21 I Saturday,] BLACKBURN— CARROLL—BRONSTON. [November ‘.22 . of the? gentleman from Henry will ‘not pre- vail. Let us have an end of this thing. Mr. BLACKBURN, having arisen, and about to address the Chair—— Mr. BRONSTON. I move the previous question. Mr. CARROLL. I second it. Mr. BLACKBURN. I was on the floor before the gentleman rose The PRESIDENT. The Chair recog- nises the Delegate from Lexington. Mir. BLACKBURN. I rise for the pur— pose of making an inquiry. Mr. BRONSTON. I object to any (le- bate. Mr. BLACKBURN. I am accustomed to the objections of my friend from Lexing- ton, so they do not disturb me. Air. BRONSTON. So am I accustomed to the ingenious ways of the Delegate from Woodford. Mr. BLACKBURN. That section 11') was adopted by the Convention. Mr. BRONSTON. I object rWIr. BLACKBURN. I am asking for information. I want to know if a simple majority can amend that section after it has been already adopted; or whether, under our rule, it does not require more than that to reverse the action of the Convention ‘? M r. BRONSTON. 1 object. The PRESIDENT. A simple majority can amend it. . Mr. BLACKBURN. I move that this Convention do now adjourn. On that I call for the yeas and nays. Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point of order on that: on the motion for the pre- .vious question that motion is not in order. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is overruled. It is in order. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll, which resulted as follows: . ' YEAS—42. Allen, C. T. Jacobs, R. P. Auxier, A. J. Johnston, P. P. Ayres, W. W. Kennedy, Hanson Beckham, J. C. Lassin , L. W. ' Beckner, W. M. Lewis, I‘. W. Mackoy, W. H. Blackburn, James Brents, J. A. McDermott, EQJ. Brown, J. S. McElroy, W. J. Brummal, J. M. McHenrv, D. Buckner, S. B. Miller, WV H. Bullitt, W. G. Montgomery, J. F. Burnam, Curtis F. Muir, J. W. Clardy, John D. Nunn, T. J. DeHaven, S. E. Edrington, W. J. English, Sam E. Farmer, H. H. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. Hines, J. S. Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Rodes, Robert Sachs, Morris A. Swango, G. B. Washington, George Whitaker, Emery Hines, Thomas Wood, J. M. sun's—35. Amos, D. C. Holloway, J. WY. Bennett, B. F. J onsonfjo ep. C. Birkhead, B. T. Kirwan, E. E. Blackwell, Joseph ‘Martin, W. H. Bourland, H. R. Bronston, C. J. Buchanan, Nathan May, John S. Miller, Will. Moore, Laban 1‘ Carroll, John D. Pettit, Thos. Chambers, G. D. Phelps,‘ Zack Coke, J. Guthrie Quicksall, J. E. Cox, H. Ramsey, W. R. Doris, W. F. Smith, H. H. Durbin, Charles Smith, W. Scott Elmore, T. J. Trusdell, George Field, W. W. Twyman, I. IN. Forgy, J. M. Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. ABSENT——23. Allen, M. K. Knott, J. Proctor Applegate, Leslie T. McChord, ‘Wm. C. West, J..F. Mr. President Ciay. Askew, J. F Moore, J H. Berkele Wm. O’Hara, R. H. Boles, S. H. Parsons, Robt. T. Forrester, J. G. Petrie, H. G. Funk, J. T. Spalding, I. A Glenn, Dudley A. Straus, F. P. Hendrick, W. J. Williams, L. P. V. Hogg, S. P. Woolfolk, J. F. Hopkins, F. A. Young, Bennett H. James, A. D. Mr. BRONSTON. _I make the point that it requires a two-thirds vote to change a rule of the House. . The PRESIDENT. The Chair decides the point is not well taken. The House can adjourn at any time, if it is a simple adjournment. The Convention stands ad- journed until half-past 10 o’clock on Mon- day morning. ionoention Record 'Vol. 1 .] KENTUCKY CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Monday,] FRANKFURT, NOVEMBER 24, 1890. .% MCHENRY-——BECKHAM—APPLEGATE—ASK law. [No 60. J‘ [November 24 . The Convention was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Ne- ville. The Journal of Saturday’s proceedings was read.’ _ Mr. MCHENRY. I want to make a motion to have the Journal corrected. The Journal shows that the motion made by the Delegate from Henry to reconsider the vote by which his amendment was rejected was carried, and that that vote was reconsid- ered. There was a question raised at the ‘time by the Delegate from Lexington, and the Chair decided, according to the recol- lection of the Chair, that the vote rejecting the amendment of the Delegate from Henry was not reconsidered, and that was . ‘submitted to the Clerk, and the Clerk, in his minute at the time, had it that the vote was taken and the vote was reconsidered. At that time I agreed that that was cor- rect, but upon reflection and an examina- tion of the minutes of the Stenographer, I find that it was not reconsidered, and that the consideration of the question now is upon the motion of the Delegate from Henry, as to whether the vote rejecting his amendment shall be reconsidered, and I move to correct the Journal in that regard. Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point that that was decided by the Chair at the time. The PRESIDENT. Still it is in the pleasure of the Convention to correct a de- cision of the Chair. Mr. BRONSTON. It has been taken up and voted upon. The PRESIDENT. Yes. Mr. BRONSTON. Upon that I call the yeas and nays. I believe the question is whether the Journal shall be corrected. Did not the Clerk’s records show that the motion was reconsidered ? Mr. MCHENRY. My motion is to cor-' rect the Journal on that point. The roll-call was then proceeded with. Mr. APPLEGATE (during the roll- call). I ask to be excused from voting, as I was not here, and do not know any thing about it. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Delegate will be excused from voting on the question. Mr. ASKEW (answering to his name in the roll-call). Aye. Mr. BRONSTON. I object to the gen- tleman casting his vote. He was not here. Mr. ASKEW. I can get my informa— tion from anywhere I want to. a The PRESIDENT. That is a matter within the discretion of the Delegate. Mr. BECKHAM. I understand that the Stenographer’s report shows it was not cor- rect. - Mr. BRONSTON. I do not so under- stand. The PRESIDENT. The Delegate from Shelby can only explain his vote by unani— mous consent. The Chair will hold that debate is not in order. Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point that the Clerk is the only officer who keeps the official record of the vote of this Con- vention. The PRESIDENT. The Chair holds that the Delegate from Shelby is out of order, unless he rises to make a parliament’ ary,,inquiry. 2 APPROVAL or THE. JOURNAL. Monday,] My 'BRUNSTON—BECKHAMZMCHENRY-QCOKET Mr. BRONSTON. Do I understand that the roll-call has been begun ? The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir; and it has proceeded as far as the name of the Dele- gate from Shelby. , Mr. BECKHAM. May I ask what the fact is as shown by the notes of the Official Stenographer of this Convention? Mr. BRONSTON. I object. Mr. MCHENRY. I will state that the notes of the Stenographer show that it was not carried. 'The result of the roll-call was announced as follows : ' runs—31. Allen, C. T. McDermott, E. J. Askew, J. F. McElroy, W J. Ayres, W. W. MeHenry, H. D. Beckham, J. C. Miller, W. H. Beckner, W. M. Muir, J. W. Blackburn, James Nunn, T. J. Brummal, J. M. Phelps, John L. Buckner, S. B. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Rodes, Robert Edrington, W. J. Smith, H. H. Funk, J. T. Straus, F. P. Jacobs, R. P. Swango, G. B. J onson, J ep. C. Whitaker, Emery Johnston, P. P. Wood, J. M. Lewis, W. W. Mr.President Clay McChord, Wm. C. NAYS—34. Amos, D. C. Graham, Samuel Bennett, B. F. Harris, Geo. C. Birkhead, B. T. Hines, Thomas H. Blackwell, Joseph Kirwan, E. E. Bourland, H. R. May, John S. Bronston, C. J. Miller, Will. Buchanan, Nathan Moore, Laban T. Burnam, Curtis F. Parsons, Rob’t T. Carroll, John D. Pettit, Thos. S. Chambers. G. D. Quicksall, J E. Coke, J. Guthrie Ramsey, W. R. Cox, H Sachs, Morris A. Doris, W. F. Smith, W. Scott Durbin, Charles Twyman, I. W. Elmore, T. J. Washington, George Field, W. W. West, J. F. Forgy, J. M. Woolfolk, J. F. , ABSENT—~28. Allen, M. K. Hines, J. S. Auxier, A. J. Hogg, S. P. Berkele, Wm. Holloway, J. W. Boles, S. H. Hopkins, F. A. s Brents, J. A. James, A. D. Brown, J. S. Knott, J. Proctor Bullitt, W. G. Lassing, L. W. Clardy, John D. Mackoy, W. H. English, Sam. E. Martin, W. H. Forrester, J. G. Montgomery, J. F.. Glenn, Dudley A. O’Hara, R. H. Goebel, Wm. Petrie, H. G. Hanks, Thos. H. Phelps, Zack Hendrick, W. J. Trusdell, George - 'EXcUsEn—T ‘ Applegate, Leslie T. Spalding, I. A. Farmer, H. H. Williams, L. P. V.. Kennedy, Hanson Young, Bennett H. Moore, J. H. Mr. MCHENRY. I move that we have’ a call of the roll. The object of my mo- tion is that this is an important vote we- have just been taking, and it ought not to’ be considered by a thin House. A motion for a call of the roll is always in order, I‘ believe‘? The PRESIDENT. Yes. Mr. BRONSTON. That vote has been~ announced by the Chair. The PRESIDENT. Certainly. , Mr. BRONSTON. I make the point what did I understand the Delegate to ask for‘? Mr. MCHENRY. I move to call the’ roll, to see how many members are pres-- ent. Mr. COKE. I rise to a point of order: that the vote has been taken, and no call of " the House can be had until the vote is an- nounced. The PRESIDENT. It has been an- nounced. Mr. COKE. Then a call of the House cannot affect this question. The PRESIDENT. No, sir. A vote being taken, the motion was car- - ried. Leaves of Absence. Leaves of absence were granted to the-- Delegates from Todd, Boone, McCracken, Wayne, First District city of Louisville, ._ Jefl'erson, Harrison, Owsley, Harlan, Gar-- & rard, Wayne and Clinton. [November *24’... RESOLUTION S. Monday,] MCHENRY—MILLER—FARMER. [November 24 . The result of the roll-call was as fol’ lows : - YEAS—82. Allen, C. T. James, A. D. Allen, M. K. Jonson, Jep. C. Amos, D. C. Johnston, P. P. Applegate, Leslie T. Kennedy, Hanson Askew, J. F. Kirwan, E. E. Auxier, A. J. Knott, J. Proctor Ayres, W. W. Lewis, W. W. Beckham, J. C. May, John S. Beckner, W. M. McChord, Wm. C. Bennett, B. F. McDermott, E. J. Birkhead, B. T. McElroy, W. J. Blackburn, James McHenry, H. D. Blackwell, Joseph Miller, Will. Bourland, H. R. Miller, W. H. Brents, J. A. Montgomery, J. F. Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. Brown, J. S. Moore, Laban T. Brummal, J. M. Muir, J. W. Buchanan, Nathan Nunn, T. J. Buckner, S. B. Parsons, Robert T. Burnam, Curtis F. Pettit, Thos S. Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Phelps, John L. Pugh, Sam’l J. Quicksall, J. E. Cox, H. Ramsey, W. R. DeHaven, S. E. > Rodes, Robert Doris, W. F. Sachs, Morris A. Durbin, Charles Smith, H. H. Edrington, W. J. Smith, W. Scott Elmore, T. J. Spalding, I. A. Farmer, H. H. Straus, F. P. Field, W. W. Swango, G. B. Forgy, J. M. Trusdell, George Funk, J. T. Twyman, I. W. Glenn, Dudley A. West, J. F. Graham, Samuel Harris, Geo. C. Whitaker, Emery Williams, L. P. V. Hines, Thomas H. Wood, J. M. Holloway, J. W. 'Woelfolk, J. F. Hopkins, F. A. Young, Bennett H. Jacobs, R. P. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—18. Berkele, Wm. Hines, J. S. Boles, S. H. Hogg, S. P. Bullitt, W. G. Lassing, L. W Clardy, John D, Mackoy, W. H English, Sam. E. Martin, W. H Forrester, J. G. O’Hara, R H Goebel, William Petrie, H. G Hanks, Thomas H. Phelps, Zack Hendrick, W. J. Washington, George The PRESIDENT. The question is on the approving of the Journal. If there is no objection, the Journal will .be consider- ed as approved. A DELEGATE. Iobject. The PRESIDENT. The vote will then be taken. The vote being taken, the Journal was approved. The PRESIDENT. Petitions are now in order. Reports from Standing Commit- tees are in order. Reports from Special Committees are in order. Motions and res- olutions. Resolutions. Mr. MOHENRY. I offer the following resolution. for Thanksgiving; but as we have a full House, I think we had just as well con- sider it now. The resolution was read, and is as fol- lows: Resolved, That when the Convention ad- journs at its morning session on Wednes- day, the 26th inst, it will adjourn to meet at 10:30 o’clock A. M. on Friday, the 28th inst. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I have a substi- tute for that. The substitute was read, and is as fol-- lows: Resolved, That when the Convention shall adjourn on Wednesday, the 26th, that. it adjourn to meet again on Monday, De- cember 1st, 1890, at the regular hour. ' Mr FARMER. I have a resolution I want to send up as an amendment. The PRESIDENT. Upon consideration of the matter, the Chair will hold that the original resolution providing for an adjourn-~ ' ment suspends or changes the rule, and will require a two-thirds vote to take it up, or- else it will have to lie over one day. Mr. MCHENRY. I thought probably it ' would be the pleasure of the House to take it up and consider it now; but I do not want to be placed in the attitude of taking a two-thirds vote to carry my resolution- I do not care to consider it. now; it is in regard to the adjournment‘ 4 RESOLUTION S. Monday,] MCHENRY—BRONs'roN—FARMER—PETTI'r—APPLEGATE. [November 24. when the substitute of the Delegate from Henderson only requires a majority. The PRESIDENT. It only takes two- thirds to take it up, and then a majority can carry it. Mr. MoHENRY. I move to suspend the rules and take it up, and determine it this morning. Mr. BRONSTON. On that I call the yeas and nays. Mr. MCHENRY. I will withdraw the motion. m Mr. FAR M ER. Will you have my sub- stitute read ‘? ' The PRESIDENT. Certainly. The substitute offered by the Delegate from Henderson, as an additional section to report of Committee on Executive Ofii- cers for State at Large was read, and is as follows: In case of rebellion, or armed resistance to the law, of large bodies of men, he may, by proclamation, declare that he will par- don all who will in a specified time surren- der to the civil authorities, and may par- don such persons before trial. Mr. PETTIT. I offer a resolution that I desire to be considered at this time. The resolution reads as follows: WHEREAS, It has been alleged by a distinguished Delegate in this Convention, that the laws of Kentucky have been and are being practically nullified, causing the State Treasury to be defrauded of a sum of money almost equal to one half million dol- lars; and that defects .and conflicts be- tween officials in the execution of the laws, with attendant losses to the people, have been admitted by another distinguished Delegate on this floor. Now, to remedy this great evil and simplify the duties of other Delegates in this Convention in de- vising the best means possible to remedy such gross irregularities, Resolved, That a select Committee of three Delegates, composed of the Delegate from Hart (Mr. Buckner), the Delegate from Lexington (Mr. Bronston‘), and the Delegate from Louisville (Mr. McDer- mott), be selected by this Convention to examine all the facts connected therewith, and submit such suggestions as will, in their judgment, secure the faithful execu- tion of the laws, and the prevention of such losses to the Treasury of this State; and that this Committee be requested to report to this Convention at as early a day as practicable. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer an amendment to that resolution. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I havea commu- nication from the County Clerk of Lincoln which I desire to have referred to the Special Committee, of which the Delegate from Anderson is Chairman. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it willbe so referred. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I would like to ask the Delegate, with the consent of the Convention, to strike my name from the resolution. The PRESIDENT. The Convention has not inserted your name. That is a matter of private arrangement between the Delegate and the Delegate offering it. Mr. PETTIT. I have heard the request made by the Delegate from Louisville, but I think he is one of the men who ought to be on this Committee, and I would rather submit that to the Convention. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington, Mr. Bronston, was read, as follows: That the Committee will also inquire in- to the operation of the Auditor’s Agents’ collection of revenue- by his Agents and the Trustees of the Jury Fund; and also as to the number of pardons, respites and remis- sions granted before and after conviction, ‘ and make a full report thereon. Mr. APPLEGATE; I move to refer this resolution to the Committee on Rules. Mr. MCHENRY. I do not think that is an appropriate Committee for any thing of this sort. I do not think this Convention has a right to be investigating the capacity of anybody or any thing for this Conven- tion to know how to vote or make a Consti- tution. I do not think this is a subject on which this Convention ought to spend any time whatever, and I, therefore, move to lay the whole matter on the table. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 5 Monday,] PETTIT—BRONSTON—DURBIN—MCELROY. [November 24. Mr. PETTIT. I must call the yeas and nays on that proposition. Mr. DURBIN. ‘I second it. Mr. BRONSTON. Is a statement in order ? The PRESIDENT. Debate is out of, Y order. Mr. BRONSTON. I do not propose to I debate it. The PRESIDENT. Any debate is out of order. A statement is debate. Mr. BRONSTON. I certainly desire to explain the purpose I had in ofl'ering the amendment. I agree with the Delegate from Ohio that it ought to be laid on the table— ’ The PRESIDENT. The‘ Chair rules the Delegate has no right to debate the ques- tion. Mr. PETTIT. I call for the reading of the original resolution. The PRESIDENT. Without objection, it can be read. A DELEGATE. I object. On the motion to lay on the table, the roll-call resulted as follows: YEAS—57. Allen, C. T. Johnston, P. P. Allen, M. K. Kennedy, Hanson Amos, D. C. Kirwan, E. E. Applegate, Leslie T. Knott, J. Proctor Askew, J. F. McChord, Wm. C. Auxier, A. J. McDermott, E. J. Ayres, W. W. McElroy, W. J. Beckham, J. C. MeHenry, H. D. Beckner, W. M. Miller, W. H. Bennett, B. F. Montgomery, J. F. Blackburn, James Moore, J. H. Blackwell, Joseph Moore, Laban T. Bronston, C. J. Muir, J. W. Buchanan, Nathan N unn, T. J. Burnam, Curtis F. Carroll, John D. Phelps, John L. Rodes, Robert Cox, H. Sachs, Morris A. DeHaven, S. E. Smith, H. H. Edrington, W. J. Smith, W. Scott Funk, J. T. Spalding, I. A. Glenn, Dudley A. Straus, F. P. Graham, Samuel Swango, G. B. Harris, Geo. C. Trusdell, George Hendrick, W . J. West, J .' F. Hines, Thomas H. Williams, L. P. V. Holloway, J. W. Woolfolk, J. F. Hopkins, F. A. Young, Bennett H. Jacobs, R. P. Mr. President Clay. Jonson, Jep. C. mus-24. Birkhead, B. T. James, A. D. Bourland, H. R. Lewis, W. 'W. Brown, J. S. May, John S. Brummal, J. M. Miller, Will. Chambers, G. D. Parsons, Rob’t T. Coke, J. Guthrie Pettit, Thos. S; Doris, W. F. Pugh, Sam’l J. Durbin, Charles Quicksall, J. E. Elmore, T. J. Ramsey, W. R. Farmer, H. H. Twyman, I. W. Field, W. W. Whitaker, Emery Forgy, J. M. Wood, J. M. ABSENT—~19. Berkele, Wm. Hines, J. S. Boles, S. H. Hogg, S. P. Brents, J. A. Lassing, L. W. Buckner, S. B. Mackoy, W. H. Bullitt, W. G. Martin, W. H. Clardy, John D. O’Hara, R. H. English, Sam. E. Petrie, H. G. Forrester, J. G. Goebel, William Hanks, Thos. H. So the resolution and amendment were laid on the table. Mr. MONTGOMERY. I move that the Convention take up for consideration the report of the Joint Committee on Executive Department. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. Phelps, Zack Washington, George Executive Department. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will report the pending motion in reference to the matter under consideration. The SECRETARY. Upon adjourning Saturday afternoon the Convention was considering section 10. The question is on the adoption of the amendment of ,the Del- egate from Henry to said section, which reads: “Amend section 10 by inserting after the word “power,” in the first line, the words “after judgment.” Mr. MCELROY. I move to lay that motion on the table. The PRESIDENT. The Secretary will please report the motions which are pend- ing before the Chair takes action on the motion of the Delegate from Allen. S 6 EXECUTIVE DERARTMEN T. Monday,] FUNK——MCELROY—CARROLL—BLACKBURN. The SECRETARY. M r. Bronston moved the previous question, and before that was put Mr Blackburn moved an ad- journment, which was carried. Mr. FUNK. mation of the Chair whether the carrying of a motion to table does not carry with it the defeat of that section ? The PRESIDENT. It has always been held that a motion to table an amendment carries with it the bill, and the main resolu- tion and amendment go together. Mr. MCELROY. I will withdraw the motion, and move the previous question. The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion has already been moved by the Dele- gate from Lexington, and seconded. The motion being put, was carried, and the main question ordered. The PRESIDENT. The question now is upon the adoption of the amendment of the Delegate from Henry, which the Secre- tary will again report. The amendment was again read. Mr. CARROLL. I demand the yeas and nays on that. Mr. STRAUS. I second the call. Mr. BLACKBURN. Is not an amend- ment offered by the Delegate from Hender- son in order? The PRESIDENT. The previous ques- tion was moved last Saturday, and during the pendency of that motion, and until it was determined, no further amendments ‘ were in order; and unless the Delegate got unanimous consent to offer his amendment, the Chair will hold that the amendment is not in order, and the Secretary will note the Journal to see whether unanimous con- sent was given this morning. Mr. BLACKBURN. I do not know whether that consent was asked. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will ask whether there is any objection now‘? Mr. CARROLL. I object. The PRESIDENT. There is objection, and it is out of order. During the roll-call— I would like to ask infor- , i i i i l i i i Mr. ELMORE. I have paired with the gentleman from McCracken on this propo- sition. , The roll-call resulted as follows: YEAS~—-30. Amos. D. C. Hendrick, WV. J. Bennett, B. F. James, A. D. Birkhead, B. T. Kirwan, E. E. Blackwell, Joseph May, John S. Bourland, H. R. Miller, Will. Moore, Laban T. Parsons, Robert T. Pettit, Thomas S. Quicksall, J. E. Buchanan, Nathan Carroll, John D. Chambers, G. D. Coke, J. Guthrie Cox, H. Ramsey,W. R. Doris, W. F. Trusdell, George Durbin, Charles Twyman, I. W. Field, W. W. Washington, George Forgy, J. M. West, J. F. Graham, Samuel Young, Bennett H. ‘SAYS—52. Allen, C. T. _ Kennedy, Hanson Allen, M.K Knott, J. Proctor Applegate, Leslie T. Lewis, W. W. Askew, J. F. _ McChord, Wm. C. Auxier, A. J. McDermott, E. J. Ayres, W. W. McElroy, W. J. Beckham, J. C. MeHenry, H. D. Beckner, W. M. Miller, W. H. Blackburn, James Montgomery, J. F. Bronston, C. J. Moore, J. H. Brown, J. S. Muir, J. W. Brummal, J. M. Nunn, T. J. Buckner, S. B. Phelps, John L. Burnam, Curtis E. Pugh, Sam’l J. DeHaven, S. E. Rodes, Robert Edrington, W. J. Sachs, Morris A. Farmer, H. H. Smith, H. H. Funk, J. T. Smith, W. Scott Glenn, Dudley A. Spalding, I. A. Hanks, Thomas H. Straus, F. P. Harris, Geo. C. Swango, G. B. Hines, Thomas H. Whitaker, Emery Hopkins, F. A. Williams, L. P. V. Jacobs, R. P. Wood, J. M Jonson, Jep. C. Woolfolk, J. F. Johnston, P. P. Mr. President Clay. ABSENT—18. Berkele, Wm. Hines, J. S. Boles, S. H. Hogg, S. P. Brents, J. A. Holloway, J. W. Bullitt, W. G. Lassing, L. W. Clardy, John I). Mackoy, W. H. Elmore,‘ T. J. Martin, W. H. English, Sam. E. O’Hara, R. H. Forrester, J. G. Petrie, H. G. Goebel, William Phelps, Zack I [November C24 .’ I EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 7 ‘Monday,] APPLEGATE—MCHENRY—BURNAM—BLACKBURN—YOUNG. [November 24. Before the result was announced by the “Chair— Mr. APPLEGATE. I do not under- stand the previous question was moved on the adoption of the report of the Commit- tee. If it was not, I want to move the previous question on that. The PRESIDENT. The Chair so stated. ‘The previous question was moved on the adoption of the section as amended. The question now recurs on the adoption of the section as amended. A vote being taken, the same was adopted. Mr. MCHENRY. I move to reconsider _the vote by which that section was adopted, .and I move to table that motion. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will hold that this second motion is out of order. The first reconsideration disposes of the .matter. The vote by which it was adopted has been once reconsidered, and parliament- .ary usage does not allow a second reconsid- eration. Mr. McI-IENRY. than the other. Mr. BURNAM. There was asecond re- port made on the eighteenth day of Octo- ber, 1890, by the Joint Committee on the Executive Department, having reference to minor ofiices. The Committee of the ‘House who had charge of that branch of ‘the matter was presided over by the Dele- gate from the First District of Louisville (Mr. Zack Phelps). 1 see he is not here. I presume that he would desire to be pres- ent, and I am willing to let it lie over if it 'is the pleasure of the House to do so. If not, it will be in order. The PRESIDENT. The Chair will ‘state that the Delegate from the First Louisville District, who was Chairman of ‘the Committee indicated, requested me to \make the request of the Convention that they would not consider that matter until he came back. He said he would be back by Wednesday, and suggested that the '(Jonvention in the meantime take up some That suits me better other report. The Chair will also suggest, as each one of the reports has been adopted, the Convention has ordered it printed for the information and convenience of the Delegates. Mr. BLACKBURN. I move that this‘ report be printed and recommitted to the Committee, in order that the work of the Convention may be made harmonious and consistent. There may be conflicts between this report as adopted and the report of some other Committees when adopted. Those conflicts should be remedied, and I move that this report as adopted be printed and recommitted to the Committee on Executive Oflicers for the State at Large. Mr. ASKEW. I object. Mr. BLACKBURN. There is objec- tion, and I ask leave to withdraw my motion. Mr. YOUNG. There is a report which has been printed and been on the tables of members for some time from the Committee on Revision. It seems to me that it is very important that as early as possible in the session of the Convention this question should be disposed of. The method of revision of the Constitution, which we shall send down to the people, will affect the views of the members upon many ques- ‘ tions, and if there is nothing else before the Convention, I move that we now go into Committee of the Whole, and consider the report of the Committee on Revision. Mr. RAMSEY. I would like for the gentleman to withdraw his motion for a moment, as 1 have an additional section which I submitted to the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Executive Depart- ment. I do not think there will be any ob- jection to it. Mr. YOUNG. I will withdraw the mo- tion temporarily. The PRESIDENT. The resolution will be read for information. The Reading Clerk read the same, as fol- lows: There shall he a seal of the State, which 8 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] K'NoTT—RAMsEY—YOUNG. [November 24 . shall be kept by the Governor, and used by him oificially, as directed by law, and shall be called “the Great Seal of the State of Kentucky.” The PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the consideration of the section? The Chair hears none, and the amendment is now before the Convention. Mr. KNOTT. Had not that better be referred to the Committee on Miscellaneous Provisions, in order that the device may be determined and the matter all perfected in the same Committee '? Mr. RAMSEY. I notice that such pro- vision usually comes in under the headvof Executive Department in various Consti- tutions, as it states the seal shall be kept by the Governor. It goes in connection with the other duties prescribed for the Governor. Mr. KNOTT. I move to refer it to the Committee on Executive Department, in order to report a device. The motion being put, was carried. Mr. YOUNG. I renew my motlon. Revision of the Constitution. The motion being put, was carried; and the President designated the Delegate from Shelby as Chairman of the COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. The CHAIRMAN The Committee of the Whole has under consideration the re- port of the Committee on Revision. The Secretary will read the report: SE01. Amendments to this Constitu- tion may be proposed in either House of the General Assembly, and if such amendment shall be agreed to by two- thirds of all the members elected to each House, such proposed amendment, with the yeas and nays of each House taken thereon, shall be entered in full on their respective Journals, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each House of the next ensuing General Assembly, by a vote there- on, to be taken by yeas and nays, and spread upon the Journals of each House, then such proposed amendment shall be submitted to the electors of the State, for their ratification or rejection, at the next general election for State oflicers or mem- bers of the House of Representatives, which shall not occur less than ninety days from the final passage of such proposed amendment, the vote to be taken thereon in such manner as the General Assembly may provide, and to be certified by the offi- cers of election to the Secretary of State, in such manner as shall be provided by law, which vote shall be compared and certified by the same board authorized by law to compare the polls and give certificate of elec- tion to officers for the State at large. If it shall appear that a majority of all the votes cast for and against such amendment was for the amendment, then the same shall be- come a part of the Constitution of this State, and shall be so proclaimed by the Governor and published in such manner as the General Assembly may direct. A proposition to amend may be either to add to or to take from this Constitution: Pro- vided, That but one amendment to any article of this Constitution shall be voted upon or be pending at any one time. SEC. 2. Before any amendment shall be submitted to a vote, the Secretary of State shall cause such proposed amendment, and the time that the same is to be voted upon, to be published at least ninety days before the vote is to be taken thereon, by a weekly insertion of the same in two local newspa- pers in each county in which two papers are published, and in counties where but one paper is published,by like insertions in same, and by such other mode as may be Fprc- scribed by law. SEC. 3. When a majority of all the members elected to each House of the Gen- eral Assembly shall concur, by a yea and nay vote, to be entered upon their respective Journals, in passing a law to take the sense of the people of the Com- monwealth as to the necessity and expe- diency of calling a Convention for the pur- pose of revising or amending this Consti- REVISION on THE CONSTITUTION. ' a‘ Monday,] APPLEGATE. ' [November 24 tution, and such amendments as may have been made to the same, such law shall be spread upon their respective Journals. If the next General Assembly shall, in like manner, concur in such law, they shall provide for having a poll opened in each voting precinct in this State by the officers provided by law for holding general eleci tions, at the next ensuing regular election to be held for State oflicers or members of the House of Representatives which does not occur Within ninety days from the final passage of such law, at which time and places the votes of the qualified electors shall be taken for and against calling the Conven- tion, in the same manner provided by law for taking votes in other State elections. The vote for and against said proposition shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the same ofiicers and in the same man- ner as in State elections. If it shall appear that a majority voting on the proposition was for calling a Convention, the Secretary of State shall certify the same to the Gen- eral Assembly atf its next regular session, at which session they shall pass a law call- ing a Convention to re~adopt, revise or amend this Constitution, and such amend~ ments as may have been made thereto. SEc.4. The Convention, when called, shall consist of as many members as there are under this Constitution in the State Senate, and no more; and shall possess the same qualifications and be elected in and for the same districts and by the same elec- tors qualified to vote for members of the ' Senate. SEC. 5. Delegates to such Convention shall be elected at the next general State election. after the passage of the act calling the Convention, which does not occur within less than ninety days; and they shall meet within ninety days after their election, at the Capital of the State, and continue in session until their work is ready for sub- mission to the people. see. a. The General Assembly, in the act calling the Convention, shall provide for comparing the polls and giving certifi-ee cates of election to the Delegates elected,v and provide for their compensation. SEC. 7. The Convention, when assembled, shall be the judges of the election and qualification of its members, and shall determine contested elections. But the‘- General Assembly shall, in the act calling the Convention, provide for taking testi-- mony in such cases, and for issuing a writ of election in case of a tie. SEO. 8. Before a vote is taken upon the question of calling a Convention, the Sec-- retary of State shall cause the same to be published in such manner as may be pro- vided by the act directing said vote to be- taken . The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re-_ port the first section. The first section of the report was again read. Mr. APPLEGATE. I desire to offer an amendment to that section. The amendment was then read, and is as. follows: Amend section 1 of the report of the Committee on Revision by striking from line 13 thereof the words “ninety days,” and insert the words “ six months.” The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Clark moves to amend by strik- ing out the words following the word “Con- stitution,” in the 26th line, down to and in- cluding the word “ time,” in the 28th line. The Delegate from Union moves to strike out the word “ majority,” in the 6th line, and insert in lieu thereof the word “two- thirds.” The Delegate from Kenton ( Mr. Glenn) moves to amend by striking from line 2, section 4, the words “ State Senate,” and in~ sert in lieu thereof the wor& “ General As-» sembly.” The Delegate from Henderson moves to amend section 1 by changing in line 3 the- words “two-thirds” to a “majority.” 10 REVISION or THE CONSTITUTION. .Monday,] BIRKHEAD—ASKEW. [November 24 . The Delegate from Ohio moves to amend ‘by striking out the proviso to the first sec- ‘tion. The Delegate from the county of Daveiss ( Mr. Pettit) moves the following amend- ment: And the same shall not become the or- ;ganic law of the land until approved by the qualified voters of the Commonwealth. The same being an amendment to para- graph 3, line 6, of page 3. Mr. BIRKHEAD. The members of the ‘Committee have no objection to that amend- ment. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would suggest that the report seems to be divided in clauses. Mr. BIRKHEAD. It has not been sec- tionalized. The CHAIRMAN. That may be done -on motion. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Larue offers the following amend- 'ment: Strike out all of the words between the word “Journals,” in the sixth line, down to and including the word “House” in\the ninth line. Insert the word “two” after the word "next,” in the eleventh line. After ‘the word “amendment,” in the twenty-first line, insert the words “at each of said elec- tions.” The Delegate from the city of Louis- ville, Fourth District,. offers the following amendments : Strike out from line 3 of section 1 the words “ two-thirds,” and insert “ three- ‘fifthsf’ Also amend by striking from sec- tion 1, lines 26, 27 and 28, all after the word “ provided.” Mr. BIRKHEAD. I move that the Clerk be instructed to number the sections ‘as they are represented there by para- graphs. " Mr. ASKEW. I second the motion. The motion being put, was carried. The READING CLERK. Mr. McDer- imott moves to amend as follows : Insert the words “ two-thirds ” before the word “ majority,” in the first line of the third section. Insert after the words “ General Assem- bly,” in the 8th line of article 3, these words: ~‘ By a vote of two-thirds of the members elected thereto?’ ‘7 The Delegate from Washington offers the following amendment: Amend section 5 of report of Commit— tee by adding the following words: “ The Constitution agreed upon shall ‘ not take effect until ratified by a majority of the qualified electors of this State voting at an election to be held for that purpose. The CHAIRMAN. I would suggest that the report be considered section by sec- tion, and the Delegates offer amendments to the sections as they are reported in their order. The Committee now has under consideration section 1. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Wolfe moves to amend section 4 by striking out of line 2 the words “State Senate,” and insert in lieu thereof the words “ House of Representatives.” The Delegate from Madison (Mr. Bur- nam) moves to amend by striking out the word “one,” in line 27, and insert “ two,” and add the letter -‘ s ” to the word “ amend- ment.” The Delegate from Monroe (Mr. W. Scott Smith) has offered the following: Amend section 1 by adding the following clause after the word “ House,” in the fourth line: “and approved by the Governor.” - Mr. BIRKHEAD. Did I understand the Chair to rule that we were discussing the report section by section, or is the whole matter before the Convention for discus- sion ? The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has not made a decision on that. The whole report is now before the Committee, and it can be determined by the Committee to consider it section by section. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I do not presume it is material with the Committee as to whether the report is considered sectibn by section or as a whole, for the present at least. ‘ REVISION or THE CONSTITUTION. 11 'The Committee 'in making this report. Monday,] BIRKHEAD. [November 24 . I want to call the attention of the Commit- tee, briefly, to some reasons that actuated us in formulating and presenting this re- port; and I do not know that I would ask the indulgence of this body if it were not that I am apprised of the fact that there :is some opposition to this report, not as a whole, but in regard to the open clause. which considered this 'matter very carefully had some as good talent as there is in this Convention to aid This is no novel thing. This idea rep01 ted by the Commit- ‘tee on Revision was in the mind of the people over forty years ago. It was vigor. -ously and ably discussed in this Hall in the 'Convention of 1849. True, there were ‘then questions agitating the minds of the I people that no longer exist; and the reasons ‘that were then given, and the objections ‘then urged to this special amendment or open clause system, no longer exist. ~is, in my humble opinion, and in the judg- There ment of this Committee, no reason why there should not be provided an open clause. In the Convention of 1849 there were two parties, having different views on this great question called slavery, that was then in existence. Now we are all ‘proud of the fact that this evil—this cancer ‘on the body-politic—no longer exists; that slavery is numbered with the things of the past. The people of Ken- tucky congratulate themselves that this terrible evil no longer exists "to agitate or disturb them, or to cause National commotion and division. In 1847-8 the friends of the Convention and Constitutional reform assembled in this Hall and unanimously agreed upon the following: “That we think, rather than put the whole machinery and form of Gov- ernment to hazard for the purpose of cor- recting an isolated error, it would be better to submit a. single proposition for amend- ment to the consideration first of the Legis- lature, and then of the people, under such restrictions as shall be deemed advisable and safe. Public opinion may then be con- sulted upon a single proposition without the danger of combination on other sub- jects.” Therefore, we say, this is no inno- vation or new idea. even in our own State. I think‘ our predecessors in the Convention of 1849 would undoubtedly have adopted an open clause, but that grave fears were ' entertained in regard to this great slavery question. It was believed by the pro- slavery men that if these special amend- ments were permitted, it would endanger the institution of slavery; and hence the rejection of this and all propositions tend- ing in that direction. But I call attention to the fact that, this open clause or special amendment system, suggested by the Committee, is prudent, wise and safe. Our experience in this Convention teaches us that we cannot tell what amendments or propositions will be brought in. Already propositions have been brought in here that the people—- at least in my end of the State—never heard of until we came to this Convention. So I say, we cannot foretell what‘ provis- ions, amendments or suggestions will be engrafted in this Constitution; and if we in Convention commit an error in our de- liberations, and in framing and bringing out this Constitution, We shall be powerless to remedy this evil without calling another Convention. Certainly, we are not willing to cut the State loose from her moorings, to have another Convention assemble, at an expense, perhaps, of $50,000 or $100,000, to correct some errors that may creep into the Constitution we are making. In the report submitted for the consideration of this body, the Committee provide such safe- guards as they deem wise and prudent. They have provided that the General As- sembly, by a two-thirds vote at one session, and by a majority vote at the next session, shall submit amendments to the electors of the State for ratification or rejection. Cer- tainly, it seems to me, we could not have suggested better restriction or a better 12 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] BIRKHEAD. [November 24. safeguard than is presented here. It will give the Legislature ample time to discuss these various questions that may come up. It will give the people ample time to con- sider the various propositions that may be submitted to them, and if, in their judg- ment, after due and proper deliberation, it is deemed proper to adopt or ratify the same, I contend that it should then become a law. If we adopt the open clause system, and it is left for us to accept or reject propo- sitions singly and separately, it is highly probable that in a great many instances we may discover wrong, and reject some sec- tion, which we cannot do if this Constitu- tion is submitted without the power of amending by special provision. I think it would be very prudent and wise in this Convention to adopt the report of the Committee, so that we may right any errors or wrongs that this Convention may make in its deliberations. If there are errors under the report of the Committee, we can correct these wrongs ; if there are no errors, certainly the report of the Committee can do'no harm. It may be that calamities or misfortunes may overtake us that will render it important for us to make some changes. Will you call another Conven- tion? Will the people of the State. or will the Delegates upon this floor, if the growth of the State may develop the need for a change that we cannot now foresee, say that we cannot remedy the defect thus made, except by calling another Convention, at an expense perhaps of $50,000, $100,000, or maybe $200,000? I am persuaded that this report will be adopted in some form or another. We have no personal or special pride of opinion about it. We are not wedded to the phraseology we have pre- sented here. We are contending very earnestly for the principle we have pre- sented to this Convention, and we urge Delegatesto weigh it carefully. We may desire to place some restrictions on the taxing power. Will the people deny the sovereign electors or tax-payers of this Commonwealth the right to remedy any evils that may be discovered without calling another Convention? It certainly will not be necessary for me even to at- tempt to make any extended remarks upon this subject. I am persuaded that the minds of the Delegates are made up on this ques- tion. They have decided, I am confident, that this report, or one of similar meaning, should be adopted. If precedents are worth any thing in the consideration of this grave question, I de- sire briefly to call the attention of Delegates to the existence of a similar provision in ‘the different Constitutions of the States of this country: Alabama has an open clause; and also provides for a Convention—1875. I have gathered this information from Poore’s Compilation of Constitutions, and have looked at all the States but six. Col- orado has an open clause, also the power to call a Convention—1876. Connecticut has an open clause with no power to call a Convention-_1818. Delaware has an open clause, and also provides for a Constitu- tional Convention—1831. Florida has an open clause ; also power to call a Conven- tion. Georgia has an open clause; Illi- nois has an open clause—1870—and also power to call a Convention. Iowa has an open clause, but retains the power to call a Convention—1857. Kansas has likewise provided an open clause for special amendments in her Constitution-— 1858. Louisiana has an open clause—1864. Maryland, Michigan, Oregon and Rhode Island, all have open clauses. South Caro- lina, Texas, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, and, I might say, all the State Constitutions that I have examined, in this work prepared by Poore, have pro- vided themselves with these open clauses or special amendments; and in no case, so far as my information extends, has there been any reason to murmur or to complain. Massachusetts adopted an open clause in her Constitution in 1780, and has since- REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. 13 Monday,] BIRKHEAD. [November 24 . added twenty-six amendments, the last in 1863—one hundred and ten years without a Constitutional Convention. I am not going to detain the Committee, for, as I have already stated, I presume their minds are already made up on this question, and from what I can see of the amendments presented, with some slight changes and modifications, they will be willing to accept the report of the Committee. I want briefly to call the attention of the Convention to the last provision that’ we - have made with reference to the calling of a Convention. “Delegates to such Con- vention shall be elected at the next general State election after the passage of the act calling the Convention, which does not occur within less than ninety-days; and they shall meet within ninety days after their election at the Capital of the State, and continue in session until their work is ready for submission to the people.” The point I want to call attention to is section 4: “The Convention, when called, shall consist of as many members as there are under this Constitution in the State Senate, and no more; and shall possess the same qualifications and be elected in and for the same districts, and by the same electors qualified to vote for members of the Senate.” I am aware of the fact that there will be very serious objection urged to this part of the report, as already evi- denced by the amendments ofi'ered, provid- ing that the House of Representatives shall be inserted. in lieu of “ State Senate.” We are all apprised of the fact that sometimes, and I believe it would be true in this Convention here to-day, if we had a smaller number of Delegates, they would frame as good a Constitution, and do it quicker, than the hundred men now assembled. I do not want to be un- derstood as reflecting on the wisdom of any ' Delegate upon this floor; but we are im- pressed with the fact that it is sometimes best not to have too many. While we have been informed ‘and edified by the dis- cussions and speeches that have been deliv- ered upon this floor, yet I am persuaded that if this Convention had assembled here with the same number as the Senate, in- stead of the House of Representatives, it could have done the work at a much smaller expense, and quite as satisfactorily, to the people of the entire State. I believe .that the time has come when we should economize—when we should not have so many officers; that the people are ask- ing at the hands, not only of this State, but of the United States, that there shall not be so many officers in existence; but we should curtail and re- duce the number of officers. I cannot see why we should not be willing to begin just at this point and reduce the number of of- ficers that are to compose the next Consti- tutional Convention of this State,_ should one be called. If we are economical, if we are careful, if we protect and guard the in- terests of our people in every particular, I believe we will receive the thanks and the approval of our constituents. Without economy in private affairs, estates the most magnificent, and fortunes that are princely, may be dissipated, scattered and squandered, and go to ruin. In public affairs, if we lose sight of economy, the same result is inevitable; without it, the highest prosperi— ty is lost, and insolvency, repudiation and disgrace are fastened upon the State and Government. Of course, I do not want to be understood as advocating economy at the expense of eificiency. I want efficiency in every department of our Government; but I believe that a measure of this kind would be accepted and approved by the voters, the tax-payers and the bread-win- ners of this grand old Commonwealth of ours; and I say, as we are careful and par- ticular in our private affairs, so should we be guarded and economical in watching, protecting and legislating for the public in- terest and the public good. In public af~ fairs economy is absolutely essential, that the funds of the people may be protected 14 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] BIRKHEAD—M CHENEY—MOORE. [November 24“. Those who have paid money into the Treasury desire to see that money ex- pended carefully, that there may not be a draft upon their private and already reduced purses to protect or carry forward the measures of the State. There is still another objection, and that is, the Senatorial qualification urged by some members on this floor. Of course, I do not know what provision may be made by the Constitution we are making with re- gard to the number of Senators. You may reduce the number from what it is now; but the present Constitution reads: ‘* The present number of Senators shall be thirty- eight. No person shall be a Senator who, at the time of his election, is not a citzen of the United States, has not attained the age of thirty years, and who has not resided in the State six years.” The qualification required by the report of this Committee only asks, should a Constitutional Conven- tion be called, that it be composed of the same number of members as the State Senate, and that they be thirty years of age, etc. Through fear that I may tax the patience of this Convention, and be- lieving as I do that there are other members of the Committee who will ably defend the report submitted, I will desist for the present.‘ The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Pike has offered the following amendment: Amend section 2 by adding the follow- ing: “ The Convention, when called, shall consist of as many members as there are, under this Constitution, in the House of Representatives, and no more; and shall possess the same qualifications and be elect- ed in and for the same districts, and by the same electors qualified to vote for members of the Legislature.” The Delegate from the Third District of Louisville has offered the following amend- .m ent : Strike out the proviso at the end of sec- tion 1 and insert in lieu thereof the follow- ing: “ But where several amendments are to be submitted to the electors of the State, i i they shall be thus submitted at different general elections, in such order of priority as may be provided by the General Assem-~ bly considering the matter. ” The Delegate from Ohio moves the fol- lowing amendment: Strike out all after the second section. Mr. MCHENRY. I do not see any ne- cessity of having any other Constitutional Convention, if the people have the right to amend section by section; and the deliber- ative way we are proceeding in making this Constitution impresses me with the belief that it is going to be such a good one that there will be no necessity for ever call- ing another; and it is the only chance we will ever have to immortalize our- selves. Our names will be to the Constitu- tion through all time and eternity, as long as Kentucky lasts. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I will ask you if it is your opinion that it is the last the people will ever want‘? Mr. McHENRY. They can make an- other by amending this section by section, and why call another Constitutional Con- vention? Let them amend it, and build upon this one as time goes on. I have no question but what some amendment will be necessary. Our work will naturally be imperfect, probably, but let them build on this Constitution that we make, and amend it section by section, without having any more Constitutional Conventions. This has been a very tedious one, and we are going to make a good Constitution before we are done, and we are going to take our time about it; and we will never want another Constitutional Convention. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Floyd (Mr. Hopkins) offers the following amendment: Add after the word “Constitution,” in the twenty-sixth line of section 1, the words “ or both.” It will then read: “A propo- sition to amend may be either to add to or take from this Constitution, or both.” The Delegate from Hardin offers the fol-~ lowing amendment : REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. 15 Monday,] ' KENNEDY——-APPLEGATE—-CABROLL——COX. [November 24 . Amend sections 4 and 5 by substituting therefor the following: “The Convention, when called, shall consist of as many mem- bers as there shall be in the House of Rep- resentatives, and no more, to be chosen at the next general election after the passage of the act calling the Convention, in the same manner and proportion, and at the same places as members of the General Assembly, but possessed of the same quali- fications as a qualified elector, and to meet within three months after their election for the purpose of readopting, amending or changing this Constitution, and continue in session from day to day until their work is completed.” Mr. KENNEDY. I would suggest that all amendments to this report should now be sent up. so that when we commence vot- ing upon the report, we can vote more in- telligently upon the same. Mr. CARROLL. I have an amend- ,ment. The Reading Clerk read the amendment, as follows: Amend section 1 by adding after the word “ Constitution,” in line ‘26, the follow- ing: “And if'more than one amendment is voted upon at the same election, each amendment shall be voted upon separately.” Mr. APPLEGATE. I move that the Committee request the Convention to order the amendments printed. This is a very important section or article of the Consti- tution, this question of Revision. And it seems to me that the members ought to be thoroughly advised upon the proposition before they commence to vote; and there are so many amendments ofl'ered that we have no opportunity of knowing what they are except by asking the Secretary to re- , port them; and then we have no opportu- nity of comparing them with other amend- ments and with the original report. We would make haste, I think, by having them printed, and giving each member an oppor- tunity to sit down and consider them by himself before he is called upon to vote upon them. ' Mr. COX. I hope the motion of the Delegate from 'Pendleton will not prevail. We have‘ attempted this morning to go to work, and engage in the work for which we were sent here; and now these amendments are ofi'ered, and I think we are in as good a position to consider them as though they were printed. It would also be an addi~ tional expense to the State, and, I conceive, a totally unnecessary expense. I think there is no Delegate upon this floor but who- is fully, or will be fully, prepared when these amendments are read, to discuss and‘ vote upon them just as well as if they were printed and put upon our tables. Mr. APPLEGATE. The matter of ex? pense is so trifling that I care not for that- I do not think that the State of Kentucky‘ will suffer much from that little expense. Probably the time that will be saved would’ more than compensate the State for what is‘ lost in printing these amendments. I do‘ not know how other members are advised‘ on a subject; some are, perhaps, advised. and prepared to vote before being in- formed as to what amendments contain; but I regard this as one of the most im-- portant provisions in the Constitution,~-the manner in which it shall be amended or re- vised; and some very valuable suggestionsv have been offered by other members than those composing the Committee. It seems- to me that the Convention would profit by ‘ having time to consider those suggestions ' that are ofi'ered, as to the manner in which the Constitution that we propose shall be» revised or amended. It is a very radical change. It is a change that has never ex- isted in the organic law of this State, and‘. - therefore it seems to me that the cry about economy and the work we are sent here to- do does not apply in this case. I am as anxious as any member on this floor to get through with this work, but I would rather do the work well than do‘ it quick. Mr. COX. In addition to the sugges‘ tions I made, I will say it will consume more time. A delay will be necessitated by this matter, and, as far as economy is concerned, I am one of the members of this Convention who desires in an earnest way that the rule of economy should be ob- 16' REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. _Monday,] Mon'reoM ERY—FUNK—APPLEGATE—ASKEW. _. [November 24 . :served in every thing'idone, and I am thor- oughly convinced that the Convention is now as well qualified to proceed to a vote as it would be from having these amend- ments printed. Mr. MONTGOMERY. Being a mem- ber of this Committee, I am very well sat- isfied with its work; but I go upon this idea, that the whole Convention, taken as a body, has more wisdom than any one Committee, and I am willing to receive, ‘.and desire to have, all the light that I can get. I have had occasion several times, since I have been here, to change my opin- ion on various important subjects, and I cannot tell what other men may gather from the reading of this great number of amendments sent up and read in rapid suc- cession, so that a man would have to have a wonderfully retentive mind to keep in ‘mind, from the reading of the Clerk, all the matters pending before the Committee of ‘the Whole in the way of amendments. In voting upon one amendment, I should like to know what other amendments there are upon that subject pending, so that I may make choice between them. If we act upon these matters unadvisedly, and'find out that we have made any mis- takes, or find out that something else is brought out that we likebetter, of course, we have to go back to reconsider. There- fore, we had better be advised before we act at all. We will save time by knowing what we are doing as we go along. If we act unadvisedly, and find out our mistakes, and undertake to go back and correct them from time to time, it will consume a great deal more time than it will to print these amendments, which I suppose can be done and laid upon our tables by to-morrow morning. I believe that by having these amendments printed and laid upon the ta— bles of members, so that we may all know what is pending, and what we may be 'called upon to vote upon, we will save more time than will be lost in waiting for the vprinting of these amendments. Therefore, I second the motion of the Delegate from Pendleton. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Butler moves the following amendment : Strike out all that part of the report after the word “law” which has reference to calling a Convention. Mr. FUNK. It occurs to me that the members have had this report long enough to have had ample time to look into the‘ several provisions it contains. It has now been before this Convention for over a month, and I cannot see that the printing of these amendments will add any thing to the enlightenment of the members of this Convention. I do not believe that the printing of them will do any good what- ever. Again, I do not believe that the Print- er can have all the amendments printed and laid on our desks by to-morrow. I do not believe it is possible for him to do so, unless he neglects the other business of this Con- vention. As we have no other report to consider, it would be a loss of time. Let us take it up now, and let the amendments be considered as they have been presented, and the Delegate who presents them will, of course, have an opportunity to explain them to the members. ' Mr. ASKEW. I make the point of order: the Committee of the Whole can- not have any printing done. Mr. APPLEGATE. That‘ is not the motion. My motion was to request the Convention to have them printed. Mr. WHITAKER. This is a very im- portant subject, and before acting upon the matter the members of the Convention ought to be fully informed.‘ It is true that the Delegates have had this report before them for now over a month ; and it may be that every Delegate for that purpose may have ‘committed to memory every word in it, and know what is in it, and know what it would be if this Convention adopted it, and know its bearings and ‘what effect it would have on the people of this State; REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. ' 17 Monday,] WHITAKER—SACHS. [November 24. but when a dozen or fifteen amendments are offered and read from the Clerk’s table, without an opportunity to examine them in connection with the report of the Com- mittee, it is impossible to see how that re- port is to be affected by them. Taking these dozen amendments offered here, and hearing them discussed, when there are two, three or four on the same subject, you only know the one under discussion, and one not under discussion may be much bet- ter. If an amendment is necessary at all to the report, not knowing what the others are, and not having an opportunity to (examine them, we vote for the one under discussion, and, perhaps, adopt it, and then we come to find out we have adopted the wrong one; one that will make the section to which it applies of less utility than one which has not been adopted; and it seems to me that on a report affecting the people as this will affect them, each member ought to have on his table, and ought to have time to examine the different amendments proposed here, in order to vote upon them intelligently, and whatever is necessary .should be done in order to enable the mem- bers of this Convention to vote intelli- gently upon any article that is to form a _part of this Constitution, so that we may present the best article to go in the Consti- tution that is possible to be made. I see no other way of arriving at that, through this mass of resolutions offered, but to have them printed, and have a chance to examine vthem, in connection with the report, and not only that, but with the subject under consideration. There may be amendments drafted yet that will be better than any al- ready drafted, that will make this article better’ than any yet ofi'ered, and if any of them are adopted, when they are examined in connection with this report, some mem- ber of this body may formulate an amend- ment that will make it still better than it would be upon the information that we have. Therefore, it seems to me, a neces- sity that they should be printed, so each Delegate may have an opportunity of ex- amining the amendments in connection with the report itself. The READING CLERK. The Dele- gate from Russell offers the following amendment: Add to section 4 the following: No person shall be a Delegate who, at the time of his election, shall hold any office under the laws of the United States or of this State. . . Mr. SACHS. I just want to say a word or two, principally in reply to the point made by the original mover of the propo- sition to print this report with its amend- ments. As a general proposition, I am in favor of printing any report, and especially where it is to be considered in connection with a flood of amendments, as this one; but this report and these amendments bear upon a matter that is notv of thedignity and importance that amendments to a Con- stitution should be generally regarded. I differ with the Delegate radically as to the importance of the thing. It is not like an amendment to the Constitution. It is not like a clause in the Constitution, that is to affect the rights of I anybod'y particularly, or any body of people in particular. It is just simply a sort of perfunctory arrange- ment, a kind of modus operandi, that we want to provide for the changing of the Constitution. We all agree, generally, that it is to be made reasonably dif-7 ficult to amend. We all agree generally, and have considered the proposition, that we want to afford the Legislature and the people ample time to consider the effect of what they are doing. If you want just simply to spend all this time in printing and considering a matter that everybody in the Convention has considered, and viewed from every side before and since the Convention met, I think it would be a useless waste of time. There are a few general principles involved, and these amendments all tend to a few matters of de- tail. There is only one radical matter offered by one of the Delegates upon this floor 18 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] DEHAVEN—APPLEGATE—BIRKHEAD-——MCHENB.Y. [November 24. and that is a sweeping measure to provide for no further Conventions in the future. Outside of that, it is just simply a question whether it should be a two-thirds, three- fourths, or four-fifths vote of the Legisla- ture, and as to whether one or more amendments shall be submitted to the peo- ple at one time—that is, so far as this first section is concerned. As to other sections, I should say it is all a question of figures and details; and there is nothing in it that it seems to me should require any further time or expense. Upon a vote, the motion to print was lost. Mr. DEHAVEN. If it is in order, I move that we take up section 1, and the various pending amendments, in the order in which they were presented, and proceed with their consideration. Upon a vote, the motion was carried. The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will read the first amendment. The READING CLERK. The first amendment is that proposed by the Dele- gate from Pendleton, which reads as fol- lows: . Amend section 1 of the Report of the Committee by striking from line 13 thereof the words “ninety days,” and insert in lieu thereof the words “six months.” Mr. APPLEGATE. I do not want to make a speech on that. I offered that reso- lution, and it is simply for this purpose' that upon taking a vote upon a Constitu- tional question, during the ninety days before any general election, other political topics generally occupy public attention, that is, if only ninety days intervene, as under the provision of that Constitution; between the passage of the amendment by the Legislature and the time in which it is to be voted on, there is not sufiicient time for the peeple to have it discussed among themselves through the public prints, and their attention will not be called to it for the reason, as I say, that other political questions will ‘probably absorb public attention; and it seems to me that six months is as short a time as there should be after the passage of the act by the Legislature and the vote upon it by the people. Mr. BIRKHEAD. I call attention to the fact that this report provides, first, that it shall be submitted to a Legislature for a two-thirds vote; then to the succeeding Legislature, which, under the present ar- rangement, would be two years; then in ninety days thereafter to the electors of the State, and that gives them two years and three months. It does look to me like they ought to deliberate and mature and make up their minds in that time; and I can see no necessity for extending the time any longer. I hope the amendment will not be adopted. A vote being taken, the amendment was rejected. The READING CLERK. The next amendment is that proposed by the Dele- gate from Clark, which reads as follows: Strike out the words following the word “Constitution," in the twenty-sixth, line, down to and including the word “time,” in the twenty-eighth line. Mr. MCHENRY. I offered the same thing identically, and I will withdraw the amendment offered by me. I think this is very proper. I am opposed to that proviso. It may be very necessary, in submitting an amendment to the Constitution to the peo- ple of Kentucky, to amend two articles at the same time, in order to make the amend- ment consistent. I cannot take time to point out, and I see no reason in the world why the Legislature and the people of Ken- tucky. undera law of the Legislature, should be compelled and restricted to one amend- ment, or to an amendment to one article of the Constitution at the same time. It may be a matter of the highest propriety to have an amendment to two articles in order to make the amendment consistent, and make it a perfect amendment, that they should be submitted at the same time to the people ; and it seems to me it would restrict the REVISION or THE CONSTITUTION. 19 Mondav ‘I ‘a U APPLEGATE—M CHENRY—BECKNER—HENDRICK. [November 24. power of the Legislature and of the people to amend this Constitution to say that but one article shall be amended at the same time. It may be necessary also that one amendment is just as necessary as another, even if they are independent of each other; and why not submit them both at the same time? I see no valid reasons why they should be restricted to one amendment. Mr. APPLEGATE. Do you construe that to mean that you shall not offer but one amendment to the whole Constitution, or to any article? Mr. McHENRY. I believe you are right in your construction of it; but I think my argument applies just as well. Why not have two amendments to the same article‘? ‘I hope the Delegate from Clark, however, will make a more satisfac- tory argument on the subject than I have. Mr. BECKNER. 1 yielded to allow the Delegate to withdraw his amendment; but he has made a speech which I had in- tended to make, and made it better than I could do. I have a few words in addition to say, which have been suggested by the remarks of the Delegate. He addressed himself to the amendment on the idea that it allows but one amendment to the Con- stitution to be voted upon at any one elec- tion That is not the meaning of that clause; but'I think it should be stricken out, even construing it, as the Delegate from Pendleton does, that only one amend- ment may be offered to any one section of this Constitution. There is very great difficulty in the provision made by the Committee about having amendments sub- mitted to the people. It takes a process that is tedious and difl‘icult. I am not one of those who believe that our work; when done here, will be a perfect work. It will, no doubt, be as well done as any other body of men in the Commonwealth could have done it; but we who are here—1 will say for the information of the Conven- tion—are finite beings, and liable to err. If the people hereafter, in this great Com- monwealth, shall see fit to change some part of the work, or to add to it _ Mr. HENDRICK- (interrupting). I make a motion to extend the time of this session until this particular section is dis- posed of. . Mr. BRONSTON. We have an after- noon session. I move that the Committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The motion of Mr. Bronston being put,. was carried. “r The Committee of the Whole thereupon rose, and the President, Mr. Clay, resumed the Chair. THE CONVENTION. Mr. BECKHAM. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration‘ the report of the Committee on Revision, and have made some progress therein, and ask leave to sit again. The report was, on a vote, adopted. Mr. L. T. MOORE. I desire the report of the Committee on Executive Affairs for the State at Large, as adopted by the Con- vention, be printed. The PRESIDENT. The amendment of the Delegate from Boyd is that the report of the Committee on Executive Affairs for the State at Large, as adopted by the Con- vention, be printed as amended. The motion of Mr. Moore being put, was carried. Mr. HENDRICK. I move that the Convention take a recess. The motion being put, carried; and the Convention took a recess until 3 o’clock. AFTERNOON SESSION. Thb Convention was called _ to order by the President. Mr. W. H. MILLER. I move that the Convention resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of further considering the report of the Committee on Revision. ' 20' . REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] BECKNER. [November 24 , The vote being taken on said motion, it was carried. Revision of the Constitution. The President designated Mr. Beckham as Chairman of the COMMITTEE OF THE YVHOLE, who took the Chair. Mr. BECKNER. I do not want to make any frivolous objections to the re- ports of Committees. I have the highest respect for the gentlemen composing the Committee who made this report. I am sure they have given it more careful con- sideration than I could hope to do; but this is a very important matter which we are considering now. When I was acandi- date for a seat in this body, there were only two questions upon which I commit- ted myself, and this is one of them. Our people desired that there should be an open clause in the Constitution, that the people, without the expense and trouble of a Con- ‘ vention, should have the privilege of vot- ing for Constitutional amendments such as the times might demand or experience shall demonstrate ought to be incorporated into the organic law. This Constitution that we are making, we are vain enough to be- lieve, will be for generations at least. It may be for centuries. The people of Mas- sachusetts are living under the same Con- stitution they adopted in 1780. The people in South Carolina never had a Constitutional Convention after the first one in 1778, until the war came and broke up all the old in- stitutions. So it has been in several of the other States; they have continued to remain under the same fundamental law, making changes by amendment from time to time. Now, this report provides for making amendments in a way that certainly precludes the people from making injudic- ions or hasty changes in the organic law. The time that must elapse‘ from the first proposition to amend until it may be car- ried is so long that, under no circumstances, can there be any changes brought about through temporary excitement; but I think, when we make provision for revision, it should be sufi‘icient to enable the people to do whatever the occasion may require. At the first Congress, after the Federal Consti- tution was adopted, there were ten amend- ments proposed, even after the wise men who made that instrument had carefully considered it, with George Washington at their head; and yet we provide here that there can only be one amendment to each article. It may be that all the amend- ments demanded will be with reference to some particular article, and it may well be that more than one amendment at the same time will he demanded in the future, when the people find themselves tied up by our blind provisions. I, therefore, insist that we change that provision in the report. If any Delegate present wishes to have a reasonable limitation, I should be in favor of it; but this provision, that there should only be one amendment offered at the same time, is a mistake, considering the great future towards which we are traveling. The country is rapidly filling up. Ken- tucky is just beginning to feel in full the impulse following the war. We shall have a population in a generation or two that may demand different provisions from those we are apt to make now, and when the time comes to amend, several changes may be wanted simultaneously, and the people will not want to wait from year to year to secure what they want. So, I think, we ought to strike out that proviso, or, at least, enlarge the boundary for amend- ment, so that more may be done at one time than to offer one single amendment. The people will be able to consider more than one at a time. I hope the minds of our people are not thought to be so con- tracted that they cannot consider more than one proposition at a time. After all, it is a question with the people. They are the sovereigns, the ones to be affected by whatever changes may be proposed to the _ organic law. I hardly think that any Dele- REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. _ 2 y-i Monday,] k; gate on this floor could insist, or even intimate, that the people of Kentucky will not be competent to grasp or comprehend more than one amendment at a single elec- tion, having, as they will, several years to read about it, talk about it, and having, as they will have, intelligence and ability enough to understand the issue that will be presented in the amendment. Mr. BIRKHEAD. What is the con- struction which you place on this? Do you understand we can have thirteen amendments under the present Constitu- tion, or only one ? Mr. BECKNER. No, sir; “provided , there can only be one amendment to any The amendments desired may all apply to one article. Here is this article we have just passed on. A gentleman said this morning that there had been a mistake made about declaring the Attorney- General ineligible. Many think other changes in the same article ought to be made. Citizens of the future may find article.” there has been a mistake made and want to‘ have a change, yet there can only be one amendment proposed to that section. I think we should make it a little more flexi- ble than that. Mr. BRONSTON. Would not that single amendment cover all the several articles? Mr. BECKNER. It might be; but that would be open to the objection of allowing more than one change in a single amend- ment. There might be several subjects in the article, and different amendments pro- posed, and the people who vote might favor a single proposed change about one separate feature; but they might be against the other changes. There might be a great many things that the people desired, and not wanting to lose them, would vote for the whole thing, and it would be a tempta- tion to put before the people amendments in such form as would be confusing, from the fact it embraces several different propo- sitions. I think we should change the BIRKHEAD—BEcKNER—BRoNsToN—VVHITAKER. ' article. [November 24. provision, and allow more than one amend- ment to any single article to be submitted at any one time. Mr. BIRKHEAD. The Committee con- sidered that question very carefully, and the opinion was that it might create confu- sion to have too many amendments in one At the same time, in order to have clearness, and that the voters might under- stand just what was before them and what they were voting on, it was thought best not to have more than one amendment to any article at the same time. ‘ Mr. WHITAKER. Was it the under- standing of the Committee that you could have an amendment pending to each article of the Constitution at the same time ‘? Hr. BIRKHEAD. I do not know that just that question was brought up. I was rather inclined to think that this thing was susceptible to that construction, and the Committee was very anxious that there should be ample protection and safeguards thrown around the Constitution; that there should not be too much liberty in amend- ing, so they placed ,these restrictions and safeguards around it in order that they might not be tampered with and amend- ments thrown in of no importance, and which might prove detrimental to the inter- ests of the Commonwealth. Mr. BECKNER. I would say to my friend from Daveiss that the history of New York ought to be suggestive to us with reference to this matter. The Constitu- tional Convention of 1846, in New York, provided that in 1866 there should be sub- mitted to the people the question as to whether they should have a Constitutional Convention or not, and every twentyeyears thereafter it should be again submitted. In 1866 the people declared for a Convention. The Convention was held, but the people failed to ratify the Constitution then adopted. In 1886 they voted by the most overwhelming vote ever given on such an occasion—that is, 583,000—for the Consti— tutional Convention, and only 31,000 22 _ REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] BECKNER—M ONTGOMERY. [November 24 . against it, and yet that Convention has never been held. When the Legislature passed a bill providing for holding a Con- vention the Governor vetoed the bill, and no newbill has yet been able to pass over the Governors veto. The people have for four years been waiting for the calling of that Convention that was voted for so over- whelmingly by them. If the people of New York had not had the power to vote on amendments separately (they voted at out: time on six amendments, rejecting half of them and adopting the other half), they would have been seriously embarrassed This proviso for an open clause has been found very useful to them, and it may be to us. Therefore we ought not to be too stringent in this provision with reference to amendments. Mr. MONTGOMERY. It may be that the limitation put upon the Legislature by the Committee in regard to amendments may not be in exactly the right place; but we are bound to recognize somewhere the line between Constitutional limitation and statutory provisions. This report of the Committee, as I consider it, represents rather the middle ground between the two extremes represented in the Committee and in this Convention. There is an element in this Convention representing the idea that a Constitution should be so permanent and so fixed that it would require consid- erable length of time and mature considera- tion before it should be changed. I belong to that party. There are others, however, in the Convention who think it would be the wise and proper thing to change any provision in the Constitution that the peo- ple and Legislature might desire, upon the shortest notice. and with as little delibera- tion and consideration as the enactment of asimple statute. I regard the force and power of a Constitution as depending to a very large extent upon its permanency. Its force depends to a great degree upon the respect the people have for it. The people respect it more for its permanency than any L % thing else. spect for things that are permanent and an- cient than things liable to constant change. We have to have somewhere a line drawn between statutory provisions and Constitu- tional limitations. If the amendment of the Delegate from Clark should prevail, there would-be left no kind of limitation upon the Legislature and the people in re— gard to passing amendments to the Consti- tution. We think that the limitation here is very liberal. I do not know exactly how many articles this Constitution we are about to frame may contain; but it is reasonable to presume that it will contain perhaps as many as twenty. This pro- vision would allow as many as twenty amendments to be offered to this Constitu- tion, or as manyamendments at any one time as there are articles: that is, you can have but one amendment to any article, but you may have that amendment apply to as many subjects in that article as you please. If we go farther than that, you make it just as easy to change the Constitution of the State of Kentucky as it would be to pass a statute, and thus virtually destroy all dis- tinction between Constitutional safeguards and simple statutory enactments. If you take from the Legislature and the people all limitation in regard to how far they shall go in amending the Constitution ; take all checks away from them (and you do that if you take this clause from the re- port); then, upon every occasion of dissatis- faction or popular excitement, every caprice that may grow up in the minds of the people on account of some temporary want of prosperity, or on account of some trivial oppression in the administration of the law, the Legislature will be elected upon the idea of changing the whole Constitution, or any part of it, as the real or imagined evil or oppression may demand. And that same people, who elect the Legislature upon such ideas of amendments, will be apt to ratify such as may be proposed, without re- gard to their merits, if permitted to do so, We naturally have greater re- REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. _ 23 Monday,] M ONTGOMERY--MCHENRY. [November 24 . before they have time to reflect or consider. Thus the Constitution would be subject to constant changes. The result will be that it will not be long before there will be no more respect by the people for the Constitu- tion than for the statutes. It will be no more permanent or lasting. Inside of twenty-five years, if we have any commo- tions or seasons of great excitement in our country, it would be impossible to tell what the Constitution of the State of Kentucky may be. We know there have been times in our own history, if the people and the Legislature had had a chance, and if the provisions of the Constitution had allowed the Legislature and the people to change the Constitution, in as short order as some persons seem to desire, they would have changed it in such a way as would have destroyed the peace and prosperity of the State. Away _back yonder, when the ques- tion of Old Court and New Court came up, if we had had a provision in the Constitu- tion by which we could have reached it in- side of two years, the whole organic law of our State would have _ been changed, and we know now, if that had occurred, we would scarcely have re covered from the mistake by this time. Therefore, it is necessary to have these checks and balances, so that suificient time can be given for the people and the Legisla- ture to think, so that these changes may be made advisedly. And there should not be too many subjects proposed at one time, for if you say the Legislature shall have the right to propose an unlimited number of amendments to the Constitution, then they could propose an entire new Constitution. If the people have the right to vote upon an unlimited number of_ amendments to the ‘Constitution. then they could vote a new Constitution. A Legislature elected for the ordinary purpose of enacting laws could get together, if something had excited the peo— ple, and propose a new Constitution out and out, and submit it to the people, and they could vote upon it and pass it; so we are W bound to have this limitation. Further, upon the subject of calling a Convention: . I think there is more necessity for a pro- vision for calling a general Convention, in view of the fact that the Legislature has the right to propose these amendments and the people to vote upon them, than if that clause was left out; because we know, when ~ the Legislature is turned loose on this ques- tion, or different questions that may arise, and the excitement that may arise in the country from time to time, and demand that changes he made, it will not be many years before it will beabsolutely necessary to have a general Convention for the purpose of re- vising the Constitution like we have to have a Commission every once in'awhile to re- . . ~ If the idea of some Del-. vise the statutes. egates in regard to revising the Constitu- tion should be carried out; that is, if all these checks should be taken away, and al- low the Legislature at one time to propose amendments and the people to vote and ,' carry them, it would not be many years be— fore we ‘would have'to have a Commission to ascertain what the Constitution of the State was, and to codify it. I do not think the amendment of the Delegate from Clark should prevail. Mr. MCHENRY. This says but one amendment to any article of the Constitu- tion shall be voted on or pending at any I time. We have provided that the Govern- or shall be ineligible after one term. Sup- pose that we want to amend that, and make it that the Governor shall be eligible after -one term. We have provided that the Attorney shall be ineligible after one term, and the Treasurer and the Secretary of State. They are all in the same article. What impropriety would there be in sub- mitting all that in one amendment or sev- eral amendments ‘? The Courts will con- strue any one of them to be an amendment to the Constitution, and would prohibit the people from making one amendment cover- ing all those ofiicers, because the Courts would reasonably consider that when you 24 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] a provide a change as to one officer, that would be a separate and independent amendment to the Constitution. Why should not an amendment covering all these oflicers be submitted at the same time? The same thing would apply on the subject of Courts. We want to make some changes in the County and Circuit Court system. One amendment ought to be made a sometimes, in order that another amend- ment might have proper effect—the efi'ect intended by the Legislature and the peo- ple—and they necessarily would have to make two amendments to accomplish the object. They would take away jurisdiction from the County Court or abolish the Circuit Court by an amendment to the Constitu- tion, and at the same time they ought to make a corresponding amendment increas- ing the jurisdiction of the tribunals to which these cases would go. Yet this thing is very imperative that there shall be but one amendment to any article. What is an amendment to the Constitution ? When you change the tenure of office of a single ofiicer of the Government, that is an amendment. Give the Governor or the Attorney-General the right to succeed him- self, and that is two amendments. I take it for granted, if the people want to change it, they will do it by an amendment cover- ing all those oflicers, and there may be half a dozen at one time. Mr. BRONSTON. If you want to amend any article of the Constitution, you can in that single amendment embody any- thing on that subject-matter. Mr. McHENRY. Change the whole article? Mr. BRONSTON. Yes, sir. Take the Courts: if you want to abolish a Court, you can in the same amendment establish an- other Court. Mr. MCHENRY. You can make but one amendment to any article. Do you mean you can substitute another article for it? MCHENRY—BRONSTON—YOUNG—BECKNER—SACHS. [November 24 . Mr. BRONSTON. You can adopt all the amendments you want to that article. Mr. YOUNG. That would mix up the Constitution. Mr. BRONSTON. N o, sir; because all the amendments, if they relate to one sub- ject, would be construed as one amend- ment. Mr. McHENRY. If you change the whole article, it would embrace forty amendments maybe. Mr. BIRKHEAD. Will the Delegate from Ohio permit me to ask him a ques- tion‘? Mr. McHENRY. Certainly. Mr. BIRKHEAD. If this provision is just as you construe it, and it fails to meet the public sentiment, can they not amend this article, and make such changes as they please‘? Mr. BECKNER. I desire to withdraw the amendment I offered, and substitute this amendment in place of it. The amendment was read, and is as follows: Strike out the words “but one,” in line 26, section 1, and substitute “not more than five.” Mr. BECKNER. That means that there shall not be before the people more than five amendments to the Constitution, so as not to have the confusion which would result from submitting several propositions in one amendment. Mr. SACHS. I desire to oii'er a substi- tute, and if there is no objection, I would like to read it: Amend section 1 of the report of the Committee on Revision by omitting the proviso. and inserting the following: “Whenever amendments are to be sub- mitted to the people, they shall be sub- mitted one or more at a time, at one or more general elections, and in such order of priority as may be determined by the General Assembly having the matter last in hand.” REVISION vOF THE CONSTITUTION. 25 Monday,] SACHS—WHITAKER. [November 24. Mr. SACHS. I would like to explain what I mean by this: why I think it covers the whole question. to what the character of the amendments offered will be. The last Legislature having this matter in hand will have be- fore it, necessarily, all of the proposed amendments, if there should be more than one. They are in a position to know what would be best to be done under the circum- stances. They can apply the various amendments to the various propositions in the Constitution that are sought to be amended. They can see the effect of it, and they can avoid any confusion. If we had that light before us now, we would not be so much in the dark, or floundering as we have been on this proviso in section 1. There is no reason on earth why an im- partial Legislature, after the thing has reached the place where it is about to be submitted to the people, having all the various propositions before them—-there is no reason on earth why that Legislature could not, in its wisdom, determine which. of the propositions shall be submitted first, if more than one, and determine properly the order of priority in which that sub- mission to a vote of the people should be made. Mr. WHITAKER. I do not exactly understand the import of the amendment offered here, but it occurs to me, as I said before, that this is an important section, Delegates did not seem to think so this morning. It is always an important sub- ject when you come to tampering with or amending the fundamental law of the State. Whenever you try to amend a Constitution, you are handling edged tools, and unless you do it very carefully, you will destroy the symmetry of the Constitution. '1 think the old Constitution is an able one. I fear many of the Delegates here think it belongs to this one ‘hundred men. We are the agents only to make the Constitution. Under the old Constitution, we were fifteen years attempting to amend it, and I do not We are in the dark as think there has been a greater fraud ever perpetrated on the people of Kentucky than the act by authority of which this Convention is assembled. The people, to get out of the difficulties they were labor- ing under, were finally compelled to adopt fraud, and fraud was practiced for the sake of getting to change this Constitution. That ought to have some influence on us when we attempt to fix a limitation upon the right of the people in their' judgment to change or alter any section of the Con- stitution. Under this section, amendments must be passed by the General Assembly by a two-thirds vote, the yeas and nays to be recorded. Then the next succeeding Legislature is to be elected. Whether these articles are to cut any figure in the subsequent Legislature or not I do not know, because this article does not say whether the people are to give them any instructions before they come here and perform the important work of submitting it to the people a second time. It seems to me those articles first pro; pounded should become part and parcel of the submission to the people before that Legislature is elected. The people ought. to know what those articles are. They ought to be the subjects of discussion in that Legislature, because, when that Legis- lature comes together, they, by a bare ma- jority of all the members, are to submit those articles to the people of the State to pass upon. Why should you, unless the people are enlightened in the election, offer it to a subsequent Legislature to that which proposes the amendment? If the people know what the propositions are submitted by the first Legislature, why is it not just as well that, in the election of the subse- quent Legislature, these articles should be- come the subject of discussion before the people, making the people feel that they are nearer the Constitution; because, if it re- quires amendment, you let them pass on it. After it has been put before the two Legis— latures, the last of which is elected on the 26 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. M onday,] WHITAKER—MONTGOMERY. [November 24 . issue,why submit it to the people any more‘? Why should not the last Legislature, in fact, pass on it. I see no reason why we should not adopt it when we elect the sec- ond Legislature. The people have had the question before them two years in succes- sion. If they elect a Legislature, and that Legislature gives a majority to it a second time, that is the will and judgment of the people, and why send it back to the people for the people to be harassed and bedeviled over it‘? It will excite their disgust to have the thing come before them again for them to pass upon. I believe, whenever the needs of the people require a change in the Constitution or any article of it, it is their right to have it. I believe that the intelligent people of the State of Kentucky will never ask for amendments in the Constitution until the necessities and wants of the people need them; and then they will call for them through the proper chan- nels; and when a Legislature has by a two- thirds vote submitted them to the people in the election of the next Legislature, would be as good a time as any to pass upon the article to be submitted to them. If the peo- ple do not believe an amendment is to their interest they will not indorse it. Now, a word upon the question of how many amend- ments shall be submitted at one time. Who is to say, and yet this Convention is attempt- ing to say, that the people of Kentucky shall have only one, two, three or four amend- ments at any time. Are you afraid to trust the people who sent you here‘? Shall the two million people now constituting the in- habitants of the State of Kentucky be bound down by the one hundred men they have sent here? If they sent them here, they ought to represent their will. Mr. MONTGOMERY. Will the Dele- gate permit a question ‘? Mr. WHITAKER. I will. Mr. MONTGOMERY. Why have a Constitution at all? Why not trust it all to the Legislature and the people? Mr. WHITAKER. That is easily answered. My proposition is based upon the fact that we have a Constitution; that we have something more stable than the fluctuations and fickleness of a Legisla- ture elected every two years, which gives the limits and boundaries to their power, and I am for that. But, if it should arise that the people of Kentucky want a change in any article of the Constitution, and they call upon the Legislature, I do not want their call to be unheeded. Our State is developing. Heretofore, we have been confined to certain limits. Whenever the grand expansiveness of the'State of Ken- tucky comes, we should be in position to adapt ourselves to the change. The great- est interests of the people of Kentucky have never yet been developed. In the next thirty or forty years they will be; and when the wants and necessities which arise require more than two or three amend- ments to be submitted, is it proper to say their wants will not be cared for and their interests promoted by such amendments as they may desire. when they have to be rati- fied by the people of the State of Kentucky‘? Are you afraid to trust them‘? Are you afraid that the people of Kentucky will not know as well what they want as this Con- vention sitting here to-day can or may know‘? I say, give the people the largest liberty. I have great confidence in the people. I have confidence enough in them to be- lieve you can submit to them every amend- ment proposed, and if there is any one of them which will injure their rights they will vote it down. Therefore, I do not want to limit the number of amendments that can be submitted under this Constitu- tion at any one time. I desire to leave the people in their wisdom to take care of their own interests, and to say how many or how few amendments they will have at one time Mr. SPALDING. I desire to offer an amendment. REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. 27 Monday,] SPALDING—BRONSTON—PETTIT—APPLEGATE. [November 24 , The amendment reads as follows: Amend by adding after section 1, at the end of line 28, the following words: “N or shall any amendment relating to or em- bracing the subject-matter of more than one section of the article proposed to be amended.” Mr. BRONSTON. amendment. I desire to offer an The amendment reads as follows : An amendment once submitted to a popular vote shall not be again resubmit- ted, until a period of ten years shall have passed since the first submission. Mr. PETTIT. I believe that the report of the Committee is nearly right, and that it will meet the demands of the people. It provides “ that but one amendment to any article of this Constitution shall be voted upon or be pending at any one time.” That would give at least twenty amendments to be voted upon at one election within the pleasure of the Legislature under the pro- vision of this section. Is not that enough? I do not believe that the point made by the Delegate from Ohio will hold good. In my opinion, the Legislature could put an amendment in the Executive Article of the Constitution, which provides that the Gov- ernor, Secretary of State, and other officers we have provided for, shall not be eligible for re—election, and could by that one amendment, and at one election, if the peo— ple of the State should so desire, make them eligible for re-election. Let us see in regard to this provision. If it be thought best to submit an amendment to the first clause, that could be done. And the Legislature could go further, and take the entire chapter and amend it from the beginning to the end, and submit that to the people. It is simply one amendment, and would be so construed. In other words, a substitute for the whole chapter could be submitted, as a substitute is nothing more than an amendment in an enlarged form. This latitude is given in the report of this Committee. Mr. APPLEGATE. Tell me what that means, if you can amend it in any way you want? Mr. PETTIT. It says that but one amendment to any article of this Constitu- tion shall be voted upon or be pending at any one time. Mr. APPLEGATE. I know what it says, but what does it mean '? Mr. PETTIT. It means that you may amend this article of the Constitution once. You are at liberty to amend the article by striking out and inserting one word, or by striking out every line and syllable of it, and inserting an entirely different article, and submit either one or the other. Mr. MCHENRY. Then you could wipe out the whole thing. You could change the whole Constitution. Mr. PETTIT. It provides that but one amendment to any article of the Constitu- tion shall be voted upon or be pending at any one time. Look at the provision in the beginning of this report. It requires a two-thirds vote of those elected to the General Assembly; then a majority of both Houses of that body shall so express them- selves at a second meeting, before it is sub- mitted to the people. I think the latitude is large and ought not to be extended. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark was again read. Mr. MCHENRY. What became of the original amendment of the Delegate from Clark ‘? The CHAIRMAN. He withdrew it. Mr. MCHENBY. I want to renew mine, then, at the proper time. Mr. AMOS. I desire to offer an amend- ment. The amendment reads as follows: Amend section 1, lines 26 and 27, by striking out these words: “one amendment to any article of,” and insert in lieu thereof “three amendments to.” I Mr. AUXIER. I have been in my seat hoping that some one would get up on the floor and say something in response to the Delegate from Mason. I have patiently 28 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] AUXrER—YoUNe—DEHAvEN—HAunis. [November 24 . waited, and have found nobody to reply to any of the remarks he made; therefore, I shall address myself to his argument forbut a few moments. If you hold his theory, it seems to me, that it would give the Legis- lature the right and power to deal with this Constitution about in the same manner as with acts of the Legislature. I look upon this Constitution, or any organic document, as being something superior to an ordinary statutory provision. I look upon it as being a luminary, over and above the common State law, around which the statutes must revolve and be governed. I think it un- wise to give the Legislature the entire con- trol without any restriction. It seems to me like there ought to be some restriction placed. Mr. YOUNG. The Delegate from Mason was not speaking to the subject at all, but about a matter not now being considered, and I hope the Delegate from Pike will not pur- sue his argument, and then follow his ex- ample Mr. AUXIER. Well. there is one other question I wish to speak about. I object to the Committee’s report for another reason. The remarks I have been making are not in opposition to the Committees re- port, but I do object to one part of the Committee’s report, and that is this: the last section, which provides for the calling of another Constitutional Convention. I object to this dual system of amending Con- stitutions. We ought either amend the Constitution by an open clause, or provide for the calling of a Convention. I hardly think it is right to have two modes of revis- ing our Constitution. If we adopt the open clause, allowing the Legislature to submit to vote upon any section, what necessity have we for the calling of a Convention? All Constitutional Conventions are attended with a great deal of cost, and if there can be devised any other means by which the Constitution can be amended other than the calling of a Convention, it seems to me the Wisdom of this Convention should adopt that system instead of having two means by which the Constitution may be revised. Mr. DEHAVEN. I move to amend that by striking out “five” and inserting “one.” Mr. HARRIS. I second that motion. Mr. BECKNER. That is the clause as it stands now. Mr. DEHAVEN. No, sir; it is not. The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate from Oldham will please put his amendment in writing. A vote being taken, the amendment offered by the Delegate from Oldham was rejected. Mr. HARRIS. I move to strike out the word “ five’_ and insert “ two." A vote being taken, the motion was lost- Mr. H. H. SMITH. I move to strike out “five " and insert “ three." Mr. SPALDING. ' I second the motion. Mr. MAY. It means, if this amendment to strike out “ five” and insert “ three," there could be only three amendments to the whole Constitution, provided it had twenty sections. Is that correct? The CHAIRMAN. The Delegate must dotermine that for himself. A vote being taken, the motion was lost. Mr. SPALDING. I move to strike out “ one " and insert “ four.” Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer this amendment to the amendment of the Dele— gate from Clark: Said amendments shall be so submitted as to allow a separate vote on each. Mr. BECKNER. I accept that. A vote being taken on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Union, it was rejected. Mr. STRAUS. I offer an amendment. Mr. MCHENRY. I call for a report of my amendment, which was offered before. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Bullitt was read, and is as follows: Amend by striking out the word “ma- REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. 29 Mondayn] Mon'reomnav jority," in line twenty, and insert in lieu thereof “sixty-five per cent.” The amendment of the Delegate from Clark, as amended by the amendment of the Delegate from Lexington, was read, and is as follows: Strike out the words “but one," in line 26 of section 1, and substitute “not more than five,” and strike out the words “any article of,” in lines 26 and 27, and add the following: “Said amendments shall be so submitted as to allow a separate vote on each.” Mr. MONTGOMERY. I offer an amendment to the amendment. The CHAIRMAN. That is not in order. There is an amendment to the amendment. Report it for information. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Adair was read, and is as follows: Add to the amendment the following: “No such proposed amendment .shall relate to more than one subject.” The CHAIRMAN. I will hold, until better informed, that that amendment is in order, as the amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington was accepted by the Delegate from Clark. Mr. RAMSEY. I move to strike out the proviso entirely, and offer this as a sub- stitute. The substitute reads as follows: Strike out the words beginning with the word ‘*provided,’ ’down to and including the word ~‘ time,” in the 26th, 27th and 28th lines, and insert in lieu thereof the follow- in : “Provided, if two or more amend- ments shall be submitted at the same time, they shall be submitted in such manner that the electors shall vote for or against each of such amendments separately.” The amendment of the Delegate from ‘Clark was here read, and also the amend- ment proposed thereto by the Delegate from Adair. Mr. CLAY. There is a difference be- tween submitting to the people and submit- ting to the Legislature. In the propo- sition submitted to the Legislature, the Legislature has the right by amendment RAMSEY—CLAY—BRONSTON. [November 24 . to vote upon every possible phase of that subject; but when the question is submitted to the people, they have to vote for or against the proposition as submitted. Therefore, I hold that there is a very strong and just reason why only one subject should be submitted in an amendment, for in voting for five or six, as the case may be, they may vote for something they are not for. In that way it prevents them from mak- ing the very best choice in the case, and the, rule that applies to the Legislature or the Convention, does not apply to the people, because they have to take it as submitted to them, and have no power of amend- ment. Therefore, each amendment should ' apply to one subject. Mr. BRONSTON. If the amendment means that, I agree with the Delegate from Bourbon. A vote being taken on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Adair, the same was adopted. The CHAIRMAN. The question is now on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark as amended by the amendment just adopted. Mr. BRONSTON. I desire to offer an amendment to that. Mr. SACHS. Is not there a substitute for that ? The CHAIRMAN. This will be per- fected first. The amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington (Mr. Bronston) was read, and is as follows: Amend the amendment as amended by adding thereto the following: “Nor shall the same amendment be submitted more than once in ten years.” Mr. MCDERMOTT. I move to strike out “ten ” and insert “ five.” Mr. BRONSTON. I have no objection to that. But I made the calculation that it takes four years to get it before the peo- ple the first time, and that would make it eight for the second time. ‘ Mr. McDERMOTT. You would make it fifteen practically. 30 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] HARRIS—BRONSTON—~BURNAM. [November 24 . Mr. HARRIS. Five years from what time ? Mr. BRONSTON. When submitted. Mr. HARRIS. Is that clear from that. Mr. BRONSTON. If it is not I will make it. The Delegate from Lexington then changed his amendment to read as follows : Nor shall the same amendment be sub- mitted more than once in five years after ‘the first submission and the announcement of the vote thereon. Mr. HARRIS. Is it in order to ofifer an amendment‘? If so, I move to strike out that five and insert ten. The CHAIRMAN. That is not in order. This is already an amendment to an amend- ment to the report. A vote being taken on the amendment offered by the Delegate from Lexington, it was rejected. Mr. BURNAM. I have an amendment. The amendment reads as follows: Amend section 1 as follows: Strike out all after the word " Journal,” in the sixth line, down to and including the word “ House,” in the ninth line. The CHAIRMAN. The vote will now be on the amendment offered by the Dele~ gate from Clark. A vote being taken on said amendment, it was adopted. Mr. BURNAM. I want to say a word about the amendment I proposed, if I am in order at this time. The report of the Committee reads as follows: Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either House of the General Assembly, and if such amendment shall he agreed to by two-thirds of all the members elected to each House, such proposed amendment, with the yeas and nays of each House taken thereon, shall be entered in full on their respective J ournals, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members 'elected to each House of the next ensuing General Assembly, by a vote thereon, to be taken by yeas and nays, and spread upon the Journals of each House, then such proposed amendment shall be submitted to the electors of the State, for their ratification or rejection, at the next / general election for State ofiicers or mem- bers of the House of Representatives, which shall not occur less than ninety days from the final passage of such proposed amend- ment, the vote to be taken thereon in such manner as the General Assembly may pro- vide, and to be certified by the officers of election to the Secretary of State in such manner as shall be provided by law, which vote shall be compared and certified by the same Board authorized by law to compare the polls and give certificate of election to officers for the State at large. If it shall appear that a majority of all the votes cast for and against such amendment was for the amendment, then the same shall become a part of the Constitution of this State, and shall be so proclaimed by the Governor and published in such manner as the General Assembly may direct. A proposition to amend may be either to add to or to take from this Constitution: Provided, That but one amendment to any article of this Con- stitution shall be voted upon or be pending at any one time. N ow, the proposition that Imake is to strike out so much of that section as begins at the word “Journals,” in the sixth line and down to the word “ House," in the ninth line, which requires these propositions to be submitted to a second Legislature be- fore the people are called on to vote for them. I undertake to say that no proposi- tion to amend the Constitution of Kentucky will ever be made by any Legislature un- less in obedience to some loud public call. There will be a demand for it by the peo- ple before it is ever submitted to them, and when it is submitted to them by a vote of two-thirds of the Legislature, on a call of the yeas and nays, with those recorded votes, I see no reason why the people should not be permitted to pass upon it at the succeeding election, and not leave it to a subsequent Legislature, as required by this section, by a bare majority to submit it to the people. If I understand his remarks, I agree in letter and spirit with every thing said by the Delegate from the county of Mason At an early day in the session, I introduced a resolution substantially like the one I now offer, except in one respect, and that is, in- stead of two-thirds, my proposition was to REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. 31 Monday,] Bummer-Moons. [November 2-1. require three-fifths to propose the change. I do not think it is doing away with any proper Constitutional restriction or amend- ment in this instrument in order to give it strength and.,power and acceptability before the people. I believe that they themselves have elected this Convention to bring about a relief from the odious tyranny and despot- ism which rests on the shoulders of the people by virtue of that provision in the Constitution of 1849, by which it could not be amended without great difiiculty. You all remember how that was. I think it would require something like seven years to have brought about an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Kentucky under the present organic law. It, I be- lieve, required a vote to be taken, first, by one Legislature and agreed to by the peo- ple, and then by a successive Legislature two years thereafter, and then to be sub- mitted to a vote of the people, and again agreed to; thus making about six years be- fore it could be accomplished, and requiring at the same time a majority of all the voters in the State of Kentucky; those out of the State, those sick and unable to get to the polls to be counted as hostile to the call of the Convention at the two elections, and then the Convention had to be called by chosen Delegates, and after all this had been done, and the Constitution matured, thereafter submitted to the people as to whether they would ratify the instrument when made. I state, in ' my opinion, that this is almost absolute despotism. Mr. MOORE. According to your prop- osition, an amendment to the Consti- tutson could be adopted within six months? Mr. BURNAM.‘ I think not. Mr. MOORE. The General Assembly passes upon it but once. Mr. BURNAM. Even if they do that‘, and the people demand it. I should not object. I go back to what I originally said. It is not worth while to be appre- hensive that the people are going to do any thing that they do not regard as necessary to their welfare. It is hardly to be im- agined that any Constitutional amend— ment will be adopted when any consider- able portion of the State is very hostile to it. In my opinion there will never be any Constitutional amendment submitted to the people, unless there is a large majority of the people of the State of Kentucky who want it, and are making a loud cry for it. Believing that, I am in favor of strik- ing out this provision, and letting a single act of the Legislature at one session, after a vote of two-thirds of the members, submit a proposition to amend to the people at the coming election. If any gentleman thinks that is not sufficient time for deliberation, I would be perfectly willing to strike out “ninety days," and say it should be sub_ mitted at an election six months after. The matter of publication is not what is chiefly in my mind. I do not want this Constitution to say that the Legis— lature, by a two-thirds majority at one time, shall leave the matter open for a bare majority of the succeeding Legisla- ture to lay it before the people. I do not know how it has come to me, but I have gotten it in some way, that a proposition will come from the Legisla- tive Committee to have Senators elected for eight years, and Representatives for four years. I avow my belief, if that is done. this Constitution will be voted down by a majority of fifty thousand. I have submitted this proposition in perfect good faith, believing it to be just. Now, one other consideration in regard to precedents I read the provision of the Missouri Con- stitution with reference to amending or changing the Constitution of that State:_ “ The General Assembly may, at any time, propose such amendments to this Constitu- tion as a majority of the members elected to each House deem expedient; and the vote thereon shall be taken by yeas and nays, and entered in full on the Journals. The proposed amendments shall be pub- lished with the laws of that session, and REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Monday,] BURNA M—TWYMAN—FARMER. [November 24. also shall be published weekly in some newspaper, if such there be, within each county in the State, for four consecutive weeks next preceding the general election then next ensuing. The proposed amend- ments shall be submitted to a vote of the people. each amendment separately, at the next general election thereafter, in such manner as the General Assembly may pro- vide. If a majority of the qualified voters of the State, voting for and against any one of said amendments, shall vote for such amendment, the same shall be deemed and taken to have been ratified by the people, and shall be valid and binding, to all intents and purposes, as a part of this Constitu- tion.” This is identical with my proposed amendment to the Committee’s report. Mr. TWYMAN. All I desire to say is this: that amendment is identical, so far as striking out from the sixth to the ninth line is concerned, with one I offered. In the eleventh line I have inserted in addi- tion the word “two,” making it two suc- cessive general elections, and in the twen— ty-first line I have added the words “ at each of said elections.” What I am desir- ous of arriving at is to know whether this Convention is going to take up the question now, or is it going to follow the regular proceedings that we have been going under ‘? The CHAIRMAN. The next amend- ment in order is that of the Delegate from Union. The amendment of the Delegate from Union was read, as follows: Strike out “majority of the second Leg- islature " and insert “ two-thirds." A vote being taken thereon, the amend- ment was rejected. The next amendment, offered by the Del- egate from Daveiss, Mr. Birkhead, was then read, and is as follows: Amend by adding “ and that each amendment shall relate to but one subject, and if more than one amendment be voted on at the same time, each shall be voted on separately.” The CLERK. The next amendment in order is that proposed by the Delegate from Henderson. The amendment was read, and is as fol- lows: In the third line strike out the word f‘ two-thirds” and insert the word “ major- ity.” Mr. FARMER. I have always been one of those in favor of trusting the people, trusting them when they could give their calm, impartial, well-considered voice. Hence, I am in favor of this part of the Committee’s report, with the exception of the word “ two-thirds.” I see no necessity for requiring that two-thirds of all the mem-,- bers elected in order to propose an amend- ment, because, before any Legislature will have proposed an amendment, as has been well said by some of the Delegates, this question will be greatly agi- tated among the people. Then, if a major- ity of both Houses concur in submitting an amendment, I see no reason why it should take a two-thirds vote to carry it. Now, as it reads, it says: “ Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either House of the General Assembly, and if such amendment shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the members elected to each House, _such proposed amendment, with the yeas and nays of each House taken thereon, shall be entered in full won their respective Journals, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each House of the next ensuing Gen- eral Assembly, by a vote thereon, to be taken by yeas and nays, and spread upon the Journals of each House, then such proposed amendment shall be submitted to the electors of the State “it *1‘ ” This, I contend, gives the people of the State a sufficiency of time to consider all the amendments. An amendment to a Constitution is a thing that should not be entered into too rashly. Some men will say this will make it too easy to amend. I think not. I think if you adopt this REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION. 33 Monday,] FARMER—MCHENRY—BECKNER. [November 24. amendment proposed you will do the right thing; that the people will have ample time to consider, and their mature voice will then be heard through the State, and in doing this, you must recollect that the public will will be really expressed three times; by first a majority of the members from all sections of the State, a two-thirds majority. You will have to have a majority then, you might say, of the voters of the whole State; then the amendment must be in- dorsed by the people at large through their representatives again. Then, again, you have a full consideration of this subject. Those proposing it will speak in all the different counties in the State and the people can have a full consideration. I think this is enough- Our Senate is a con- servative body. If the Lower House has been hasty, the Senate may correct; and so, in case they come to consider any amend- ment, they will have all these things, and the people will have full, mature considera- tion; and when the people have fully and maturely considered any proposition, I think a majority should carry it. As to the other States, on this question I find they are considerably divided; but I find that the large and pro- gressive States have adopted substantially this Committee’s report, with the exception of that two-thirds majority. The States of New York and Pennsylvania, looking at the Constitutions of those States, I find that subsequent amendments have been adopted by a vote of the majority of the Legislature submitting them to the people, and those amendments have almost always been good. We find that the people are not likely to change their Constitutions for light or transient reasons. We are a con- servative people, and unless a good cause can be shown us why an amendment shall be adopted, the people will vote it down. I think from these considerations that you ‘should strike out the words “two-thirds” and insert a “a majority.” If this two- thirds provision remains in the Constitu- tion, and also the amendment proposed by the Delegate from Ohio, I contend that in a State like Kentucky it will be almost im- possible to get an amendment. The people of Kentucky are conservative, hard to change, and it is almost impossible in our Legislature, unless very good reasons are urged, to get a two—thirds vote of the mem- bers elected to both Houses on any propo- sition. We all know how hard it is to get such a majority. Hence, I think it is bet- ter, for all purposes, to adopt the amend- ment I have offered. A vote being taken on the said amend- ment, it was rejected. The CLERK. The next amendment is one offered by the Delegate from Ohio. Strike out the proviso of the first section. Does that include the amendment of the Delegate from Clark? Mr. MCHENRY. Let us hear how it would read after it is amended. The Clerk read the proviso as amended by the amendment offered by the Delegate from Clark: Provided, That no more than five amend- ments to this Constitution shall be voted upon or be pending at any one time, and said amendments shall be so submitted as to allow a separate vote on each. No such proposed amendment shall relate to more than one subject, nor shall the same amend- ment be submitted more than once in five years after the first submission and the an- nouncement of the vote thereon. Mr. B'ECKNER. The vote has been taken on that amendment, and would not the proposition of the Delegate from Ohio simply take it out again ? Would not that be a reconsideration of it ‘2 I, therefore, in- sist that it is not in order. Mr. MCHENRY. I do not know that I care about it. I would rather strike out the whole provision. It has been changed so that the author of it would not know it. It is a difi'erent thing from what it was when I moved to strike it out. However, I think my amendment is still i'n‘order. A vote being taken on the amendment s4 REVISION OF THE coNsTITUTIoN. Monday,] TWYMAN. [N ovember 24 . offered by the Delegate from Ohio, the same was rejected. The Clerk read the next amendment, one proposed by the Delegate from Larue: Strike out all the words between the word “Journals,” in the sixth line, and down to and including the word “ House,” in the ninth line, and insert the word “ two " after the word “next” in the eleventh, and after the word “amend- ment,” in the twenty-first line, insert the words “at each of said elections.” Mr. TWYMAN. I would ask the Clerk to read how the section would then read. The CLERK. It would read as fol- lows: Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either House of the General Assembly, and if such amendment shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the members elected to each House, such proposed amendment, with the yeas and nays of each House taken thereon, shall be entered in full on their respective Journals, then such proposed amendment shall be submitted to the electors of the State for their ratifica- tion or rejection, at the next two general elections for State ofiicers or members of the House of Representatives, which shall not occur less than ninety days from the final passage of such proposed amendment, the vote to be taken thereon in such man- ner as the General Assembly may provide, and to be certified by the oflicers of election to the Secretary of State, in such manner as shall be provided by law. which vote shall be compared and certified by the same board authorized by law to compare the polls and give certificate of election to ofiicers for the State at large. If it shall ap- pear thata majority of all the votes cast for and against such amendment at each of said elections was for the amendment, then the same shall become a part of the Con— stitution of this State, and shall be so pro- claimed by the Governor, and published in such manner as the General Assembly may direct. A proposition to amend may be either to add to or take from this Constitu- tion: Provided, That but one amendment to any article of this Constitution shall be voted upon or be pending at any one time. Mr. TWYMAN. My object in that is to submit it to the people of the State twice, instead of allowing the Legislature to pro- pose twice, and then the people ratify it. My idea is that it is better to submit a proposition of this character to the people at large, and allow them to pass directly upon the question. Undoubtedly it was the object in the Committee making this report, that the second House elected should go before the people and be elected upon that idea, for or against the proposed amendment, and coming back for the pur- pose of ratifying it or rejecting it. Allow me to say here, if we take our past experi- ence as of any advantage of the future, you will not find a candidate for Representative in this State ever announcing himself for or against any amendment. You can scarcely ever get a man in this State who would announce himself for or against a call of this Convention. They feared they might thereby lose some votes. Then, on re-submitting it to the House, a bare major- ity of the House will have no bearing, so far as the people are concerned, upon the question, and you had just as well say at once that the people shall decide upon it. When it is submitted to the peo- ple they are right almost all the time. The people hardly ever go wrong. They will hardly ever be mistaken in an amendment if it is submitted to them. My idea in sub- mitting it to them is this : Very frequently questions are submitted to the people when they do not vote intelligently, because the matter is not discussed or fully under- stood. There has been little said about it in the community, and, perhaps, after the election is over, and they get to discussing it, they may find that they have done wrong. Then they have until the next election to consider the matter, and decide in their own mind whether they did right, and after considering it and weighing the pro and con, and having the benefit of the newspapers in discussing the importance of the measure and its bearing at the second election, it is right for them to ratify it, and they are fully competent to do so, and then it is declared by the Governor as adopted as an amendment to the Constitution. I REVISION or THE CONSTITUTION. - 35 Monday,] TWYMAN—PETTIT—WHITA TIER. [November 24 . do not know what the report of the Legis- lative Committee will be. I do not know how often they will elect the Legis- lature, or how long they will hold; but if it turns out that they are to be elected every four years, and you have it go before a Legislature first, and then go before the successive Legisla- ture, and then before the people, you make the'time too long before such an amend- ment can become part of the organic law. I do insist that the people are the proper repository in which to place this important question. I desire to throw all the guards necessary around an open clause in the Con- stitution, that no amendment may be oar- red through excitement at any election or by improper means. Times of excitement do arise when men do not vote according to their judgment, but according to their pas- sions, and I think, therefore, it is better to allow the people on two occasions to express whether they shall or shall not have an amendment. I cannot see any advantage growing out of the proposition made by the Committee. I say, after the Legislature passes upon it the first time, submit it to the people, and let them decide whether or not it shall be en- ' grafted on the organic law. If at one time, by fair or foul means, they have been led to make a mistake, they will find out that mistake and retract it at the second time. I think the people are the ones to say Whether we shall or shall not have an amendment to the Constitution. Mr. PETTIT. This is a proposition to submit it to the Legislature one time, and to the people at two general elections. Mr. TWYMAN. The Legislature pro- pose it_ by a two-thirds majority, and then at the two succeeding elections the people decide upon whether they shall or shall not haveit Mr. WHITAKER. I move the Com- . mittee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried. The President here resumed the Chair. THE CONVENTION. Mr. BECKHAM. The Committee of the Whole have had under consideration the report of the iCommittee on Revision. They report progress, and ask leave to sit again. A vote being taken, the [report of the Committee of the Whole was adopted. Mr. MAY. I move that the Convention adjourn A vote being taken, the motion was car- ried, and the Convention thereupon ad- journed. ..~...n.,__ x‘: r " i‘ "'-. s am A I . <~v~._~.._‘ . _ 12.91836 8 .‘ m 6v . . 1 3 nd l W » i0 All ‘fN-VEJIH