GIFT or 
 
fflsst Uirgmia Ilnrasrsiig Studies 
 
 IN 
 
 West Virginia history 
 
 J. M. CALLAHAN, EDITOR 
 
 Constitutional History 
 
 Nos. 1 and 2 
 
 
 Evolution of the Constitution of West Virginia 
 
 BY MAUD FULCHER CALLAHAN 
 
 Department "of History and Political Science 
 
 MOBOMTOWN, W. TA. 
 
 1909 
 
 Prick 50 cents 
 
 *1.50 TOR SERIES OB SIX NUMBER* 
 
o 
 
 
 WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY. 
 
 Morgantown, West Virginia. 
 
 A modern state university with full equipment of laboratories, 
 libraries, and shops; and with the following colleges and schools: 
 
 Colleges of Arts and Sciences, Engineering and Mechanic Arts, Ag- 
 riculture, Law, and Medicine. 
 
 Schools of Music, Fine Arts, Commerce, and Military Science and 
 Tactics. 
 
 The Summer School, and Preparatory Schools. 
 
 Agricultural Experiment Station. 
 
 Faculty of eighty members; 1,250 students. 
 
 The campus contains fifty acres, and the location is one of the 
 most beautiful in America. 
 
 Announcements of the various colleges and schools or catalogues 
 of the University as a whole, will be sent upon request to Waitman 
 Barbe, or to D. B. PURINTON, D. D., L.U. D., President. 
 
 WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY STUDIES IN AMERICAN HISTORY 
 
 A series of monographs on (1) American diplomatic history and 
 foreign policy and (2) the American expansion policy, published by 
 the head of the department of history and political science. 
 
 These studies are based upon materials obtained through careful 
 researches in the official manuscript archives at Washington and by 
 examination of other original materials which have not been exploited 
 by historical writers. They have been prepared in connection with 
 lecture courses and seminar work for graduate students. 
 
 The first number treats of "Russo-American relations during the 
 American civil war." (30c) Several numbers are devoted to inter- 
 American relations — especially relations with South America and 
 Central America. The following subjects are announced: 
 
 Project of a Spanish-American confederation, 1856. 
 
 American-Mexican diplomatic relations, 1853-60. 
 
 Some forgotten applications of the Monroe doctrine. 
 
 Evolution of Seward's policy against the French in Mexico. (75c). 
 
 Evolution of American policy in the West Indies. 
 
 Spanish-American policy during the American civil war. 
 
 The Alaska purchase and America-Canadian relations. (50c). 
 
 Background of the American policy in Panama. 
 
 Other subjects will be announced later. 
 
 UNIVERSITY STUDIES IN WEST VIRGINIA HISTORY 
 
 A related series of monographs treating the most important 
 phases of the general development of the state: constitutional, 
 political, institutional and industrial; legislative and regulative. 
 Prepared by advanced students who have had training in modern, 
 scientific methods of historical research. The first numbers trace the 
 "Evolution of the constitution of West Virginia" (50c). Other num- 
 bers, on transportation, education and taxation, and on smaller sub- 
 jects of local history are in preparation. 
 
 Department of History and Political Science, 
 West Virginia University, Morgantown, W. Va. 
 
 Copyright, 1909. 
 J. M. Callahan. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution of West Virginia 
 
 I. Introduction. 
 
 West Virginia, the only distinctively mountainous state of the 
 Appalachian region, and the only state whose formation represents 
 a logical conclusion of the sectionalism which existed before the 
 civil war in all the southern states from Pennsylvania southward 
 to Florida, has a constitutional history somewhat unique. Its 
 destiny to form a separate state was largely determined by the 
 flow of its rivers in an opposite direction to the flow of the tide 
 water rivers, and was foreshadowed in the different political ideas 
 of the West — causing it to give a proportionately larger vote than 
 the East for the ratification of the national constitution in 1788, 
 to oppose the Virginia resolutions of 1798, to antagonize the elec- 
 tion of Jefferson in 1801, to favor the American system as a 
 national policy and to advocate the establishment of free schools 
 and the further democratization of social and political institutions. 
 Showing a growing influence in determining the constitutional de- 
 velopment of the mother state before the war and its determination 
 to fight the mother state in order to preserve the Union, the New 
 Dominion still retains in its constitution many evidences of a sur- 
 viving sentiment in favor of the institutions of the Old Dominion. 
 
 IT. A Half Century Under the Constitution of the Revolution. 
 
 The first constitution of Virginia was adopted on June 29, 
 1776 when there were within the limits of the present state of 
 West Virginia only Hampshire and BerkeJley counties and the dis- 
 trict of West Augusta. This constitution! established an annual 
 general assembly of two houses the members of which were elected 
 by the limited number of people who had the right of suffrage. 
 The house of delegates, the members of which were elected each 
 
 1. Poore, Charters and Constitutions of the United States, vol. 
 2, pp. 1910-12. , , 
 
 3GG12<. 
 
2 Studies in West Virginia Histoby. 
 
 year, replaced the old house of burgesses and with slight exception* 
 retained the old system of representation: two representatives 
 from each county, and two from the district of West Augusta, 
 (and one from both Williamsburg and Norfolk). The general as- 
 sembly was authorized to grant to each new county which it might 
 create two delegates, and to use its discretion in allowing repre- 
 sentation to new towns; but there was a provision for dropping the 
 representation of any town whose population decreased until for 
 seven consecutive years its voting population was less than one- 
 half that of a county. 
 
 The senate was composed of twenty-four members chosen 
 for a term of four years from twenty-four districts, and was made 
 a rotating body by a provision for the election of six members each 
 year. The apportionment was purely arbitrary and without pro- 
 vision for future reform. 
 
 The elective franchise remained as exercised since the law of 
 1736" 5 and was confined to freeholders who had been in possession 
 of their freehold at least one whole year before the issue of the 
 writ for the election at which they wished to vote. 
 
 With the election of the members of the general assembly the 
 voice of the voting population ceased. The governor, treasurer, 
 the eight privy councilmen, the secretary, the attorney-general, and 
 the judges of all the superior courts were chosen by joint ballot 
 of the two houses of the general assembly; the governor and 
 treasurer were chosen annually; the privy council was subject to 
 the removal of two of their number every three years by the 
 "scratch" of the assembly; the secretary, the attorney-general and 
 the judges served during good behavior. 
 
 The people had little share in local government. The self per- 
 petuating county courts* had general management of all local 
 affairs. These courts constitutionally appointed the sheriff, the 
 coroner and the clerk of the county; they had the statutory privi- 
 lege of appointing all other civil officers of the county and all mili- 
 tary officers under the grade of brigadier-general, and of laying all 
 taxes for county purposes and of expending them as they saw fit; 
 and, with all these powers, they were responsible to no one for 
 their actions. 
 
 2. Jamestown and the college of William and Mary were no longer 
 granted representation. 
 
 3. Hen in g vol. 4, pp. 470, 476. A freehold was one hundred acres 
 of uncultivated land without a house, twenty-five acres of improved 
 land with a house, or a house and lot in town. 
 
 4. Jefferson's Works, vol. 7, p. 10. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 3 
 
 The development of West Virginia for the half century after 
 the revolution produced new problems for the Old Dominion. 
 Before the close of the eighteenth century the population in the 
 region now known as West Virginia had begun to grow rapidly. 
 In the Virginia convention of June 2, 1788, which was called to 
 ratify or reject the federal constitution, it was represented by six 
 new counties which had been formed from the district of West 
 Augusta: Monongalia and Ohio, in 1776, Greenbrier in 1777, and 
 Harrison, Hardy and Randolph in 1784, 1785 and 1786 respect- 
 ively. This number of counties had increased to thirteen in 1800 
 by the formation of Pendleton in 1787, Kanawha in 1789, Brooke 
 in 179 6, Wood in 1798 and Monroe in 1799. These thirteen be- 
 came sixteen in 1810 by the addition of Jefferson in 1801, Mason in 
 1804 and Cabell in 1809. To these counties four new ones were 
 added before 1820: Tyler in 1814, Lewis in 1816, Nicholas in 
 1818 and Preston in 1818. By the end of the next decade a total 
 of twenty-three counties was completed by the formation of Morgan 
 in 1820, Pocahontas in 1821 and Logan in 1824. The white popu- 
 lation had increased from 50,593 in 1790 to 70,894 in 1800, to 
 93,355 in 1810, to 120,236 in 1820, and to 157,084 in 1830.5 
 
 During these years, and partly as a result of changing condi- 
 tions, the defects in the constitution became very marked. These 
 defects were early noticed by Jefferson who desired a state Con- 
 stitutional convention to remedy them. Commenting on the con- 
 stitution, in 1782 he wrote: "The majority of the men in the state 
 who pay and fight for its support are unrepresented in the legis- 
 lature — the roll of freeholders entitled to vote not including gen- 
 erally the half of those on the roll of the militia or of the tax 
 gatherers. Among those who share the representation the shares 
 are unequal." To show some of the inequalities which existed even 
 at that early date between the four sections of the state from the 
 coast to the Ohio he prepared the following table:* 
 
 Fighting men Delegates Senators 
 
 East of river falls 19,012 71 12 
 
 Falls to Blue Ridge 18,828 4« 8 
 
 Blue Ridge to Alleghenies. . 7,673 16 2 
 
 Trans-Allegheny 4,458 16 2 
 
 The inequality of tke county system of representation is well 
 shown by a comparison of the counties. Tn 1800 Warwick with a 
 
 5. Census reports for 1790, 1800. 1810, 1820 and 1830, 
 
 6. Jefferson's Works, vol. 8, p. 360. 
 
4 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 white population of 614 and had two members in the house of dele- 
 gates while at the same time Berkeley with a white population of 
 17,832 had but two members in the lower house. The ine'quality 
 was equally noticeable in the senate. In 1815 the entire West with 
 a free white population of about 233,469,' two-fifths that of the 
 state, was represented by four senators; and at the same time the 
 East containing the other three-fifths of the w T hite population. 342-781, 
 was represented by twenty senators. 
 
 Several attempts to secure adjustment were unsuccessful. In 
 the house of delegates, in the May session of the assembly of 1784, 
 a petition from Augusta county asking for a constitutional conven- 
 tion was the subject of a two days debate; and although Madison 
 strongly advocated it, a bill for a convention failed — largely 
 through the violent opposition of Patrick Henry.? 
 
 After 1790 petitions praying for a reform in representation and 
 suffrage were presented at almost every session of the assembly. 
 From the counties of Patrick and Henry these petitions were ex- 
 pected regularly at the commencement of each session. In the ses- 
 eion of 1806 a bill for submitting to the people the proposition to 
 call a constitutional convention passed the house but was indefin- 
 itely postponed in the senate through the iafluence of prudent men 
 who feared the political bitterness of the times. » 
 
 In 1814, a constitutional reform bill which provided for ex- 
 tension of suffrage, reapportionment of representation, and the re- 
 duction of the total number composing the house of delegates, was 
 rejected in the house by a slight majority. The next year, a bill 
 was introduced into the house providing for a rearrangement of the 
 senatorial districts on a white basis. The fight was largely sec- 
 tional. The western members unsuccessfully urged the passage of 
 the bill. Eastern constitutional lawyers in the house held that 
 the districts, created by the same power that made the constitu- 
 tion, could be altered only by a constitutional convention. This 
 doctrine the westerners then determined to put into practice. On 
 August 19, 1816, a convention composed of representatives from 
 thirty-six counties (twenty-four of which were from the region west 
 of the Blue Ridge) met at Staunton and sent a memorial to the 
 general assembly requesting the passage of a bill for submitting 
 to the people the question of calling a constitutional convention. 
 Though the house was successful in securing the passage of a bill 
 
 7. Madison's Writings, vol. 1, p. 87. 
 
 8. Debates Virginia Constitutional Convention, 1829-30, pp. 81, 
 and 421. ' ' ; f\ 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 5 
 
 calling a convention to change the constitution by amendments 
 which would extend the right of suffrage, equalize the land tax, 
 and equalize representation on the basis of the white population, 
 its program for securing a convention and larger western repre- 
 sentation was frustrated in the senate. Then the legislature, re- 
 versing the doctrine held by the constitutional lawyers in 1815 
 passed a bill equalizing the senatorial districts according to the 
 white population of the old census of 1810 which no longer rep- 
 resented the true population of the West.s By this reapportion- 
 ment, the West got nine instead of four senators, while the num- 
 ber from the East was reduced from twenty to fifteen. 
 
 Though for a time public agitation ceased, by 1824 the equal- 
 ization of representatives in the house of delegates on the white 
 basis became the subject of newspaper controversy and general dis- 
 cussion which resulted in a second meeting at Staunton, on July 
 25, 1825, attended by upwards of one hundred friends of reform. 
 This convention passed resolutions in favor of several reforms: 
 representation in the house according to white population; the re- 
 duction of the total number of delegates in the house; the exten- 
 sion of the right of suffrage; the abolition of the executive council, 
 and a more responsible executive. These resolutions, forwarded 
 to the general assembly, in the three following sessions were the 
 sub jet of discussions which finally (in January 1828) resulted in 
 the passage of a bill for submitting the question of a constitutional 
 convention to a vote of the freeholders. The election returns 
 showed that the convention was favored by the almost unaminous 
 vote of the West and opposed by over one-half the vote of the 
 East. 
 
 m. The Constitutional Convention of 1829-30. 
 
 The convention which met at Richmond on October 5, 1829, 
 was an august assemblage composed of ninety-six of the most 
 prominent men of the state (four members from each senatorial 
 district) — eighteen of whom were from counties within the present 
 limits of West Virginia. Its dominating spirit of sectionalism was 
 largely due to the geographic and economic conditions which foi 
 years the defects of the old constitution had aggravated. The two 
 sections agreed on the acceptance of the bill of rights; but, with 
 their radically divergent ideas, they clashed on the practical appli- 
 cation of the principles of government. 
 
 9. Ibid pp. 82 and 
 
6 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 Practically all the time of the convention (October 5, 1&23 to 
 January 15, 1830), was consumed by debates on two questions: 
 representation and suffrage. On the question of suffrage the 
 thirty-six delegates from the district west of the mountains stood 
 solidly for white population as the basis for both houses, in oppo- 
 sition to the East which favored a representation based on white 
 population and taxation combined. Madison, Marshall and Monroe 
 defended the property basis on the grounds that the state was the 
 conservator of property. In the debates, when the eastern mem- 
 bers demanded reasons, based on facts and conditions, for what 
 they termed "the most crying injustice ever attempted in any 
 land" against property rights, the westerners continued to cite the 
 bill of rights and the abstractions of Jefferson. i<> In answer to the 
 statement that nearly three-fourths of the tax had been paid by the 
 counties east of the Blue Ridge, the West asked who were the men 
 who had fought the battles. When Judge Upshur from the Eastern 
 Shore, in a speech lasting the greater part of two days, endeavored 
 to show that the law of the majority came from no source — not 
 from the law of nature, nor from the exigencies of society, nor 
 from the nature and necessity of government, nor from any con- 
 stitutional source — Philip Doddridge of Brooke answered him by 
 asking: if the majority are not possessed of the right or power to 
 govern, "whence does the gentleman derive the power in question 
 to the minority?" When Randolph, in a high key, exclaimed that 
 if he were not too old to move he would never live under King 
 Numbers, Campbell from the Ohio extolled King Numbers as the 
 most dignified personage under the canopy of heaven. During the 
 debate the white laboring farmers in the western part of the state 
 were designated "peasants" holding the same place in political 
 economy as the slaves of the tide-water East. There were reports 
 that the western members would secede from the convention. To 
 allay sectional feeling Monroe urged mutual concessions and sug- 
 gested a white basis for the house and a mixed basis for the 
 senate." 
 
 Thus the debate continued until finally a plan of apportion- 
 ment by districts, based on no principle and opposed by the West, 
 was adopted. 
 
 The extension of suffrage was most strongly advocated by the 
 
 10. Debates of Convention, 1829-30, pp. 53, 54, and 57. F. N. 
 Thorpe: The political value of state constitutional history, (Iowa 
 School Journal, January 1903, p. 20). 
 
 11. Debates of Convention, pp. 66 et seq., 123, 151, 321, and 359. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. T 
 
 western people who quoted Jefferson in favor of free manhood 
 suffrage, but who were promptly notified by Randolph that the East 
 was "not to be struck down with the authority of Mr. Jefferson." 
 At this time, in Virginia (the only state of the twenty-four in the 
 Union which still adhered strictly to freehold suffrage), in a total 
 of 143,000 free white males there were 100,000 free white citizens 
 paying taxes to the state — of which about 40,000 were freeholders 
 and 60,000 were men who owned personal property." 
 
 Having failed in the effort for manhood suffrage, the West 
 fought vigorously , but unsuccessfully, to extend the suffrage at 
 least to taxpayers. Several easterners, arguing that much of the. 
 land in the West, fit only for a lair of wild beasts, was not worth 
 a mill per acre and would never be of any value, were determined 
 to draw the line of suffrage restriction even closer by fixing a 
 minimum value for a freehold. Throughout the East the feeling 
 was pretty general that there should be some local attachment. 
 Monroe said that the elective franchise should be confined to an 
 interest in the land, and Randolph approvingly agreed that "terra 
 firma" was the only safe ground in the commonwealth on which 
 the right of suffrage could stand. "The moment you quit the 
 land," said he, "you find yourself at sea without compass, without 
 landmarks, or polar star."" 
 
 The convention finally agreed to lessen the requirements of a 
 freehold, and to extend the suffrage to leaseholders and house- 
 keepers who paid taxes. 
 
 Philip Doddridge, typifying the western democratic sentiment 
 moved that the executive, unhampered by a council, should be 
 elected by the people and responsible to them.i* Although at that 
 time eighteen states elected their governors by popular vote, his 
 motion was lost. Mr. Naylor of Hampshire proposed that the office 
 of sheriff should be filled by the people instead of by the county 
 court whose members were accustomed to give this office to them- 
 selves in rotation, the one receiving it selling it at public auction 
 to the highest bidder; but this recommendation met the formidable 
 and successful opposition of men as influencial as Giles and Leigh 
 who thought such an innovation would disturb the county court 
 system which to them was "the most valuable part of the constitu- 
 tion." In the convention there seemed to be an abhorrance of 
 
 12. Ibid, pp. 355, and 356. 
 
 13. Ibid, pp. 347, 428-43. 
 
 14. Ibid, p. 464. W. T. Willey: Life of Philip Doddridgre, pp. 
 55-57, 
 
8 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 overlegislation and to remedy this Mr. George of Tazewell proposed 
 that the assembly should meet but once in two years. The motion 
 was lost, many perhaps feeling with Randolph that as the legis- 
 lature of the United States met every year the Virginia assembly 
 should meet annually also in order to watch it. Resolutions sub- 
 mitted by western members, looked toward the encouragement of 
 public education, were opposed by eastern men, some of whom 
 feared the adoption of a system by which the people of the East 
 would be taxed for the education of the children of the West. Nor 
 did the West, after failing to realize so many of its longed for re- 
 forms, have any prospect of realizing them in the early future. 
 The proposition that there should be a constitutional provision for 
 amendment received but twenty-five votes. In opposing this propo- 
 sition, John Randolph declared that he would as soon think of 
 introducing a provision of divorce in a marriage contract; and al- 
 though he was strongly against the constitution, he exclaimed: 
 "If we are to have it, let us not have it with the death warrant 
 on its very face."i5 
 
 The completed constitution, a precedent for all later consti- 
 tutions of the South before 1860,i« provided for several minor 
 reforms. Under it the number of delegates was reduced from 214 
 to 134 (not to exceed 150), the county system of representation 
 was abolished and representatives were apportioned according to 
 districts — which were so arranged that the apportionment was 
 more nearly in accord with the respective population of the 
 counties;. Thirty-one of the representatives were assigned to the 
 twenty-six counties west of the Alleghenies. Of these thirty-one, 
 the twenty-three counties now in West Virginia were given twenty- 
 nine. However, as no reapportionment could be made before 1841, 
 and then not unless two-thirds of the assembly agreed, and since 
 the East had a large majority in the legislature, the chances for 
 a reapportionment were small. An age qualification of twenty-five 
 years was added to the qualifications of delegates. The number 
 of senators was increased from twenty-four to thirty-two, not to 
 exceed thirty-six. The state was divided into two great senatorial 
 districts separated by the Blue ridge. The western district which 
 contained the larger number of electors was given only thirteen 
 members while the eastern was given nineteen. The age qualifi- 
 cation for senators was changed from twenty-five to thirty years. 
 The right of suffrage was extended to all white male citizens 
 
 15. Ibid. pp. 487, 817, 44, 359, 378, 787, 789. and 791. 
 18. F. N. Thorpe: Constitutional History of the American people, 
 vol. 2, p. 463. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 9 
 
 twenty-one years of age who were qualified to vote under the old 
 constitution and laws,i7 to all who possessed a $25.00 freehold, a 
 $25.00 joint tenantship, a $50.00 reversion, a five-year leasehold of 
 an annual rental value of $20.00, and to all tax-paying house- 
 keepers who were heads of families; but the right was granted 
 in terms the interpretation of which proved very difficult.^ There 
 was a provision for the viva voce vote — characteristic of the South. 
 
 The term of the executive was increased to three years, and 
 he was ineligible for the next three years. Contrary to the con- 
 stitution of 1776, which left all qualifications for the executive to 
 the general assembly, the new constitution contained several 
 qualifications: thirty years of age, a native citizen of the United 
 States, or a citizen at the time the federal government was estab- 
 lished, and a citizen of Virginia for five years next preceding his 
 election. The executive council was a rotary body consisting of 
 three instead of eight members chosen by the assembly, and the 
 senior councilman was authorized to act as lieutenant governor.^ 
 
 This constitution, submitted to the people, in April, 1830, was 
 ratified by a vote of 26,055 to 15,563. The vote within the bounds 
 of West Virginia stood 1,383 for ratification and 8,365 against it. 
 
 Naturally, the constitution of 1830 worked unfavorably for 
 the West. The vast natural resources of West Virginia — forests 
 of excellent timber, oil and natural gas, and 16,000 square miles 
 of bituminous coal in workable seams 2 ° — remained undeveloped be- 
 cause of the short sightedness of eastern leaders. The West, with 
 no railroads and no canals, sorely needed improvements; but, de- 
 spite much public agitation and vigorous struggles in the general 
 assembly, it had to remain content with paltry appropriations for 
 turnpikes, obtained by log rolling, while vast sums were spent on 
 badly managed improvements which were undertaken in the East. 
 Under this constitution the present territory of West Virginia re- 
 ceived no public buildings, had no representatives in the United 
 States senate and had no opportunity to furnish the governor 
 for the state before the appointment of Joseph Johnson in 1850. 
 
 Under these conditions it is not surprising that equal repre- 
 sentation on the white basis continued to be the western cry; but, 
 
 17. Hening vol. 12. p. 120. The law of 1785 defined a freehold as 
 twenty-five acres of improved or fifty acres of unimproved land. 
 
 18. J. A. C. Chandler: The history of suffrage in Virginia (in 
 Johns Hopkins University Studies, nineteenth series). 
 
 19. Poore, vol. 2, pp. 1912-1919. 
 
 20. Hon. George C. Sturgiss in Congressional Record, April 5, 
 1909, p. 859. " ' ; 
 
10 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 after the indefinite postponement of the subject by the legislature, 
 which had the power to reapportion the state after 1841, west- 
 erners, with sectional feeling more pronounced, finally settled into 
 a firm determination to endure the evils of the constitution until 
 after the census of 1850, satisfied that the excess of white popula- 
 tion west of the mountains would be so great that the Bast could 
 no longer with any show of justice refuse them their proper share 
 in the general assembly. 21 
 
 The basis of representation was the most prominent question 
 between the two sections. The easterners, who affirmed not very 
 reverently that to the white basis they could not and would not 
 yield, gradually advocated many of the reforms which had so 
 startled them when proposed by western members in the conven- 
 tion of 1829-30. They became willing to extend the suffrage to 
 every free white man over twenty-one, allowing him to vote once 
 where he resided and no where else; they favored a reform of the 
 county court and the judicial system, the election of the governor 
 by the people, and a more rigid accountability of all the govern- 
 mental departments. Through their newspapers and through the 
 governors' messages they urged a constitutional convention to bring 
 about these reforms. 22 On the other hand the westerners, who 
 had favored these reforms for years were unwilling to vote for a 
 convention which was not organized on the white basis and which 
 did not promise to equalize representation. 
 
 In the legislature, the West was again defeated by the pas- 
 sage of a convention bill that adopted for the convention a mixed 
 basis which gave the East a majority of seventeen in the conven- 
 tion (The white basis would have given the West a majority of 
 13). In the western papers this defeat was attributed to the votes 
 of western members who were anxious to secure a convention on 
 any basis. The feeling in the trans-Allegheny region, however, 
 was strongly against "that abominable convention bill" as it was 
 called in the Parkersburg Gazette, and the people were urged to 
 repudiate those traitors to the interests of the West and re- 
 publican principles who had voted for the bill with no provision for 
 a white basis. Anti-convention meetings were held in many of 
 the counties and the people were advised to vote against the con- 
 stitution. The Parkersburg Gazette, exhorting the West to pre- 
 sent an unbroken front in opposition to the eastern scheme to avoid 
 
 21. Monongalia Mirror, March 16, 1850. Speech of Johnson, of 
 Taylor Co., in House of Delegates, March 11, 1850. 
 
 22. Ihid, Dec. 15, 1849, Governor Floyd's message to general as- 
 sembly, Dec. 4, 1849 and Richmond Enquirer, Dec. 3, 1849. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 11 
 
 the reform most needed, said that it would then remain to be seen 
 whether the East would have the temerity to stake the integrity of 
 Virginia upon her dogma of "might makes right."23 At the April 
 elections, although the majority vote was in favor of the conven- 
 tion, most of the trans-Allegheny counties voted against it. 
 
 In the August elections for selecting delegates to the conven- 
 tion the basis question was the issue. Not a member elected from 
 the West favored the mixed basis and not a member elected from 
 the East except Henry A. Wise opposed it. Of the 135 members 
 elected 34 were from the present state of West Virginia. 
 
 IV. The Constitution of 1850. 
 
 The convention which met October 14, 1850, and adjourned 
 November 4, to await census data, reconvened on January 6, 1851. 
 On February 6, the committee on basis and apportionment having 
 found itself equally divided in opinion, submitted two reports. The 
 one, favored not only by the western members of the committee but 
 by every western delegate, advocated the white population as the 
 basis for the apportionment of both houses; the other, having the 
 almost equally unaminous support of the East, advocated white 
 population and taxes combined as a basis for both houses (so that 
 every seventy cents of taxes would have a representation equal to 
 one white person). Every days* from February 17 to May 10, 
 in committee of the whole, the convention discussed the reports of 
 this committee and the various substitutes; but no conclusion was 
 reached. The East had the power to adopt its basis, but feared 
 that if it should do so the West would secede from the convention. 
 Each side clung to its demands with bull-dog tenacity. Feeling 
 was so high that on May 10 the convention was forced to adjourn 
 until the following day. Then a compromise committee was ap- 
 pointed to prevent a split.25 Finally, the West, unflinchingly re- 
 fusing to consider any compromise which did not eventually pro- 
 vide for the white basis or for submitting the basis question to the 
 people, partially gained its point. In the plan adopted the ap- 
 portionment for the house of delegates was based on the white 
 
 23. Monongalia Mirror, April 20, 1850. 
 
 24. One session a day proved insufficient for the discussions. The 
 reporter struck for higher wages, and the members enamored with 
 their own verbocity agreed to his demands. 
 
 25. Journal, Acts and Proceedings of Virginia Convention, 1850- 
 51, pp. 205, and 206. J. A. C. Chandler: Representation in Virginia 
 (J. H. U. Studies, 14th. series), pp. 64-71. 
 
12 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 population according to the census of 1850 (giving to the West 
 eighty-three delegates and to the East sixty-nine). The appor- 
 tionment in the senate was arbitrarily fixed giving thirty to the 
 East and twenty to the West, but in the plan there was a provision 
 that either the legislature should make a reapportionment on the 
 white basis in 1865 or the governor should submit the basis ques- 
 tion to the people. Any qualified voter of twenty-five years of age, 
 except a minister of the gospel, or an officer of a banking corpera- 
 tion, or an attorney for the commonwealth, was eligible for elec- 
 tion to the general assembly. The delegates were elected bien- 
 nially; half of the senators were elected every two years and served 
 four years. 26. 
 
 With the amicable settlement of the question which for so 
 many years had been the great disturbing element, the convention 
 was free to express that democratic spirit of the times which had 
 been gradually breaking down old barriers, and which Virginia had 
 not been able to resist as is shown by the work of the legislature 
 of 1849 which abolished imprisonment for debt, and granted to 
 women the right to make a will. 
 
 The provision extending suffrage to every white male over 
 twenty-one, two years resident in the state and twelve months in 
 the district where he votes, not only greatly enlarged the number 
 enjoying the elective franchise but abolished the crying abuse of 
 double and treble voting. A man, who before could vote in every 
 district in which he held real or pretended property which he could 
 reach by fast driving or riding on election day, could now vote 
 only in the district in which he resided. 2 ? Although the method of 
 voting was still viva voce, dumb persons were permitted the use 
 of the ballot — a provision which was evidently suggested by the 
 precedent in the Kentucky constitution of 1850. 
 
 The executive council was abolished, the judicial system re- 
 formed, and the county court reorganized. The governor, lieu- 
 tenant governor (for a term of four years), the twenty-one circuit 
 judges (for a term of eight years), the five judges of the court of 
 appeals (for a term of twelve years) and all local officers — the 
 justices of the peace and attorney for the commonwealth (for a 
 term of four years), the clerk of the court and the surveyor (for 
 a term of six years) and the sheriff and commissioners (for a term 
 of two years) — were elected by the people. Provision was made for 
 the payment of jurors who previously had been chosen from the 
 
 26. Poore, vol. 2, pp. 1919-1937. 
 
 27. Governor's message to the general assembly, December, 1849. 
 J. A. C. Chandler: History of Suffrage in Virginia, pp. 41-45. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 13 
 
 loungers within reach of the sheriff's voice the day the court opened 
 and who had served without compensation.38 
 
 The spirit of the time was also reflected in restrictions on the 
 legislature, both houses of which were now for the first time given 
 equal power of legislation. The general demand throughout the 
 United States for less frequent sessions of the legislature was re< 
 fleeted in the provision that the general assembly should meet once 
 in two years for no longer than ninety days, which, however, 
 might be extended for thirty days by the concurrence of three- 
 fifths of the members. To the old restrictions of 1829 — relating 
 to habeas corpus, bill of attainder, ex post facto laws, impairing the 
 obligation of contracts, freedom of speech and press,, and religious 
 freedom — were added several additional restrictions. The general 
 assembly was forbidden to pledge the state for debts or obligations 
 of any company or corporation, to grant charters of incorpora- 
 tion to any religious body, to authorize lotteries or to grant di- 
 vorces, 29 to change names of persons or direct the sale of the estates 
 of persons under legal disabilities. The attitude of the recently 
 admitted states was reflected in the provision prohibiting the leg- 
 islature to form a new county of less than 600 square miles or to 
 reduce an old county to a lower limit. One restriction, reflecting 
 a phase of the slavery question, forbade the assembly to emanci- 
 pate any slave or descendant of a slave. 
 
 The constitution declared that taxation should be equal and 
 uniform and that all property other than slave should be taxed 
 according to its value. All the resolutions, substitutions and 
 efforts of western members failed to keep this exception out of 
 the constitution. 3o On every slave over twelve years of age was 
 assessed a tax equal to that assessed on land of the value of $300. 
 Slaves under twelve were not taxed. A majority vote of those 
 elected to the assembly might exempt other taxable property from 
 taxation. A capitation tax equal to the tax on land of the value 
 of $200 was levied on every white male inhabitant of twenty-one. 
 One equal moiety of this white capitation tax was applied to the 
 purpose of education in primary and free schools. Many in the 
 convention would have been delighted to have had a provision for a 
 permanent system of schools incorporated in the constitution, but 
 
 28. Monongalia Mirror, December 8, 1849. 
 
 29. The general assembly granted two divorces from 1829 to 1831, 
 and thirty-seven from 1849 to 1851. Acts 1830-31, p. 305; Acts 1848-49, 
 pp. 246-248; Acts 1849-50, pp. 227-230; Acts 1850-51, pp. 196-200. 
 
 30. Journal etc., 1850-51, pp. 32 and 43. Resolutions of Neeson, 
 Brown and Faulkner. 
 
14 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 Virginia was not yet ready for that.** As in Michigan the same 
 year, the constitution provided for a sinking fund by directing the 
 legislature to set aside seven per cent of the state debt existing 
 on January 1, 1851. 
 
 The constitution was ratified in October, 1851, by a vote 
 of 75,748 to 11,063. The only counties giving majorities against 
 the constitution were five < eastern counties. 
 
 V. Formation of the New State. 
 
 In his speech at the close of the convention of 18 51, after ex- 
 horting the members on their return to their constituents to exert 
 all their influence to allay sectional strife and to promote a cordial 
 fraternal feeling among the people of their beloved commonweath, 
 President Mason said: "Virginia united has ever been one of the 
 noblest states of the confederacy. I cannot contemplate what she 
 would be if torn by intestine feuds or if frantically seeking her 
 own dissolution. May you long live to see this ancient common- 
 wealth united and happy at home, honored and respected 
 abroad. "32 
 
 In spite of Mason's parting injunction, the rift between the 
 East and the West continued to widen in the decade of political 
 agitation which followed. The fierce controversy over slavery was 
 driving the North and South farther and farther apart and neithei 
 the President, nor Congress, nor the Supreme Court could suggest 
 any middle ground which would satisfy both. Under the ad- 
 ministration of Wise, the political hero of the West, efforts were 
 made to conciliate the West and thereby to endeavor to bridge the 
 chasm between sections. The West was exhorted to send her chil- 
 dren to Virginia schools taught by Virginians, and various schemes 
 for railroads and canals to connect the West and the East were 
 proposed. The interests of West Virginia, however, with less than 
 four per cent, of her population slave, were those of a northern 
 state. Her sons continued to attend schools in free states rather 
 than the schools across the Blue ridge. Her markets were in Pitts* 
 burg, Baltimore and the Mississippi river towns rather than in 
 Norfolk. Her geographic conditions allied her interests with those 
 of Pennsylvania and Ohio and her Industries were those which 
 called for white rather than slave labor. Her natural destiny 
 and future loyalty to the Union and opposition to secession were 
 
 31. Journal, p. 26. (Also, the resolutions of Martin, Faulkner and 
 Carlile in the appendix). 
 S2. Ibid, p. 420. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 15 
 
 clearly forecasted by Webster, in his speech at the laying of the 
 corner stone of the addition to the capital at Washington (in 
 1851). "And ye men of Western Virginia who occupy the slope 
 from the Alleghenies to the Ohio and the Kentucky," said he, 
 "what benefit do you propose to yourself by disunion? If you 
 secede what do you secede from and what do you secede to? Do 
 you look for the current of the Ohio to change and bring you and 
 your commerce to the waters of Eastern rivers? What man can 
 suppose that you would remain a part and parcel of Virginia a 
 month after Virginia had ceased to be part and parcel of the 
 United States.33 
 
 Ten years later, Webster's significant utterance was brought 
 to a test. The secession of South Carolina and the other cotton 
 states precipitated a crisis in which Virginia hesitated to act. 
 Governor Letcher called an extra session of the legislature which 
 met January 7, 1861, to determine "calmly and wisely what ought 
 to be done." This session authorized an election (on February 4) 
 to choose delegates to a convention to determine the policy of Vir- 
 ginia in the impending crisis. In the West, in most of the counties, 
 meetings were held vigorously protesting against any convention 
 to consider federal relations and condemning the act of the legis- 
 lature which had called such a convention without previously sub- 
 mitting the question to the peopled 
 
 In the convention which met February 14, special commis- 
 sioners sent from Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina, urged 
 secession. The secessionists strained every nerve to get the pas- 
 sage of the ordinance and gradually induced several Union mem- 
 bers to join them. Though the convention hesitated for a time, 
 it was induced by excited leaders, after the news of the fall of 
 Fort Sumter, to cast the lot of Virginia with the confederacy. The 
 decisive step was finally taken on April 17, largely through the 
 dramatic speech of Wise, who spoke with watch in hand, pistol in 
 front of him, his hair bristling and disheveled, and his eyes stand- 
 ing out with the glare of excitement. The ordinance of secession 
 was passed by vote of 88 to 55. The vote of members from 
 western Virginia stood 32 to 11 against it (4 not voting). 
 
 Neither unionists nor secessionists waited for the popular vote 
 on the ordinance which the convention provided should be taken 
 May 23, the date for the regular election of members to the general 
 assembly. The secessionists seized the arsenal at Harper's Ferry 
 
 33. Granville Davisson Hall: Rending- of Virginia, p. 14. 
 
 34. Hall: Rending of Virginia, pp. 123-127. 
 
16 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 and the custom houses at Richmond, Norfolk and Portsmouth, and 
 put Virginia under the control of the confederacy as if she had 
 already become one of its members. 
 
 The West, deserted by Wise its leader of the decade before, 
 x and seeking other wise leaders for the future, was soon under the 
 general direction of John S. Carlile after his safe return from 
 the Richmond convention. A meeting held at Clarksburg, on April 
 22, urgently recommended that each county of northwestern Vir- 
 ginia should send at least five men to Wheeling, on May 13, to 
 determine what action should be taken in the emergency, In 
 response to this recommendation, on the day appointed, over 400 
 men, pursued in some instances by confederate troops, flocked to 
 Wheeling where amid great demonstrations, flags and banners fly- 
 ing, bands playing and people cheering, they assembled as a con- 
 vention in Washington Hall. The members were divided on the 
 question of what should be done first. Many, led by John S. 
 Carlile, insisted on the immediate formation of a new state. The 
 Wood county delegation carried a banner which bore the inscrip- 
 tion: "New Virginia, now or never." Others feeling that the 
 time called for thoughtful, guarded deliberation, were opposed to 
 immediate action. After a debate which lasted for three days the 
 convention delegated its power to a central committee and ad' 
 journed. Its recommendation, that if the ordinance of secession 
 should be ratified on May 23, there should be an election, on June 
 4, to select delegates to a new convention to reorganize the govern- 
 ment, was put into operation. ss 
 
 On June 11, the representatives from thirty-nine counties as- 
 sembled at Wheeling. At this time the people of western Virginia 
 were without a judiciary, without sheriffs and without legal pro-, 
 tection of life, liberty and property. The convention reorganized 
 the state government and adjourned on June 25. It declared 
 vacant the offices held by state officials who were acting in hostility 
 to the federal government and provided for the appointment (by 
 the convention) of the state officers for six months or until their 
 successors were elected or qualified. It elected the governor, lieu- 
 tenant governor, the executive council and attorney general, and 
 provided that the remaining executive officers should be elected by 
 the general assembly, consisting of all the members who were 
 elected on May 23 and who should take the prescribed oath. 
 This assembly also appointed Carlile and Willey to the seats in the. 
 
 35. Congressional Globe, part 3, 2nd session, 37th Congress, 1861- 
 «2, pp. 2415-2419. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 17 
 
 United States senate made vacant by the resignation of Hunter and 
 Mason. 
 
 The convention reassembled on August 6; and, after much dis- 
 cussion concerning the legality of such an act, on August 20, it 
 passed an ordinance providing for the formation of a new state; 
 and adjourned on August 21. On October 24, the people living 
 within the boundaries of the proposed state ratified the ordinance 
 by a vote of 18,408 to 781 and at the same time elected delegates 
 to a constitutional convention which met at Wheeling on November 
 26, 1861.36 
 
 The constitution framed by the Wheeling convention was far 
 better than the prejudices of many of the members, as reflected 
 in the debates, might have indicated. 37 Unfortunately, there was 
 no official provision for the publication of the debates. Perhaps 
 the reasons for this neglect are reflected in the remarks of three 
 members. Chapman J. Stuart, representing Doddridge county, 
 speaking without historical foresight said in the convention, that to 
 publish the debates which no one would ever read would be an 
 unnecessary expense. James H. Brown of Kanawha, untrained in 
 historical perspective, said that after the vital point — the success 
 and excellence of the constitution — had been attained, the debates 
 by which it had been attained were "immaterial and unimportant." 
 Hall, a stickler for impromptu and informal discussion, opposed 
 publication because he feared it would lead to "set speeches."-^ 
 
 The name selected for the new state was not the only one pro- 
 posed. The name Kanawha which had been used in the ordinance 
 for the formation of the state was rejected — probably because there 
 was already in the state a county and a river by that name. Mr. 
 Willey said that some of his constituents along the Monongahela 
 thought that Kanawha was too hard to spell. There was objection 
 also to the name of West Virginia. Many felt that, as immigrants 
 held the name Virginia in disrepute, thousands believing that Vir- 
 ginia policy still prevailed would be kept away if that name 
 were retained. Others feared that the soubriquet "West" would 
 disgrace the new state in comparison with Virginia. The ques- 
 tion was finally settled by the sentiment of those who had long 
 
 36. Journal of the Constitutional Convention of West Virginia, 
 1861-2: Appendix (No. 53). 
 
 37. The stenographic notes of the debates, made by an assistant 
 clerk of the convention, Granville D. Hall, are in manuscript in the 
 department of Archives and History of West Virginia. These have been 
 read by the writer and frequent reference will be made to them under 
 the title "Hall MS.** 
 
 38. Journal p. 45; and Hall MS., Dec. 16, 1861 and Feb. 13, 1863. 
 
18 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 lived in the old Dominion and who revered the memories of its 
 most honored citizens. s» 
 
 The question of boundaries was a source of considerable de- 
 bate. On the day that the convention assembled, the Wheeling 
 Intelligencer urged that the people wanted a homogeneous state. 
 Such they could not have by including the eastern valley in which, 
 contrary to conditions in northwestern Virginia, negroes were the 
 staple, and whose people could not agree with the trans-Allegheny 
 counties on the question of prohibiting slavery in the new state. 
 Yet several attempts were made in the convention to include the 
 valley counties together with additional counties in the south- 
 west.^ Through the influence of the Baltimore and Ohio railway, 
 whose officials were desirous of getting the road out of Virginia,** 
 the proposition was made to include (conditioned on a majority 
 of the votes of each county), Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, 
 Morgan, Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick. « On the same day 
 that this proposition was carried (February 11, 1862,) Brown ot 
 Kanawha, who at first had contended that the Blue ridge should be 
 the eastern boundary, moved to include under like conditions 
 seventeen additional counties: nine in the southwest (Lee, Scott, 
 Wise, Russell, Buchanan, Tazewell, Bland, Giles and Craig), three 
 between the Allegheny and Shenandoah mountains (Allegheny, 
 Bath and Highland) to fill the niche between Monroe and 
 Pendleton counties, three extending along the Potomac to a 
 point below Washington (Loudoun, Alexandria and Fairfax) and 
 the two counties of the eastern shore (Accomac.and Northampton). 
 The majority of the members of the convention, believing that 
 if these counties were- included the new state movement would 
 fail, disapproved and defeated Mr. Brown's motion. ** 
 
 Important changes in the electorate and in the elections were 
 made. Desiring to accelerate the retarded development which had 
 resulted from tide-water policies and the long delayed execution 
 of projected intra-state improvements in western Virginia, the new 
 state made a jealous bid for thrifty immigrants by extending the 
 rather liberal suffrage provision of the Virginia constitution of 
 
 39. Journal pp. 24-25; Hall MS., Dec. 3, 1861. [Harmon Sinsel, the 
 eccentric member from Pruntytown desired to include Virginia as pan 
 of the name because it reminded him of the Virgin Mary]. 
 
 40. Journal pp. 32-39. 
 
 41. Parker: Formation of West Virginia, p. 62. 
 
 42. Hardy county included Grant which was formed from it in 
 1866; and Hampshire included Mineral which was formed from it in 
 the same year. 
 
 43. Journal p. 162, and Hall MS., Feb. 11, 1862. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 
 
 1851. The residence qualification for a voter, which had been 
 fixed at two years in the state and twelve months in the voting 
 district, were reduced to one year in the state and thirty days in 
 the district. Viva voce voting, "that old aristocratic thumb-screw 
 which had kept a large part of the voters of Virginia virtually 
 slaves" and without which it was generally believed that Virginia 
 could never have passed the ordinance of secession, was replaced 
 by the ballot system. The date of elections was changed from May 
 to October, which was considered a more convenient time for 
 farmers to meet, and which also was more suitable to the con- 
 venience of candidates and politicians. ** 
 
 The legislative body, the name of which was now changed from 
 "general assembly" to "legislature," was to meet annually for not 
 longer than forty-five days unless three-fourths of the members con- 
 curred to lengthen the session. Annual sessions were favored on 
 the ground that they would prove less expensive than the biennial 
 sessions which had been tried under the constitution of 1851. 
 For the first time representation in both houses was to be based 
 on the white population. The delegates were to be elected for a 
 term of one instead of two years and the senators (half each 
 year) for the term of two years in place of four years. To the 
 age and district resident qualifications for legislators, which re- 
 mained as in the Virginia constitution of 1851, was added the pro- 
 vision that a senator should be a citizen of the state five years next 
 preceding his election or at the time of the adoption of the new 
 constitution. 
 
 The clause of the constitution of 1851 which had debarred 
 ministers and bank officers from seats in the legislature was 
 dropped but a provision was borrowed from the constitution of 
 Indiana debarring any person who had been entrusted with public 
 money and had failed to account for and pay over such money ac- 
 cording to law. A new anti-duelling clause disqualified from hold- 
 ing office any person who had been concerned in a duel.* 5 
 
 To the previous Virginia restrictions on the legislature pro- 
 hibiting it to authorize a lottery, to grant a charter to a religious 
 denomination, or to grant special relief in matters entrusted to th*. 
 
 44. Hall MS., Dec. 18, 1861. 
 
 45. The reason for inserting- this disqualifying clause in the con- 
 stitution was explained in the report from the committee. The con- 
 stitution of 1851 had given the legislature the power to pass laws dis- 
 qualifying persons concerned in a duel. The legislature although it 
 had passed such laws had been accustomed to repeal them temporarily 
 whenever a favorite so disqualified became a candidate for office. 
 [Hall MS., Jan. 7, 1862]. 
 
20 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 circuit court (to grant a divorce, to change the names of persons 
 and to direct the sale of estates of persons under legal disability), 
 or to form a new county of less than minimum size, were added 
 other restrictions: prohibition of all special legislation, and any 
 law which would make the state a stock holder in any bank, or 
 grant the credit of the state in aid of any county, city, town or 
 township, corporation or person, or make the state respons- 
 ible for their debts or liabilities, or contract any state debt except 
 to meet casual deficits in the revenues, to defend the state, and to 
 redeem a previous liability of the state (including an equitable 
 portion of the public debt of Virginia prior to January 1, 1861. 
 
 In one instance, the convention, after much debate, increased 
 the power of the legislature by giving it the additional, but as 
 yet unused power, to pass laws regulating or prohibiting the sale 
 of intoxicants in the stated 
 
 The term of the chief executive was changed from four years 
 to two, his term to commence March 4, instead of January 1, and 
 his salary reduced from $5000 to $2000 per year.*? His powers 
 and duties remained as under the previous Virginia constitution 
 except that the clause which made him commander-in-chief of the 
 naval forces of the state was omitted. He still had no power to 
 veto an act of the legislature. The office of lieutenant governor 
 which was considered a very unnecessary appendage was abolished 
 without debate. In opposition to the wishes of Brown and others, 
 who favored their election by the legislature as in Virginia, the 
 convention decided that the secretary of state, the treasurer, and 
 the auditor should be elected at the gubernatorial election for a 
 term of two years. The attorney-general was to be chosen at the 
 same time and for the same term. 
 
 The whole judicial power of the new state was vested by the 
 constitution in a supreme court of appeals (with three judges, but 
 otherwise the same as in the Virginia state constitution), circuit 
 courts, and justices of the peace. The nine circuit judges were to 
 be elected for six instead of eight years and the court was to be 
 held at least four times instead of twice a year. Both the much 
 disliked county court and the Virginia district court (created by 
 the constitution of 1851) were abolished without mention. *s 
 
 46. Hall MS., January 16, 1862. 
 
 47. Stevenson, who doubtless changed his mind later when he be- 
 came governor of the state, said in the convention that, as the gov- 
 ernor might be at work but one month in the year and could occupy 
 himself with someth:?^"- el** the other eleven months, surely $1,600 
 would be enough for him. 
 
 48. Poore, vol. 2, pp. 1978-1992. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 21 
 
 In the constitution one may see the evidence of the earlier 
 opposition to the inequalities of the Virginia system of taxation. 
 Paxton, in his report from the committee on taxation and finance, 
 said that no feature of the constitution of 1851 was so odious 
 as that which discriminated in taxation — taxing slave property 
 much lower than the ad valorem tax on all other property. Therev 
 fore, the constitution clearly provided that all property both real 
 and personal should be taxed in proportion to its value and that no 
 one species of property should be taxed higher than any other 
 species of property of equal value. There was a provision, how- 
 ever, that educational, literary, scientific, religious and church 
 property might be exempted from taxation by law.« 
 
 In its provisions for the local government the constitution 
 showed a distinct departure from the previous provisions of the 
 Virginia constitutions. In place of the county court system which, 
 although remedied much in 1851, was still very objectionable to 
 many of the people of northwestern Virginia, the convention adopt- 
 ed the "Yankee institution" of townships as sub-divisions of the 
 counties with provision for regular township meetings and for va- 
 rious township officers chosen by the people of each township: a super- 
 visor, a clerk, surveyors of the roads and an overseer of the poor, elect- 
 ed annually; one or more constables elected biennially; and one or 
 more justices elected quadrennially. The county officers retained 
 in the new system were a sheriff (elected for four years and ineli- 
 gible for the succeeding term) and a prosecuting attorney, a sur- 
 veyor of land, a recorder and assessors (all elected for two years.) so 
 
 On the question of education the convention took advanced 
 ground. In this it was much influenced by Mr. Battelle, who, 
 favoring greater financial encouragement than was finally secured, 
 said in the convention that to his certain knowledge people were 
 leaving West Virginia in droves, in a great part influenced by the 
 fact that elsewhere they could educate their children. The edu- 
 cational question was not new. The earlier discussions had fina*i> 
 resulted in the beginning cf a system of common schools in 1846. 
 Thereafter the West had continued to agitate for reform in the 
 Virginia system of education, which Mr. Johnson of Taylor county, 
 in the house of delegates, (en March 11, 1850), said was properly 
 called a system for the poor and as properly called a poor system — 
 one calculated to create and keep up distinctions in society, and one 
 so abhorrent to the feelings of the poorer class of people that the 
 children of the poor man dreaded to come within the pall of its 
 
 49. Hall MS., Jan. 31, 1862. 
 
 50. Hall MS., Jan. 17 and 22, 1862. 
 
22 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 provisions. Consistent with the policy of the West, expressed In 
 long-continued agitation, the convention provided for the establish- 
 ment of a thorough and efficient system of free schools supported 
 by interest from an invested school fund, the net proceeds of all 
 forfeitures, confiscations and fines, and by general personal and 
 property taxes. si 
 
 In the convention no one question caused more concern and 
 division than that of slavery. On the one hand, some, strongly 
 urging that the new state should be free from slavery, sustained 
 their view with the argument that the convention was providing 
 for the future of a region capable of becoming one of the most 
 wealthy and important parts of the Union and which would long 
 ago have been such had it not been for the curse of slavery which 
 repelled from its borders the white population which had built up 
 half a dozen states in the northwest. "Make West Virginia free," 
 they said, "and she will invite immigrants. Her coal and her iron 
 can be mined only by free labor. Negro slavery is wasteful every- 
 where but less profitable in West Virginia than in any other part 
 of the southern states." Some also feared that Congress might 
 refuse the admission of the new state if it should appear so wedded 
 to slavery that it could not apply for admission with a free state 
 constitution. M On the other hand, many in the convention, be- 
 lieving perhaps that slavery would gradually become extinct, 
 thought it unnecessary to make any provision for it. The conven- 
 tion finally inserted in the constitution a clause forbidding the im- 
 portation or immigration into the state of any slave or free negro 
 with a view to permanent residence; but, feeling that there might 
 be some objection to this clause in Congress, when it adjourned on 
 February 18, 1862, it did so subject to recall in case any change 
 should be necessary. 
 
 The remaining steps necessary to secure statehood were 
 promptly taken. On the fourth Thursday of April, the constitution 
 was ratified by the people by a vote of 18,062 to 514. On May 13, 
 the re-organized legislature of Virginia gave the state's consent to 
 the formation of the new state; and on May 29, Senator Willey, 
 representing Virginia, in a speech ably setting forth the causes and 
 conditions which led to the request, presented to the senate West 
 Virginia's petition for admission to the Union. On June 23, the 
 committee on territories reported the bill for admission, drawn up 
 
 51. Hall MS., Jan. 27, 1862; and Monongalia Mirror, March 16, 
 1850. 
 
 52. Extracts from New York Post, Cincinnati Gazette and Pitts- 
 burg Gazette in Wheeling Intelligencer Feb. 1, 3, 5 and 12, 1862. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 23 
 
 largely by Carlile who had previously been an ardent new state 
 man, and providing that before the state should be admitted its 
 boundaries should be extended to include the fifteen valley coun- 
 ties, that a new convention should be held, and that a new constitu- 
 tion should be framed with a provision that all children of slaves 
 born after July 4, 1863 should be free. It was evident to those 
 who understood conditions that such a bill, even if desirable, was 
 impracticable and could not succeed; and some even asserted that 
 its intent was to block admission. After several debates (on June 
 26 and July 1, 7, and 14), the bill, amended to conform with the 
 boundaries established by the constitution, and to provide for gen- 
 eral emancipation, passed the senate. On December 10, after a 
 term of postponement, it passed the house; and on- December 31, 
 was signed by the President.^ On February 12, 1863, the consti- 
 tutional convention convened and made the necessary provision for 
 gradual emancipation, and on March 26, the amended constitution 
 was ratified by the people by a vote of 2 3 f , 3 2 1 to 472. On April 
 20, the President issued his proclamation by which (on June 20, 
 1863) West Virginia became the thirty-fifth state of the Union. 
 The new state government promptly replaced the re-organized gov- 
 ernment of Virginia, which moved from the new state and located 
 at Alexandria. 
 
 West Virginia entered upon her career as a separate state of 
 the American union at the most critical period in the war of se- 
 cession — two weeks before the battle of Gettysburg and Vicksburg. 
 After the President's proclamation of April 20, the new government 
 was rapidly organized. Arthur L. Boreman for governor, and other 
 state officers, nominated at a convention at Parkersburg early in 
 May, were elected the latter part of the same month. Judges of 
 the supreme court and county officials were elected at the same 
 time. On June 20, the state officers began their duties. On the 
 same day the first legislature (20 senators and 51 delegates) as- 
 sembled, and on August 4, it elected two United States senators — . 
 Waitman T. Willey and Peter G. VanWinkle. Soon thereafter con- 
 gressmen were elected from each of the three newly formed con- 
 gressional districts. 
 
 VI. Problems of the First Decade. 
 
 The new state government, laying the foundation stones of 
 state institutions and of future order and development, was con- 
 
 53. Cong. Globe, Part 3, 37th. Cong. 2nd. session, pp. 2959, 3307- 
 15, 3397-98. Cong. Globe, Part 4, 37th. Cong. 2nd session, pp. 3308- 
 3320. Cong. Globe, Part 1, 37th. Cong. 3rd. session, pp. 37, 41, 60. 
 
24 Studies in West Vibginia History. 
 
 fronted by many serious difficulties and obstacles — economic, social 
 and political. The people, separated into many detached local 
 groups by precipitous mountains and rugged streams, had not de- 
 veloped unity of action nor social and commercial identity except 
 perhaps in the counties along the Ohio, and along the Baltimore and 
 Ohio railroad. The most serious immediate political difficulty was 
 the sympathy for the Confederacy in various parts of the state. 
 Although the Confederates had soon lost control of the larger part 
 of the state, over 7,000 West Virginians had entered the Confed- 
 erate army early in the war — about one-fourth of the number who 
 enlisted in the Union army — and the Confederate raids and skirm- 
 ishes into the state, at first to prevent separation from Virginia, 
 were continued until the close of the war. 
 
 Counties along the southern border of the new state were 
 partially under the control of the Confederates until near the close 
 of the war and "were forced to pay heavy taxes to the Richmond 
 government, and to furnish soldiers for the Confederate army." 
 Other counties along the border suffered from irregular "bands 
 of guerillas and marauders" whom the state troops were unable to 
 manage. In this sad state of disorder, the governor recommended 
 that the citizens should organize to capture and kill the "outlaws" 
 wherever and whenever found, and appealed to the Washington 
 government which organized the state into a military district un- 
 der command of General Kelley who scattered many irregular bands, 
 and generally rendered life and property secure; but in some por- 
 tions of the state the civil authorities were helpless against lawless- 
 ness long after the close of the war.54 
 
 Under these conditions the administration was seriously em- 
 barrassed by lack of funds to meet ordinary expenditures. In 1864, 
 the governor reported that one-half of the counties had paid no 
 taxes and others were in arrears. In fourteen counties there were 
 no sheriffs or other collectors of taxes "because of the danger in- 
 cident thereto." The burdens of the counties which paid were 
 necessarily increased. One of the earliest measures of the govern- 
 ment was an act (1863) providing for the forfeiture of property 
 belonging to the enemies of the state, including those who had 
 joined the Confederate army.sr. but such property was seized only 
 in a few instances and the law remained practically a dead letter 
 because the citizens of the state were usually unwilling to take ad- 
 vantage of the political disabilities of their neighbors. 
 
 54. House Journal, Jan. 19, 1862, pp. 1-8 and Jan. 17, 1865, pp. 6-18. 
 
 55. West Virginia Acts. 1861-1866; Acts of 1863, pp. 131-135. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 25 
 
 Though in the election of 1864 there were only a few scatter- 
 ing votes in opposition to the officers of the state administration, 
 there were no means of obtaining an expression of the people in 
 some of the extreme southern counties where the governor reported 
 that owing to the Confederate incursions and local conditions it 
 was still impracticable to organize civil authority. 
 
 At the close of the war there were still many sources of dis- 
 order and friction. The most prominent related to the political 
 status of those who had joined or aided the Confederate cause. 
 Although the constitution had extended the right of suffrage to 
 all white male citizens of the state, the first general election laws 
 of West Virginia, passed in 1863, provided for election supervisors 
 and inspectors who were authorized to require, from all whose 
 eligibility to vote was in doubt, an oath to support the constitution 
 of the United States and of West Virginia. Naturally the Unionists 
 considered that those who had supported the Confederate cause 
 could not safely be entrusted with political power immediately after 
 their return from the Confederate armies, and before they had 
 proven their willingness to co-operate in maintaining the established 
 order. This opinion was enforced by conditions and events. In 1865, 
 organized bands of returning Confederates committed several mur- 
 ders and robberies in Upshur, Barbour, Marion and Harrison coun- 
 ties. The legislature, with partisan spirit increased, on February 
 25 p?.ssed the voter's test act, requiring from all voters an oath 
 that they had neither voluntarily borne arms against the United 
 States, nor aided those who had engaged in armed hostility against 
 the United States." On March 1, with some fear that the test- 
 oath act was not constitutional, it also proposed an amendment 
 disfranchising those who had given voluntary aid to the Confed- 
 eracy — of course with the intention of removing the disabilities 
 in course of time." This proposed amendment, which required 
 the concurrent approval of the subsequent legislature and ratifica- 
 tion by popular vote before it was part of the constitution, further 
 aroused the spirit of antagonism and insubordination in the minds 
 of the ex-Confederates who were "impatient to repossess them- 
 selves of place and power." In the election of 1865, the test-oath 
 
 56. West Virginia Acts. 1861-1866: Acts of 1865, p. 47. 
 
 57. The amendment was as follows: "No person, who, since the 
 first day of June, 1861, has given or shall give voluntary aid or as- 
 sistance to the rebellion against the United States, shall be a citizen 
 of this state or be allowed to vote at any election held therein, unless 
 he has volunteered into the military or naval service of the United 
 States and has been or shall be honorably discharged therefrom." 
 Acts of West Virginia 1861-66: Acts of 1865, p. 94. 
 
26 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 act was not strictly enforced^ and in a few places it was entirely 
 ignored. Many ex-Confederates, claiming that the law was uncon- 
 stitutional, took a free hand in organizing the local government. 
 In some places they ran for office, and in Greenbrier county two 
 were elected — one to the state senate and the other to the house 
 of delegates. In his message of 1866, Governor Boreman, com- 
 menting upon the alacrity with which the ex-Confederates insisted 
 upon participation in politics, advised the legislature to ennct a 
 more efficient registration law, to require election officers to take 
 a test oath, and to give the necessary concurrence in the proposed 
 disfranchisement amendment, so that it could be submitted to the 
 people. The legislature promptly passed a registration law, au- 
 thorizing the governor to appoint in each county a registration 
 board consisting of three citizens who were given power to desig- 
 nate the township registrars. It also concurred in the proposed amend, 
 ment, which was promptly ratified by the people in May, 1866 by a ma- 
 jority of about 7,000 votes, thereby disfranchising between 10,000 
 and 20,000 persons. 
 
 Although there is yet considerable difference of opinion in re- 
 gard to the wisdom of these measures, it is generally agreed that 
 they were the natural result of conditions which seemed to threaten 
 not only the policies of the administration but also the integrity 
 and independence of the new state. Many of those who were dis- 
 franchised hoped to see West Virginia return to the control of 
 Virginia. In Jefferson county a large number of persons stating 
 that the transfer of the county from Virginia to West Virginia 
 during their absence was irregular and void, refused to acknowledge 
 that they were West Virginians and attempted to hold an election 
 as a part of the state of Virginia; but they yielded when General 
 Emory was sent to aid the civil authorities in maintaining the 
 law. Virginia, too, tried in vain to secure the return of Jefferson 
 and Berkeley counties, first by annulling the act of the Pierpont 
 government which had consented to the transfer, and second (1866) 
 by bringing suit in the supreme court which in 1871 was decided 
 in favor of West Virginia. In 1866, while Pierpont was still gov- 
 ernor of Virginia, the legislature of that state appointed three com- 
 missioners to make overtures to West Virginia for the reunion of 
 the two states, but the legislature of West Virginia rejected the 
 proposition in 1867 — stating that the people of the new state were 
 unalterably opposed to reunion. At the same time, the legislature, 
 although in order to thwart the argument of unconstitutionality 
 which was urged against the proscription laws it repealed the reg- 
 istration law of 1866, was forced by conditions in some of the 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 27 
 
 southern border counties to enact in its place a more exacting reg- 
 istration law, requiring the applicant for registration not only to 
 take the test oath but also to prove that he was qualified to vote. 
 A state of insubordination existed in three or four counties. In 
 some places no elections were held in the fall of 1866, because of 
 the fear of violence. The judge of the ninth district, including 
 Greenbrier and Monroe counties, had received annoymous letters 
 threatening his life. In his message, the governor stated that the 
 ex-Confederates who caused the trouble were "learned men/'ss 
 
 The new registration law, which gave to registrars the power 
 to identify those who had aided the secessionists in any form, in- 
 creased the antagonism to the administration and the opposition to 
 the laws. During the campaign of 1868 there was much partisan 
 excitement. Many, unable to take the iron-clad oaths which would 
 enable them to vote, and perhaps further irritated by the adoption 
 of the fourteenth amendment, frequently attempted to intimidate pub- 
 lic officials and threatened violence which in some places prevented 
 elections and in others compelled the governor to appeal for federal 
 troops to aid in the maintenance of law and order. Force was neces- 
 sary to aid in the execution of the law in the counties of Monroe, 
 Wayne, Cabell, Logan, Randolph, Tucker, Barbour and Marion. 
 In some counties the restrictions of the registration law were al- 
 most entirely disregarded. As might have been expected, in some 
 instances disorders arose from arbitrary refusal to register persons 
 against whom there was no tangible evidence, or for unnecessary 
 and unwise rigidity in administering the law — which of itself was 
 not necessarily unjust nor unwise. $* 
 
 Before the election of 1869 there was a vigorous discussion of 
 the suffrage question in all its phases. With the admission of ne- 
 groes to the suffrage by the fifteenth amendment which was pro- 
 posed by Congress in February, 1869 and ratified by West Virginia 
 on March 3, 1869, the question of removing the restrictive legisla- 
 tion which disqualified Confederates from voting became more and 
 more prominent and was seriously considered by the ..ore conserva- 
 tive wing of the party in rower. A Jarg* number of the liberal 
 Republicans considered that a continuance of the test oaths was 
 inexpedient, and desired to adopt some policy that would terminate 
 the bitter animosities of years. The legislature of 1870 repealed 
 some of the test oaths. Governor William B. Stevenson, a man of 
 
 58. House Journal, 1867; Governor's Message Jan. 15, 1867, p. S et. 
 seq.; Ambler: Disfranchisement in West Virginia, p. 50. 
 
 59. House Journal, 1868 and 1869, (Governor's messages of Jan. 
 21, 1868 and Jan. 19, 1869). 
 
28 Studies m West Vibginia Histoby. 
 
 liberal as well as vigorous progressive views, earnestly favoring 
 liberal legislation to encourage projects of internal improvement 
 and industrial enterprise which would engage the people of the 
 state in the development of its resources and terminate the quarrels 
 over past issues, recommended an amendment to the constitution 
 to restore the privileges of those who had been disfranchised by the 
 amendment of 1866.eo w. H. H. Flick in the house proposed the 
 amendment which after acceptance by the legislatures of 1870 and 
 1871 was ratified by a vote of the people by a majority of 17,223, 
 and proclaimed by the governor in April, 1871. Judging from the 
 figures in the auditor's report, it appears that many disfranchised 
 persons voted for the constitutional amendment which determined 
 their legal right to vote. 
 
 In the meantime, in the election of 1870, the opposition pushed 
 their claims to registration — often by intimidation of the registrars. 
 In some counties the law was so far disregarded that every male 
 of the required age was registered. This laxity in the enforcement 
 of the more stringent features of the registration law, together 
 with the opposition to negro suffrage, resulted in a victory for the 
 Democrats, who elected John J. Jacobs governor by a majority of 
 over 2000 votes, and secured a working majority in both houses 
 which they retained for a quarter of a century. 
 
 VII. The Constitution of 1872 and' Amendments. 
 
 After the passage of the Flick amendment which accomplished 
 the enfranchisement of the ex-Confederates, an object for which the 
 Democrats professedly had striven for five years, further amendment 
 to the constitution seemed unnecessary. However, the strong re- 
 actionary elements of which the Democratic party was composed, 
 interpreting the attitude of the liberal Republicans on the amend- 
 ment as a sign of weakness, desired to put them completely to 
 rout — or as the Wheeling Intelligencer said, they were not willing 
 to wait until the corpse of the Republican party was decently 
 buried, "but must administer on the estate at once," and for this 
 purpose demanded a constitutional conventional Their strength 
 is shown in the legislature which, on February 23, 1871, passed 
 a convention bill. 
 
 The most radical advocates of the convention were apparently 
 resolved to restore pre-bellum conditions as far as possible. In 
 
 60. House Journal, 1871, (Governor's message, Jan. 17, 1871). 
 
 61. Wheeling Intelligencer, Jan. 31, 1871. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 29 
 
 their zeal to make war on the state constitution, they constructed 
 various ingenious complaints against it. The Wheeling Register 
 first objected (July 26, 1872,) to it on the ground that a reappor- 
 tionment could not be made under it without diminishing the ex- 
 isting representation of some of the counties, and later (August 
 11,) on the ground that a new constitution was necessary to extend 
 the time in which the Virginia debt should be paid. The Demo- 
 cratic papers and various stump speakers emphasized the point that 
 the constitution of 1862-63 was adopted without the consent of 
 the whole people — at a time when many were in the Confederate 
 army and when many others, refusing to recognize the reorganized 
 state authority, had not participated in the election*. Some, who 
 were jestingly called "Democratic protectionists," wanted a conven- 
 tion to frame a constitution which would provide protection against 
 the consequences of engaging in future rebellion. All the advo- 
 cates of the convention were most emphatic in expressing their 
 wish to abolish the township system, which they claimed was a 
 new and expensive importation from the northern states. They 
 desired to restore the antiquated county court system, and many 
 proposed to abolish the ballot and to restore viva voce voting. 
 Some frequently hinted that too many people were voting, and 
 that some property qualification should be adopted to disfranchise 
 the negro population and some of the poorer whites. Others who 
 fiercely denounced the court of appeals, which had sustained the 
 constitutionality of the proscription laws, at the same time criti- 
 cised the constitution because it gave to the legislature the power 
 to remove judges. But perhaps the most unique argument in favor 
 of a new constitution appeared in the Martinsburg Statesman whose 
 editor, apparently unconscious that the thirteenth and fourteenth 
 amendments had preceded the fifteenth amendment to the consti- 
 tution of the United States,, declared in bold type, perhaps only 
 for negro consumption, that under the existing state constitution 
 slavery could still exist in West Virginia after the repeal of the 
 fifteenth amendment by Congress (!) which he expected to be 
 done soon ( ! ) ; and he undertook to inform the colored voters 
 that if they should oppose the call for a convention they would be 
 voting to retain a constitution which still recognized them as 
 slaves.«2 
 
 On August 24, 1871, the people determined the question in 
 favor of a new constitutional convention by a vote of 30,220 to 
 
 62. Wheeling Intelligencer, Aug-. 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19 and 22, 
 containing clippings from Wellsburg News, Parkersburg Journal, Point 
 Pleasant Register, and Jefferson County Register. 
 
30 Studies in West Vieginia History. 
 
 27,638 (17,571 not voting). All the largest centers of population, 
 except Martinsburg, voted in the negative. The big majorities for 
 the convention were from localities in which there was a large ex- 
 Confederate element — from the counties of Jefferson, Hampshire, 
 Hardy, Greenbrier, Logan, Gilman and Braxton. 63 
 
 The Democratic strength was again shown in the following 
 October, at which time the Democrats elected sixty-six of the 
 seventy-eight members of the convention. The twelve Republican 
 members they humorously called the "twelve apostles." 
 
 Meeting on January 16, 1872, the convention remained in 
 session for eighty-four days, at Charleston, then a village with un- 
 paved and unlighted streets and shut off from the mails for three 
 days at a time. It declined to accept the invitation to adjourn 
 to Wheeling with free transportation. The radicals felt that noth- 
 ing good in the shape of constitutional reform could be accomp- 
 lished in that "iron hearted city" in which had been framed the 
 first constitution to which they were so strongly opposed; and 
 many, no doubt, were influenced by the fact that the "best livers 
 of Charleston" had thrown open their homes to the members of 
 the convention who would have been compelled to seek boarding 
 houses in Wheeling.^ 
 
 Strong efforts, made by the radical reactionaries, to keep West 
 Virginia under the influence of the life and institutions of Virginia 
 and the South, were resisted by the more moderate members. On 
 January 20, Mr. George Davenport, a liberal young Democrat from 
 Wheeling,, wishing to show the ex-Confederates that the Union 
 Democrats were unalterably opposed to the manner in which they 
 were "running the convention," presented a sarcastic resolution re- 
 questing that the names of Grant and Lincoln counties should be 
 changed to Davis and Lee. A few days later, some radical mem- 
 bers made themselves rather ridiculous by opposing the first pro- 
 vision of the constitution which declared that the constitution ot 
 the United States is the supreme law of the land. Ward, of 
 Cabell, on this question announced that he believed in the reserved 
 rights of states and Col. Johnson of Tyler objected to the clause 
 because it ignored the "heaven born right to revolutionize. "«* 
 
 63. Wheeling Intelligencer, Aug. 30, 1871. 
 
 64. Kanawha Daily, Jan. 19, 1872. A complete file of the Kanawha 
 Daily (the only daily published in Charleston during the convention) 
 containing the most complete account of the debates that can be 
 found, is in the possession of the Department of Archives at Charleston. 
 
 65. Journal of Constitutional Convention of West Virginia, 1872, p. 
 34; Kanawha Daily, Feb. 8, and Wheeling Intelligencer, Jan. 25, Feb. 7 
 and 26, 1872. 
 
Evolution or the Constitution. 31 
 
 After the early sessions of the convention, the efforts of the more 
 radical reactionaries were somewhat neutralized by the more 
 liberal and modern Democrats who feared that the ex-Confederate 
 element of the party would force into the constitution provisions 
 which might defeat it before the people. Some, observing how 
 vigorously many members rode the hobby of economy, feared they 
 would adopt a constitution intended not so much to benefit the 
 people as to save money. The radical as well as the economic 
 spirit of the members was shown in the great squabble which arose 
 on January 22, after Mr. Farnsworth of Upshur made a customary 
 and appropriate motion that the United States flag should be 
 placed over the convention hall while the convention was in 
 session.ee 
 
 The new constitution exhibited the marks of the period of 
 partisanship which preceded it. Due to this feeling was the inser- 
 tion of provisions which made martial law unconstitutional, pro- 
 hibited the denial of the right to vote to any citizen on the ground 
 that his name had not been registered, and forbade the legislature 
 to establish or authorize a board or court of registeration. The 
 same feeling was reflected in the declaration, found in no other 
 state constitution, that political tests which require persons, as a 
 prerequisite to the enjoyment of their civil and political rights, to 
 purge themselves by their own oaths of all past offences, are re- 
 pugnant to the principles of a free government. Several new sec- 
 tions quoted from the Virginia constitution of 1851 and consist- 
 ing of glittering generalities on the equality of man, the sovereignty 
 of the people and the inalienable right of the majority, were also 
 
 66. .After Farnsworth's motion, Ward, who it was jocularly said was 
 perhaps best known for his magic ointment and scalp wash, moved to 
 strike out "United States n>sr" and insert the "flag of West Virginia,'' 
 arguing that his first allegiance was to his state. After a futile at- 
 tempt to lay on the table, Farnsworth's motion was adopted, but the 
 weighty question was reconsidered on January 24, and 25, when Col. 
 Johnson wished to amend the resolution so that it would provide for 
 inscribing on the flag the words "West Virginia rescued from tryanny." 
 "In 1861," added Hagan, who rose from the opposite side. But while 
 various members were debating the probable expense which would be 
 incurred by the purchase of a flag. Mr. Henry Pike who, looking after 
 coal land in that region, happened to be present solved the question 
 by offering a flag as a gift to the convention. Whether or not Pike's 
 offer was out of pure generosity or not, the convention accepted it, 
 voted its thanks to Mr. Pike, and ordered the sergeant at arms to raise 
 the flag over the convention. On February 19 the flag arrived, and 
 after it was seized upon frantically by the twelve apostles and kissed 
 by some of them it was hoisted over the convention hall. [Journal, pr>. 
 43, 44, 57, 62-64, 73, and 115.] 
 
32 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 introduced into the bill of rights as finger-boards to commemorate 
 the proscriptive laws of the Republican party. 67 
 
 The qualification for suffrage under the clause of the constitu- 
 tion of 1863 was changed in two ways: by the omission of the 
 word "white"68 to make it conform to the fifteenth amendment, 
 and by increasing residence in the district from thirty to sixty 
 days. The proposition to omit the word "white" from the clause 
 on suffrage called forth lengthy debate before it was finally car- 
 ried. Mr. Maslin of Hardy, expressing the wish that his arm might 
 be palsied in any attempt to strike out the word "white," said that 
 with the exception of those who had been re-enfranchised by the 
 Flick amendment the legal voters were "carpet baggers, negroes, 
 mulattoes, Chinese, Dutch, Irish, coolies, Norwegians, scalawags, 
 with a few of the native population of the country." It was his 
 purpose, he said, to give the latter more protection. Mr. Thomp- 
 son of Putnam desired to cut off "that hideous tail" to the constitu- 
 tion (the fifteenth amendment), and to provide for such an emerg- 
 ency he urged the retention of the word "white." He did not con- 
 sider that the negroes, who he said claimed every species of artifi- 
 cial rights in addition to natural rights, were quite as capable of 
 self government as the buffaloes of the plains which had only 
 their natural rights to protect. e» 
 
 Different views in the convention, in regard to the best method 
 for the expression of the popular vote, resulted in a peculiar pro- 
 vision which exists in no other state™ and which leaves the voter 
 free to select open, sealed or secret ballot. The opposition to the 
 secret ballot was strong. Ward, asserting that the ballot system 
 had given a great deal of trouble to the world, and Samuel Price, 
 of Greenbrier (lieutenant governor of Virginia under the Confed- 
 eracy, and president of the convention), said that the people of 
 their counties favored the viva voce system of voting. Mr. Martin, 
 with face toward the East, lamented that, although fifteen years 
 before in old Virginia the right to vote had been regarded as the 
 most sacred one known to man, "now-a-days the voter sneaks up 
 drops a litle slip of paper through a hole in a door and then goes 
 
 67. Poore, vol. 2, pp. 1993 et seq.; Stimson: Federal and State Con- 
 stitutions of the United States, p. 213; Wheeling Intelligencer, April 12, 
 1872. 
 
 68. Although the constitution makes no distinction between white 
 and colored in the exercise of the elective franchise nor in the holding 
 of office, it provides that white and colored children are not to be 
 taught in the same school. 
 
 69. Kanawha Daily, Feb. 16, 1872. 
 
 70. Stimson, p. 217. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 33 
 
 away lively as though he had done something he was ashamed of." 
 All the more liberal democrats, however,, fearing that a provision 
 for viva voce voting would defeat the constitution, secured a vote 
 of 36 to 29 against it. Twenty-four members insisted that at least 
 the voter ought to be required to put his name on the back of his 
 ballot, and were able to secure the compromise clause which was 
 finally adopted. « 
 
 The legislature was required to meet in biennial sessions of 
 not longer than 45 days unless two-thirds of the members concurred 
 in extending the session. The members of the house of delegates 
 were chosen for a term of two years; and the senators, half of 
 whom were elected biennially, were chosen for a term of four years. 
 Representation was based on population. Although in ,a few in- 
 stances the convention in laying out the senatorial and judicial dis- 
 tricts was accused of gerrymandering, the larger state papers do 
 not reflect any serious discontent. The list of persons debarred 
 from seats in the legislature was enlarged by the inclusion of per- 
 sons holding lucrative offices under foreign governments, members 
 of congress, sheriffs, constables or clerks of courts of record, per- 
 sons convicted of bribery, perjury or other infamous crimes, and all 
 salaried officers of railroad companies. 
 
 On the latter debarment, peculiar to West Virginia," there 
 was much debate. The attitude toward railroads at Charleston 
 had greatly changed in the ten years since the convention in 
 Wheeling in which Van Winkle of Wood, advocating the dropping 
 of bank officers from the disqualified list, had clinched his argu- 
 ment and won the convention by saying that it might just as con- 
 sistently proscribe railroad officers as bank officers. The growth 
 of railroad influence produced anti-railroad sentiment in some sec- 
 tions of the state. It was sneeringly said that the young common- 
 wealth should be called the state of the Baltimore and Ohio Rail- 
 road. Farnsworth, whose policy was to grant to big corporations 
 no liberal franchises which worked to the detriment of land owners, 
 declared his fear that the entire state would soon be under the 
 control of the Baltimore and Ohio railway which by means of its 
 through connections, he said, diverted to the west the immigrants 
 who otherwise might stop in West Virginia. Among those who 
 opposed the disqualification of men who had been active in improv- 
 ing means of locomotion was Mr. Hagan who — after recalling the 
 times not so remote in which they had carried deer skins on their 
 backs to Philadelphia and had drunk sassafras tea six months of 
 
 71. Journal, pp. 26 and 176; Kanawha Daily, Feb. 16, 1872. 
 
 72. Stimson, p. 203. 
 
34 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 the year because they could not get store tea — said that without 
 railroads residence in West Virginia would be abomt as desirable 
 as residence at the North Pole. ?* 
 
 The legislature was forbidden to pass special acts in a long 
 list of additional cases including the following: sale of church 
 property or property held for charitable uses; locating or changing 
 county seats; chartering, licensing, or establishing ferries; remit- 
 ting fines, penalties or forefeitures; changing the law of descent; 
 regulating the rate of interest and releasing taxes. By this com 
 stitution the state, in addition to the prohibition of 1863 which 
 prevented it from holding stock in any bank, was prohibited from 
 holding stock in any company or association in the state or else- 
 where, formed for any purpose whatever. 
 
 The only new power given to the legislature (a power which 
 remained inoperative for thirteen years) was that of taxing priv- 
 ileges and franchises of corporations and persons which in the con- 
 situation of 1863 had been witheld largely through the fear that a 
 corporation tax would discourage corporate capital which was then so 
 much needed to build up the new state. 
 
 The governor and all the executive officers were to serve for 
 four years, and, with the exception of the secretary of state, were 
 to be elected by the people. No lieutenant-governor was provided. 
 In case the governor was unable to act, the duties fell upon the 
 president of the senate or the speaker of the house; and, if neither 
 should be qualified, the legislature was given the power to appoint 
 unless the vacancy should occur in the first three years of the term, 
 in which case an election by the people was required. 7* 
 
 The judicial system, entirely reorganized, consisted of a su- 
 preme court of appeals, a circuit court, county and corporation 
 courts and justices of the peace. The supreme court of appeals, a 
 rotary body consisting of four judges elected by the people for 
 twelve years, could render no decision which should be considered 
 as binding authority upon any inferior court except in the particu- 
 lar case decided unless the decision was concurred in by three 
 judges. The number of circuits was fixed at nine and a provision 
 forbade the legislature to increase that number until after 1880. 
 After much debate, in which Osburn humorously suggested that 
 there was no way out of the difficulty but to put the ofiice up to 
 the lowest bidder, the salary of judges of the supreme court of 
 appeals was raised from $2000 to $2250 and of circuit judges from 
 
 73. Kanawha Daily, Feb. 13 and 26, 1872. 
 
 74. This provision is peculiar to West Virginia. Stimson, p. 243. 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 35 
 
 $1800 to $2000J5 Abandoning the township system, the conven- 
 tion reestablished the antiquated county court system — composed 
 of a president and two justices with its police, fiscal and judicial 
 powers. This court was eulogized by Mr. Haymond of Marion, as 
 the guiding star to younger members of the profession, the 
 "theater upon which their youthful geniuses might disport with gay 
 freedom before the assembled people." Hagan answered this 
 speech by suggesting that it would be far better if these young 
 lawyers were safely housed by the state in some law school where 
 they would not afflict the public with such a "fraud as the farce 
 known as the county court of the olden times." He continued by 
 declaring that it was cruel and almost criminal to impose on men 
 who had never read a law book in their lives the delicate and 
 difficult tasks of adjusting the complex questions that arise in 
 the suits that come before them. He had learned, he said, that 
 the hapless suitor whose attorney could not boast of gray hairs 
 could almost copy the inscription which appeared over the inferno, 
 "He who enters here leaves hope behind," and rewrite it at the 
 threshold of the august forum of the county court for it mattered 
 not how ably a case might be put by the young lawyer, nor how 
 much law he might bring forward to sustain it until it was as clear 
 as a sunbeam, the venerable and foxy lawyer had but to refer to the 
 "youth and inexperience of his young friend," and close with a few 
 well chosen and hackneyed expressions about the "good sense" 
 and profound judgment of the court, when lo! the heads went to- 
 gether for an incredibly short time and with a wave of the hand it 
 was "judgment for the defendant, Mr. Clerk."™ 
 
 Although the question of the Virginia debt arose in the con- 
 vention, and Mr. Willey advocated the adoption of some addition 
 to the clause of the constitution of 1863 relating to it so that there 
 would remain no shadow of a question as to West Virginia's in- 
 tention to assume her equitable proportion of the debt, the con- 
 stitution omitted the entire clause. This was regarded by many as 
 repudiation. 
 
 The antiquated clauses of the constitution which relate to 
 the forfeiture of land may be regarded as a monument to a mis- 
 
 75. Kanawha Daily, March 27, 1872. (In the convention of 1861-62, 
 Harmon Sinsel, urging the strictest economy in the finances Of the new 
 state and stating that respectable families could live on $500 a year, 
 advocated small salaries for judges partly on the ground that men liked 
 the honor of the office.) [Hall, MS., Jan. 24, 1862.] 
 
 76. Kanawha Daily, March 8, 1872. 
 
36 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 take of the dead but living past. 77 Originating with a purpose to 
 quiet titles and reduce litigation they are still a prolific source of 
 expensive litigation and lawyers familiar with the abuses and ob- 
 jectionable features of their operation have recently advocated their 
 abolition in the interest of a less complex system of land laws if 
 it can be done with injustice to none and without unsettling land 
 titles. The adoption of a rational system for the registration and 
 transfer of land titles is much needed. 
 
 The clause of the constitution of 1863 requiring an amend- 
 ment proposed by one legislature to be approved by the next before 
 it was submitted to the people was omitted from the constitution 
 of 1872. 
 
 Although the new constitution which was ratified by a ma- 
 jority of only 4567, made some wise changes — lengthening the 
 term of state executive officers to four years, doubling the terms 
 of members of each house of the legislature and providing foi 
 biennial legislatures — it contained several restrictions, inhibitions 
 
 77. West Virginia at the beginning of her history inherited the con- 
 fusion of land titles which had resulted from the mistakes made by 
 the mother state in the early years of our national existence when she 
 had urgent need of revenue to suport her government. The earlier 
 failure to secure either revenue or much desired barrier settlements in 
 the west, by the statute of 1779 which placed public lands on the market 
 at a fixed charge of forty pounds for each one hundred acres (a price 
 which proved too high for the hunter-farmer of the frontier), induced 
 the legislature in December 1792, with the expectation of increasing 
 revenues from land taxes, to offer western lands for sale at the merely 
 nominal price of two cents per acre — an offer which in the next decade 
 resulted in the acquisition of almost all the territory of western Vir- 
 ginia, principally in large grants often reaching a million acres In A 
 single tract, by speculators who neither became residents on the land 
 nor paid taxes thereon. Much confusion resulted from the methods by 
 which the grants were located. Without adequate returns from the 
 lands to enable her to supervise the location and survey of the lands 
 sold, the state allowed every buyer to establish his own boundaries(!) ; 
 and later, when she reluctantly and gradually entered upon the policy 
 of forfeiting titles for non-payment of taxes, she first found many 
 boundary disputes and subsequently discovered that many tracts had 
 never been entered upon the commissioners' book for assessment. 
 Finally, forced by the stern fact that the settlement of western Vir- 
 ginia by those who were willing to brave the dangers and bear the 
 inconveniences of the frontier, was retarded by the fear of the insecur- 
 ity of ownership of the soil upon which settlers might erect their 
 humble homes, the Virginia legislature in 1831 and in 1835 passed two 
 acts which provided for the forfeiture of titles returned delinquent (and 
 not redeemed) and for the protection of pioneer settlers — acts which 
 were lineal ancestors of sections three and six of article thirteen of the 
 West Virginia constitution of 1872. The Virginia legislature, though 
 it showed a growing tendency to forfeit titles for non-payment of 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 37 
 
 and imperfect provisions which have retarded or prevented gov- 
 ernmental adjustments and have been criticised by leading men of 
 both parties. Though some of these have been changed, others still 
 remain. 
 
 Amendments have been submitted and ratified by the people 
 at four different times. The first effort to appease the clamor 
 for amendment was made in 1879 when the legislature proposed 
 two amendments which were ratified: (1) an entire revision of 
 the article on the judiciary increasing the number of circuit courts 
 from nine to thirteen (and providing that the number of circuits 
 might be increased or diminished after 1888) and increasing the 
 number of terms in each county from two to three, and abolishing 
 the county court system but still retaining the name -for its suc- 
 cessor — a police and fiscal board of three commissioners for the 
 administration of county affairs; (2) a change in section thirteen 
 
 taxes and to favor pioneer settlers who paid the taxes, hesitated to for- 
 feit a title absolutely; and from time to time it passed numerous acts 
 granting- former owners of forfeited lands additional time to redeem 
 them, and it never transferred a title to a claimant who had no claim 
 of title derived from the commonwealth. 
 
 West Virginia in her first constitution adopted the growing policy 
 of the mother state in regard to forfeitures, and again temporized with 
 tho delinquent tax payer, but made a distinct advance by a provision 
 which for the first time showed a disposition to favor the owner of a 
 small tract whose delinquent taxes did not exceed $20. In a statute of 
 1869, her legislature provided for the proper entry of all land and im- 
 posed forfeiture as a penalty for failure to enter land on the books 
 for a period of five years, but allowed the owner to redeem it within 
 a year. The members of the convention of 1872 inserted in the consti- 
 tution provisions which prevented any further temporizing with the 
 question of forfeiture of tracts of unassessed land containing 1,000 acres 
 or more and extending the transfer of a forfeited title to persons who 
 had actual possession for a term of years and had paid taxes charged 
 on the land for five years. In 1873 an act of the legislature (still in 
 force) provided for the forfeiture after five years of all tracts of non- 
 assessed land of less than 1,000 acres. [Hening, vol. 10, p. 82; Acts of 
 V ; r«inia 1831, pp. S7-97; Acts of Virginia 1835, p. 7; Code of Virginia 
 1849, p. 494; West Virginia Acts 1872-73, p. 450]. The tendency of this 
 system to breed litigation is well illustrated by the fact that there are 
 now on the docket of the circuit court of McDowell county thirty-seven 
 suits by the state for the sale of forfeited lands, and in the larger 
 part of these suits there are from ten to thirty tracts of land involved. 
 These suits frequently result from the efforts of individuals who take 
 an unfair advantage of the forfeiture clauses of the constitution in the 
 litigation of their claims. They impose upon the state the burden of 
 proof, and they assume no responsibility for the costs of the suits. 
 The parties behind this litigation, in many cases, would have no stand- 
 ing in court if forced into a suit in ejection. [Proceedings of the West 
 Virginia Bar Association, 1908, pp. 66-75. Paper by W. W: Hughes.] 
 
38 Studies in West Virginia History. 
 
 of the bill of rights providing for a trial by a jury of six in suits 
 at common law before a justice when the value in controversy 
 should exceed $20.™ In 1883 the legislature submitted an amend- 
 ment, which was ratified, changing the time of state elections to 
 coincide with the day on which the federal elections are held.™ 
 
 With a hope of removing or reducing the many evils which 
 still existed, the legislature of 1879 appointed a non-partisan (bi- 
 partisan) joint committee to suggest needed revisions of the state 
 constitution. In an elaborate report, this committee suggested 
 many needed changes, five of which have since been adopted. In 
 1901, the legislature proposed amendments,** which were ratified 
 by the people, limiting the invested school fund to $1,000,000, 
 requiring the legislature to provide for the registration of all 
 voters, making the office of secretary of state elective under the 
 same provision as the other state executive officers, providing that 
 the salaries of all these officers shall be established by statute 
 and that all fees liable by law for any service performed by these 
 officers shall revert to the treasury,*** and increasing the number of 
 
 78. The working of justices' jury was not always satisfactory; and 
 in 1897, after sundry decisions of the supreme court, the legislative 
 committee on the revision of the constitution, in order to avoid the 
 necessity of recording evidence in a jury trial before a justice or of 
 taking bills of exceptions to the rulings and conduct of the justice, 
 and with the idea that the judgment of a justice upon the verdict of a 
 jury should not be final and binding as the judgment of a court of 
 record uoon a verdict in such court, proposed to add to section thirteen 
 of the bill of rights a provision in such a case for an appeal to the 
 circuit court for re-trial, both as to law and fact, under such regula- 
 tions as the legislature might prescribe. (Rp. Sp'l. Joint Com., 1897, 
 pp. 20 and 78). 
 
 79. West Virginia Acts 1879, pp. 72-76; Ibid. 1883, pp. 61-63. 
 
 80. West Virginia Acts, 1901, pp. 472, 459, 462, and 465. 
 
 81. This turned a considerable sum into the treasury. The fees de- 
 rived from the office of secretary of state and auditor were variously 
 estimated from $10,000 to $15,000 per year. The committee also sug- 
 gested amendments providing for the election of a county treasurer to 
 collect the taxes of the county, and for the payment of salaries to 
 county officers in place of fees which should then revert to the treas- 
 ury. Those in favor of the abolition of the fee system in payment of 
 county officers argued that the fees collected by almost every county 
 officer amounted to more than a just compensation for the officer's 
 services and more than he would receive if he were paid a fixed salary, 
 and that the cost of administering county government had become bur- 
 densome and oppressive to the people. The demand for reform be- 
 came so strong that the legislature in 1908 passed a counties salaries 
 bill. Notwithstanding the name of this bill, the fee svstem in payment 
 for county officers is not entirely abolished, and there is much demand 
 for complete abolition of the abuses that exist under the present sys- 
 tem. [The Bar, March (pp. 4-6) and April 1908 (pp. 5-8).] 
 
Evolution of the Constitution. 39 
 
 members of the supreme court of appeals from four to five — whose 
 salaries, together with the salaries of the circuit judges, were to he 
 fixed thereafter by statute instead of by the constitution. In ad- 
 dition to the adopted amendments which had been suggested by 
 the legislative committee, the people have since ratified (1908) 
 two other amendments — one of which increased the pay of com- 
 missioners of the county court in order to secure more competent 
 men, and the other amended section four, of article four, of the 
 constitution so that it no longer prohibited the appointment to 
 office (state, county, or municipal) of persons who are not citizens 
 entitled to vote in the state. 
 
 The committee of 1897 proposed other amendments which al- 
 though, many of them have seemed desirable, have never secured 
 the approval of the legislature. Among these recommended, for 
 which there seems to be a rather general demand, is that proposing 
 + hat the legislators should receive "$4.00 a day for actual attend- 
 ence for a period not to exceed 60 days at any regular, and 40 
 flays at any special session," and another suggesting that, in order 
 to secure more deliberate consideration of bills, no bill should be 
 introduced into the legislature after the fortieth day of the regular 
 session. The committee also suggested that the provision which 
 limits the jurisdiction of inferior courts to a single county should 
 be made more flexible in order to meet the growing necessity of 
 development, and proposed that the constitution should leave the 
 creation of such courts to legislative discretion and judgment. It 
 also urged that, in order to prevent the great traffic in votes that 
 exists under the constitutional method of voting, the mode of 
 voting should be exclusively by secret Australian ballot.® 2 To se- 
 cure this change it would be necessary to omit the antiquated 
 clause which provides that "the voter shall be left free to vote by 
 either open, sealed or secret ballot as he may elect." Finally, it 
 proposed to equalize taxation (1) by an exemption on real estate 
 against which there was a lien for debt of purchase, (intended 
 chiefly to benefit the farming classes who were paying more than 
 their fair proportion of the taxes), and (2) by giving the legis- 
 lature power to tax "business" (in addition to privileges and fran- 
 chises) with the special purpose of reaching the intangible pro- 
 perty of corporations and large enterprises which had escaped tax- 
 ation, or paid only a small amount of their fair proportion estim- 
 ated on the basis of wealth. 
 
 In 1903, Governor White, suggesting the need of a constitu- 
 tional convention said: "Our constitution creaks at almost every 
 
 82. Report of Joint Committee, 8? pages. 
 
40 
 
 Studies in West Virginia Histoby. 
 
 joint. "s 3 Governor Dawson especially urged the need of reform in 
 the size of senate — which can be most effectively accomplished by 
 a constitutional clause providing for representation of each county 
 in the senate by a senator chosen by the voters of that county. 
 There has been a growing feeling that the size of the senate should 
 be increased and that there should be some early change in the 
 present system of choosing senators under which it is possible for 
 eight counties to control the majority of the senate. Again, both 
 the legislative and the executive branches of the state government 
 have recognized the inadequacy of the present organic law as a 
 means of solving modern economic problems relating to taxation 
 and the proper regulation of public service corporations. Although 
 the need of a new constitution has been suggested recently by 
 Governor Glasscock, and although many recognize that a constitu- 
 tional convention would be the best, cheapest and surest solution 
 of the problems — especially social, economic and financial — which 
 have resulted largely from the recent rapid industrial development 
 of the state, many conservative leaders still prefer what they con- 
 sider the less expensive method of "patchwork" amendments. »* 
 
 83. Governor White's message to the legislature, January 14, 
 
 84. Morgantown Post-Chronicle, May 10, 1999. 
 
 1903. 
 
BRIEF NOTICES OP SOME NEW BOOKS. 
 
 The Law of the Federal and State Constitutions of the United 
 States. — By F. J. Stimson. (Boston Book Company, 386 pages). An 
 historical study in constitutional law and principles and a comparative 
 digest of the constitutions of the forty-six states. A timely and val- 
 uable book on "a live science" especially suitable for the use of the 
 citizen and the student of politics. It especially aims to give the 
 history, origin and present tendency of American constitutions. 
 
 Life and Letters of George Bancroft. — By M. A. DeWolfe Howe. 
 (Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 2 vols., $4.00 net.) These well- 
 edited volumes based largely upon his private correspondence shed 
 authentic light upon the character of a man whose literary ideal was 
 to produce an historical epic of democracy and who in varied fields 
 rendered distinguished service to his country and his time. In a series 
 of nine interesting chapters the author has treated the chief periods 
 in Bancroft's career: boyhood, preparation at home and' abroad, be- 
 ginnings of his interest in politics and history, secretary of the navy, 
 minister to England, citizen of New York, minister at Berlin, and the 
 final years at Washington. To these the author adds a chapter on 
 his conclusions and a bibliography of Bancroft's books and pamphlets. 
 
 America the Land of Contrasts. — By J. F. Muirhead. (The John 
 Lane Co., New York). A Briton's view of his American kin. An en- 
 tertaining, practical and instructive, impartial and sympathetic survey 
 of the social, economic, political, moral and religous condtions in the 
 United States. Interspersed with flashes of humor, it presents the lights 
 and shadows of American society, and acute and interesting reflections 
 on various phases of American life. The author speaks with authority. 
 He is the general editor of Baedeker's guides and his book is largely 
 based on observation made throughout the United States in 1890-93 
 in the preparation of Baedeker's Handbook to the United States of 
 which he is the author. His wife is a sister of Josiah Quincy and he 
 dedicates his later book "To the land that has given me what makes 
 life most worth living." His book is substantially a tribute of admira- 
 tion — and of gratitude. 
 
 The Federal Civil Service as a Career. — By El Bie Kean Foltz. (G. 
 P. Putnam's Sons, New York, $1.50). A reliable book of practical facts 
 on the working of governmental machinery concisely and clearly ar- 
 ranged and suitable especially for the use of applicants for federal 
 positions. The author is an offica holder in the treasury department 
 at Washington and writes from a knowledge of facts gathered at first 
 hand. 
 
 Readings on American Federal Government.— By Paul S. Reinsch. 
 (Ginn & Co., New York, $2.75). A collection of original materials suit- 
 able for use in the study of the institutions and the processes of the 
 Federal government by the case method. These include selections on 
 the executive and congress, the treaty making power, the senate, the 
 conference committees, the organization of the house, financial legisla- 
 tion, the executive departments, legislative and administrative prob- 
 lems, the army and navy, the foreign service, the civil service, the 
 courts centralization and constitutional changes and national nominat- 
 ing conventions. 
 
The Good Neighbor in the Modern City. — By Mary E. Richmond. 
 (J. B. Lippincott Co., Philadelphia, 60 cents). A practical book for 
 charity workers, treating concretely the conditions of city life and 
 the principles which should govern the giving of charitable relief to 
 dependent families in the city. In detail the author in successive chap- 
 ters considers: the bad conditions and remedial agenices that surround 
 the child in the city; the men and women who make the goods we 
 buy; the tenants who live in the houses we build and rent; the home- 
 less men on the streets; the families in distress; and the sick who 
 should have been strong and well. In the last two chapters she con- 
 siders the good neighbor (1) as a contributor to charity and (2) as 
 a church member. 
 
 The Statesmanship of Andrew Jackson (as shown in his writings 
 and speeches.) Edited by F. N. Thorpe. (Tandy Thomas Co., New York, 
 $2.50). A collection of letters and documents (many of which have 
 never been published before) selected with care to illustrate in detail 
 all the different aspects of Jackson's public policies — especially in re- 
 lation to nullification, the national bank and the public domain. The 
 editor has added a scholarly introduction and also explanatory notes 
 to serve as an historical background. 
 
 America at College. — By R. K. Risk. (Archibald Constable & Co., 
 London, 3-6). This book, the result of a recent examination of a 
 dozen representative universities and colleges of the United States, 
 contains a series of brightly written chapters describing the work 
 and life of these institutions and comparing and appraising their 
 methods in order to throw light upon problems in England and Scotland 
 whose people the author believes should ponder and adapt to their 
 uses the lessons drawn from the adventures of their kinsmen abroad. 
 In observing the American system of higher education at work he ap- 
 parently fails to be struck by the "deficiency of pedagogic intelligence" 
 which has recentl3 r distressed two American writers on American col- 
 lege organization and methods. Though deeply impressed with the 
 vast resources of the larger American universities, after a visit to 
 both Chicago and John Hopkins he frankly expresses his preference 
 for the Hopkins whose business he says is higher education in the 
 most exacting sense of that elastic term, 
 
 American Supremacy. — By George W. Crichfield. (Brentano's, New 
 York, 2 vols., $6.00). In these volumes, the author, who has studied 
 conditions in South America for fifteen years, traces the rise and de- 
 velopment of those republics gives some attention to the biographies 
 of their leading statesmen and especially emphasizes social, economic 
 and political tendencies and conditions resulting from the Monroe doc- 
 trine — a doctrine which he thinks should be abrogated. The second 
 volume is largely devoted to a critical analysis of the relations of the 
 republics to foreigners, and especially to the United States, under the 
 Monroe doctrine, closing with a brief survey of national and inter- 
 national policies in relation to the government and civilization of 
 Latin America. 
 
 A First Conrse in American History. — By Jeanette R. Hodgdon. 
 (D. C. Heath & Co., Chicago, 2 vols., $1.30). An introductory survey of 
 primary events of American history through biographies (from Lief 
 Ericson to Thomas A. Edison and his contemporaries), suitable for use 
 in the intermediate grades. The first volume covers the periods of 
 discovery and colonization, and the second treats the national period. 
 
v?£ L 
 
 V 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA LIBRARY